Israel’s Incremental Inhumanity Precludes the Right to Demand for Israelis That Which It so Violently Denies the Palestinian People
September 4, 2014
Anti-Semitism: The Ultimate Zionist Weapon
August 1, 2014
Tony Blair: The War Criminal Middle East “Peace” Envoy
September 9, 2014
They invented The Jewish People Who Are Now In The Process Of Inventing A Nation, But At What And Whose Cost?
October 17, 2014
Eretz Yisrael HaShlema / Greater Israel
“Dominated by Zionism's particular concept of nationality, the State of Israel still refuses, sixty years after its establishment, to see itself as a republic that serves its citizens. One quarter of the citizens are not categorized as Jews, and the laws of the state imply that Israel is not their state nor do they own it. The state has also avoided integrating the local inhabitants into the superculture it has created, and has instead deliberately excluded them. Israel has also refused to be a consociational democracy (like Switzerland or Belgium) or a multicultural democracy (like Great Britain or the Netherlands)—that is to say, a state that accepts its diversity while serving its inhabitants. Instead, Israel insists on seeing itself as a Jewish state belonging to all the Jews in the world, even though they are no longer persecuted refugees but full citizens of the countries in which they choose to reside. The excuse for this grave violation of a basic principle of modern democracy, and for the preservation of an unbridled ethnocracy that grossly discriminates against certain of its citizens, rests on the active myth of an eternal nation that must ultimately forgather in its ancestral land.”
In his scholarly book The Invention of the Jewish People — a fascinating and controversial study of Jewish historiography — Tel Aviv University professor of history Shlomo Sand challenges biblical and conventional claims that Israel has a moral right to define itself as an explicitly exclusive Jewish society in which non-Jews including Palestinians are marginalised and deliberately discriminated against. Sand asserts that Jews — both those who are Israeli or citizens of other countries — are not the direct descendants of the ancient people who originally inhabited the Kingdom of Judea during the First and Second Temple periods but are mostly Mediterranean Basin and periphery people who converted to Judaism over the course of history.
Sand disputes whether the Jewish People ever existed as a common origin national group in the Land of Israel/Palestine and concludes that they should be regarded only as a religious community consisting of a farrago of individual or group converts without any historical right to establish an independent Jewish state in the Holy Land because they are not really a “people” in the sense of having a common ethnic origin and national heritage that entitles them to having a legitimate political claim over what today constitutes Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories, including Jerusalem. Furthermore, he asserts that Zionist historians are ideologues — responsible for introducing the mythical conception of the Jewish People as an ancient race — and charges them with a racist mindset that without reasoned debate dismisses as “a hater of Israel” anyone who dares to aver that the world’s Jews have never constituted, and still do not constitute a people or a nation.
Yet despite such justifiable doubts, the biblical assertion still persists that God chose Abraham to be the father of a people that were special and would be an example to the rest of the world — an example which presumably includes Israel’s six decades of barbaric crimes against humanity. Jewish history is regarded by many scholars as having begun with the Exodus from Egypt and that anything previous to that event in the Bible was a collection of syncretic mythologies based on numerous non-Jewish sources.
Though it is possible that some Jews may have been expelled from ancient Egypt because of a plague, it is highly unlikely that the number expelled was anywhere near the number that was subsequently claimed by Jewish scribes. According to the various parts of the narrative in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, it was in c. 1300 BCE that Moses parted the Red Sea waters and led 600,000 oppressed Israelite slaves through the wilderness for 40 years — imagine the logistics that would have been required under the best of conditions, let alone in the wilderness — before settling in the promised land. Unfortunately there is no mention or record of this Exodus in ancient Egyptian history and had such a momentous event actually occurred — 600,000 people would in those days have represented at least a quarter of the Egyptian population — then surely it would have warranted being diligently recorded or at least mentioned. So while the Exodus story is discounted by Egyptologists, archaeologists and even Jewish scholars, it has nonetheless served to historically cast Jews as the perennial victims. As for the narrative of Moses parting the waters, this was undoubtedly copied from the legend of Egyptian Goddess Isis who on learning of the location of the chest containing the remains of her murdered husband Osiris, parted the waters for her journey to Byblos in Lebanon — thereby also providing the story line for Bindumati (Kali as the mother of bindu or Spark of Life) who miraculously crossed the River Ganges.
