[rerevisionist]

NOTE ON KHAZARS and SUPPOSED GENETICS DISPROOF

Sorry to bore people with this. Just more dubious stuff. ...

The following comment was made on the BNPideas website by 'Ed' (who I think may be Arthur Kemp - he might be described as a white 'race historian' and though very sound will have nothing to do with 'conspiracy theories', apart from climate change, and the forcing of immigration into white countries; he has no science background). This is what 'Ed' said re the Khazar idea, very possibly copying it from somewhere else in his own writings:-

The “Khazar” theory has been thoroughly disproved by modern genetics. It is a myth.

The Khazars were a central Asian tribe. DNA studies of modern Jewish populations have shown that 12% of Ashkenazim Jews do have a central Asian DNA strand.

There is however no evidence that this 12% strain — which exists among a small group of male Ashkenazim Jews — is actually Khazarian in origin.

This DNA strand could be of any origin — but even if it is Khazar (and it is worth repeating that there is no proof for this) then it still comprises only 12% of Ashkenazim Jews, and therefore less than 6% of all Jews (Ashkenazim and Sephardic). Be careful not to propagate easily disproved lies as it will affect the credibility of all your arguments.

Source: “The Y Chromosome Pool of Jews as Part of the Genetic Landscape of the Middle East,” Almut Nebel,1 Dvora Filon,2 Bernd Brinkmann,4 Partha P. Majumder,5 Marina Faerman,3 and Ariella Oppenheim1, by The American Society of Human Genetics, Am J Hum Genet. 2001 November; 69(5): 1095–1112.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1274378/

This was a 2001 piece of work. It's perhaps too long to include here; maybe some other time.

I replied to the BNP site--

Yes, thanks, ed. The fact is there’s a lot hanging on this issue. And another fact is that Jews have a long history of scientific fraud. I don’t think there’s any serious doubt about the Khazar conversion, or the large numbers of the Khazar population who migrated, mainly north, in subsequent centuries. Short of using a time machine to revisit the Khazar lands in the 8th century to take samples, to find “a central Asian DNA strand”, evidence remains inconclusive. The whole authorship and writing style of that paper in unimpressive.

I subsequently found on https://www.khazaria.com there's an explicit comment that the Khazar link hasn't been tested ('It is important to note that Khazarian skeletons and North Caucasian Turks have not yet been used to compare Jewish genes with likely traces of the Khazars. Thus, the Khazar theory has not really been put to the genetic test yet. Some historians and scientists recognized the need for specifically testing the Khazar theory, rather than generalizing based on studies of other non-Khazar populations') and that piece is dated at least 2006. (I'm not claiming to have checked e.g. with British researchers, if indeed any of them have views on the issue).

My comment that the work is phoney is based on a number of things, including the poor quality of modern cell biology research (not specifically a Jewish thing) and scientific fraud (unquestionably Jewish-linked). Additional factors include: the small sample of relevant 'Jews' (526 Y chromosomes representing six Middle Eastern populations - Ashkenazi, Sephardic, and Kurdish Jews from Israel; Muslim Kurds; Muslim Arabs from Israel and the Palestinian Authority Area; and Bedouin from the Negev - was analyzed for 13 binary polymorphisms and six microsatellite loci, their self-selected nature, the restriction only to one Y chromosome, the fact that testing appears not even to be double-blind. It seems to have been organised at a haematology depratment in Jerusalem. Note it states it was 'Received June 18, 2001; Accepted August 27, 2001'.

[rerevisionist]

Out of sequence, really. If one knows something, one tends to assume others do - maybe this mistake is a weakness of white races. This is a rough summary of the Khazar hypothesis----

Re Arthur Koestler (Hungarian Jew, I believe, who moved to Britain, believed in 'the Holocaust', wrote several novels including one on the 'Russian Revolution' - code phrase for Jewish coup, funded or helped establish a chair in the 'Paranormal'. at I think Edinburgh University). He wrote 'The Thirteenth Tribe', in English, published 1977 I think, which is probably online, though I doubt it has copyright permission to be there. The material NOT original with him. The story is the documented conversion of the Khazar empire to Judaism, postdating Islam and Christianity. Koestler regards 'Ashkenazim' as Khazar descendants, and 'Sephardim' as the far fewer descendants of the small tribe of genuine Jews. This means - as 'Jews' noted - that 'Jews' have no right to Israel, and indeed aren't biologically 'Jews' at all. It's worth reading online reviews in Amazon to see the impact this book made, in an unpublicised way. Unsurprisingly, there has been censorship and lies and all the rest of the propaganda circus.

Post by Sorensen731 » 08 Sep 2011 20:28
I seriously distrust Koestler thesis.

[Mentions another book - Identity of the religions called druidical and Hebrew... (1829)]

Why do you trust a jew, Koestler? It's disinformation.

Koestler only popularised the idea, and I mention his book because it is fairly easily available - it's not that I trust him. Koestler did NOT originate the Khazar idea. Russians, and some Poles, and Hungarians, did, at least in the 20th century. Koestler mentions his sources, but at no stage clearly lists them - you have to read through the whole book to pick up clues - but it's clear the idea predates these people, who were in effect rediscovering the idea. If I can find the time, I'll try to make a list of them. I have a Polish book, in English, pre-dating Koestler, which includes the Khazars. H G Wells's 1920s Outline of History has material on this too. So it's not an idea of Koestler's - though it is likely he misrepresented the previous writers in a way flattering to Jews.