Even the name Moses, was Egyptian as in Thutmose or Ahmoses, and meant “unfathered son of a princess” with the Moses myth being modelled on the Egyptian demigod Heracles of Canopus — Ancient Egyptian coastal town located on the River Nile Delta — who was drawn from an arc in the Nile bulrushes, grew up to perform many great deeds, and eventually died on a mountaintop. Moses’s fortuitous meeting with Sinai’s god — the Chaldean moon-god Sin — suggests that the Jews attempted to settle in that god’s Cainite-Midianite mining community on the Sinai Peninsula, or land of Sinim (“Land of the Moon”) whose consort was Mother Inana, who annually turned Sumer’s (present-day Iraq) waters into blood. Moses, who climbed the holy mountain where Sin dwelt, divulged that Sin was the same as the God of Abraham who apparently did not know him by that name (Exodus 6:3). Ancient documents show that the name Abraham was itself a synonym for Ab-Sin, or “Moon-Father.”
Abraham’s God (Father Brahm) introduced himself to Moses with the words “I Am That I Am.” thereby echoing the Brahmanic Tat sat’s “I Am That that Is.” He also commanded, “Put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground,” (Exodus 3:5). The removal of footwear was an ancient Hindu custom — also attributed to ancient Egyptian and Roman witches — which in India is still practiced in temples where worshippers go barefoot because of the belief that emanations from the holy ground can enter the body via the feet.
The narrative of Moses allegedly being given the tablets of stone was borrowed from the Canaanite god Baal-Berith, “God of the Covenant” — later to be regarded as a devil by Christian demonology — and the tablets’ Ten Commandments followed the commandments of the Buddhist Decalogue. In ancient times such commandments were generally given by a deity on a mountain top as was the case with the Greek Titan Queen of heaven, Mother Rhea of Mount Dicte (in Crete), and Zoroaster who received his tablets on a mountaintop from Ahuru Mazda.
People are still being misled into believing that Moses wrote the Pentateuch (first five books of the Old Testament) despite the fact that scholars have long known that they were written by priestly scribes in Jerusalem late in the post-exilic period — between the end of Jewish exile in Babylon in 538 BCE and 1 CE — with a view to creating a mythic history for their nation based on the customs, pronouncements and legends of others. Because the character of Moses was conceived with a non-Jewish name and a selection of different myths, he remains shrouded in mystery that casts doubt on his actual existence.
Other groundless Judaic traditions include the common assumption that the hexagram, with its two intersecting equilateral triangles, has been the emblem of Judaism since the time of David or Solomon. Though variously known as the Magen David (Shield of David), Star of David, or Solomon’s Seal, the hexagram had nothing to do with either of them and was not even mentioned by Judaic scribes until the twelfth century. Furthermore its official acceptance as the Judaic emblem did not occur until the seventeenth century after it had been part of the medieval Cabala’s system of sex worship.
The symbol originally represented the union between males and females in Tantric Hinduism, with the upward pointing triangle representing the former and the downward representing the latter. The borrowing of this Tantric Hindu symbol was only a very small part of a lengthy and concerted effort by religious scribes to create a Jewish nation whose mythic history incorporated the traditions, maxims and legends of other religions and nations. Unfortunately Judaism has never been content to be just a religion, it has also always wanted its adherents to regard themselves, and to be regarded by others as a distinct race whom God had chosen. By growing up and living in accordance with such a premise — those who believe they are “superior” by virtue of having been allegedly chosen by God — will invariably create a barrier between themselves and the less fortunate “unchosen” who will neither regard their assumed “supremacy” with respect nor shower them with brotherly love.
Nonetheless Jews have every right in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights — rights which Israeli Jews and their supporters deny to Palestinians — to worship the God and practice the religion of their choice. If in pursuing that religious choice, however, Jews ghettoise themselves and remain aloof from others; if they continue to tolerate — either by their direct support or silence — Israel’s racist and barbaric criminality; and if they do not unconditionally demand respect for the rights of the Palestinian people, then they will have no justification for complaints when others regard them with suspicion and contempt. To invent or reinvent a “people” is not a crime. But to invent a nation at any moral or material cost to others; at any or by any Machiavellian or racist means; at any length including the ethnic cleansing of another people, is without doubt abhorrent and immoral and renders as grossly hypocritical and false all the magnificent attributes that jews with a great deal of pride claim for themselves.
It is time for all Jews — and especially those ridden with the Zionist viral disease — to fully comprehend that the excesses of Zionist Apartheid Israel’s avaricious, dishonest, racist, and murderous conduct will ultimately cause Israel to self-destruct and this time there will be no Holocaust on which to lay the blame; no holocaust with which to blackmail the rest of the world into subservient tolerance for its iniquitous crimes; no Holocaust to generate endless reparations; and no Holocaust apart from the accumulative result of its own horrendous crimes: crimes committed to perpetuate the myth of its identity as a democratic nation serving as a homeland for a distinct people who exist in accordance with all of the high-principled Talmudic ethics including the Unity of Mankind which as a concept deserves to be placed on the highest of moral grounds as is befitting a people chosen by God Himself.
“I am often ashamed of Israel, particularly when I witness evidence of its cruel military colonisation, with its weak and defenceless victims who are not part of the “chosen people.”