The strength of the Khazar theory is that (i) It explains numbers- how could some tiny exclusivist tribe populate big chunks of central and eastern Europe? (ii) It explains the geography - if there was a 'diaspora' of some sort, why would they all move north east? (iii) The language - I assume Koestler, familiar with Hungarian and other languages, made some link with central European languages and Yiddish. (iv) It seems consistent with a political mass conversion postdating the rise of Islam, and makes sense as an ideology for a narrow group.

But rerevisionist, the truth is that Jews ruled England, and France and America too, not "the East", the central and Eastern Europeans were anti-Semites, the Russians specially, and the Germans, so, how can that be? And how came to be that Britain and France loved them and had them in government and always together?
It's disinformation, Jews may have come, or traveled from the East, maybe, but their power wasn't there, it was in Britain and France, and the US.

It's not the numbers, but the powers, where do they got power and where were they put in ghettos (In Eastern Europe, because they didn't like or trust them).

I recommend the book I pointed out. [See the other thread for this - rerev.] The Khazar theory makes no sense.

I may be missing your point here. But---

* I take it that there were 'Hebrews' who may have been defined by language and/or some area in the eastern Mediterranean, and/or may have been a violent group hiding in mountains and preying on cities in plains, and/or may have been wholly or partly religious in the sense of having books/scrolls/ practices. They may have had connections with Babylon or other places, may have had a language related to (e.g.) Chaldean. They may have been arranged by something like castes. Their 'priests' may, or may not, have been learned in some sense - possibly including astronomical and calendar matters. Their books may have been intended as truth and/or made up as propaganda.

* I don't think there's much doubt that the Khazar conversion took place. Any other 'Jews' - or whatever they called themselves - may not have recognised them as Jews. But in a de facto sense they were Jews. It's perfectly possible they were savages compared with genuine Jews, and possibly the general brutality of these modern 'Jews' was not shared with authentic 'Jews'.

* I think* Jewish power was a matter of organisation and learning and calculation. (Christian power had an analogous basis, including its own language, which settled down into Latin, and a clerisy if that's the right word).

* The money side of things of the Khazars seems to have been based on trade, facilitated by a common language which mutated into Yiddish, and straddled a large area in northern Asia.

* More or less modern banking seems to have been started by Italians and Venetians, but because of the divide with northern Europe and Germanic tribes and the Reformation etc it seems to have been Jewish in northern Europe. I *guess* if there were traditional Jews in France, England etc they would have allied with Khazar Jews.

* In Spain, there's the complication of the Islamic invasions, the Reconquista, and Jews there too.

* Going back to the 'dark ages', I'm personally agnostic. For instance, it's *possible* that skilled traders could have claimed or pretended to be 'Jews' by adopting some fanciful mannerisms to impress people. A bit like actors putting on white coats in TV ads, pretending to be scientists.

Sorensen731---
Yes here, there may seem to be a difference with "old" Jews, anti-Zionist and "modern" Jews.

I do accept that the ground for modern Jews could be the East, where they split or some refuse to change into modern Jews and go to dominate the World (Europe).

But I still add that the Rothschild [sc. dynasty] could not have rise up so easily, neither the Jews just with money-lending, I believe their rabbis and kabbalah gave them the upper hand, call it psychology, manipulation, or just ancient knowledge. The druids moved to the Church very easily and continue in power, change one robe for another, the prophets in the desert with their sticks, sacrifices, and power to speak with the Gods... is the same, in Mesopotamia and in Celtic Druids.

It's truth it's a hard question, where did they came from, it they came, because they seem to be everywhere already, mostly, specially after the country's adoption of Christianity, which was very fast in Celtic-countries and late in Germanic-Nordic-Slavic ones.

Templars were in cahoots with the Jews, a banking empire, with laws of their own, the Jesuits too where above the law, their ships going unchecked by the Spanish Crown.

I get almost angry with the "blame it on the Russians or the Khazars"... No, I blame it on the British, until they get their shiny temple, London is and has been their headquarters for the last centuries.

Yes, the book is a bit complicated, it was the one I had most handy about the subject, search others about the same idea if you prefer. The best I have on this are in Spanish...

[rerevisionist]

Interesting remark ...

... Lenin was in the process of murdering the middle classes when he died. Trotsky was meant to succeed and deliver up Russia on a plate to the bankers. But when the Georgian Stalin gained power he could not be completely co-opted {not surprising as Georgians and the false Ashkenazi {false Jews as Churchill called them} were neighbours and the story of the Khazar warriors adopting Judaism in 740 A.D. is common knowledge there. ...

from britishnationalistblogspot, someone called 'anonymous' (some spelling and capitalisation changes). It hadn't occurred to me that geographical regions near what was the Khazar area would know about the conversion to Judaism, or believe it as a folk story. In fact, if it a conversion was undertaken for reasons of state, it would have been well-known over a wide area. In fact, maybe Koestler became aware of the idea much earlier in his life from people from these areas. Note also a 'Jewish homeland' of Birobidzhan was established, the size of Switzerland.

[rerevisionist]

A small quotation from Arthur Koestler's The Thirteenth Tribe '... Huns, Alans, Avars, Bulgars, Magyars, Bashkirs, Burtas, Sabirs, Uigurs, Saragurs, Onogurs, Utigurs, Kutrigurs, Tarniaks, Kotragars, Khabars, Zabenders, Pechenegs, Ghuzz, Kumans, Kipchaks, and dozens of other tribes or people...'

Koestler described the Khazar conversion, and the intricate interrelations of all the north Asian tribes before about 1000 AD.

It's worth noting that. because of the intensive censorship in the media and academic world, the Khazar relation to so-called 'Jews' has been a taboo topic in the 'west', this is not true in the 'east'. Very likely it's well known to Russians and Poles and Hungarians and Muslims and Turks that so-called 'Jews' were Khazars.