Israel in control of US nukes?? Could this be true?????

by **robertdreed** » Wed Aug 17, 2005 10:45 pm

proldic, from above: "The term "aryan" I used in a general sense without fully pinning down what I mean by it, as you pointed out. I don't feel comfortable w/ it. Please elucidate further why I should not give it validity (Not being sarcastic)." It's a false 'racial' designation, originally deived from early philology (the study of language origins.) It's meant to describe Northern Europeans as separate and distinct, above all other peoples, including other Europeans like the Eastern Slavs and the Mediterranean peoples. The designation of 'Aryan' grew to prominence in the 19th century, based primarily on fictional mythological tracts of "speculative prehistory." Blavatsky, Bulwer-Lytton, Houston Stewart Chamberlain. That was the way people "studied" population genetics, in the pre-DNA era. Racial classifications are nebulous in general. They arguably have validity for population isolates, like the difference between various sorts of rainbow trout (species salmo gardinerii) adapting to their native watersheds and displaying subtle taxonomic variations as a result. But the history of humanity (species homo sapiens) is replete with instances of the hybridization of neighboring peoples. And, sometime back in the 20th century, we ALL became neighbors... I think it's particularly absurd to frame a 'racial' contest of "Aryan" vs. "Jew" in this day and age, where hybridization is so evident. For whatever reason, Bibi Netanyahu and Ariel Sharon both resemble males from my mother's side of the family, which hails from Alsatian Germany. They're the ones with the blue eyes, not me. Beyond the increasing proliferation of "non-stereotypical phenotypes", genealogical family trees are readily traceable among many of the most prominent families of Europe and North America to provide irrefutable evidence of the common "Aryan" and "Jewish" roots of the offspring. Given those circumstances, the characterization of "anti-Semitism" as primarily associated with "white Northern European racism" becomes increasingly obsolete. The nation of Israel has also been demonstrating that they'd rather admit peoples of non-Jewish origin from the former Soviet Union to swell the ranks of "Israelis" than grant first-class citizenship to the Arab population in their midst. There are now approximately 800,000 non-Jewish immigrants from that region who have been allowed to settle in Israel, and only part of this can be explained by passport fraud (admittedly rampant.) Whatever the pragmatic pro-nationalist Israeli arguments put forth to support this policy, it renders the historical dichotomies of "Jew"-"European" increasingly contradictory and puzzling. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p097.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 8/17/05 9:08 pm

by **Sweejak** » Wed Aug 17, 2005 10:54 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>the way people "studied" population genetics, in the pre-DNA era. Racial classifications are nebulous in general.<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=00055DC8-3BAA-1FA8-BBAA83414B7F0000">www.sciam.com/article.cfm...414B7F0000</a>

by **Anonymous** » Wed Aug 17, 2005 10:59 pm

Starman wrote: "...the four soldiers burned and mutilated and publicly hung from the bridge in Fallujah? Those were men hired by a secretive company called Blackwater that has about 450 personnel in Iraq doing various "security jobs" for US government. Americans reacted to the killings with outrage believing that these were American soldiers in our military, when infact they were hired mercenaries..." And a little known fact: The killings of the four mercenaries was in retaliation for American troops firing on a crowd of Iraqis, killing 11, who had gathered to peacefully protest the closing of an Iraqi newspaper. And, "Ecuador expressed uneasiness on Monday over the recruiting of mercenaries to serve in Iraq by a US firm operating from the coastal city of Manta". It's from Prensa Latina, via Tom Feeley's ICH: <a href="http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9816.htm">www.informationclearingho...le9816.htm</a>

by **Dreams End** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 2:23 am

I'd read somewhere that these guys may have even been set up somehow. Something about how they were not in any place that made sense for them to be. certainly, we never saw anything like that attack, before or since. robertdreed: thanks for the nice summary about the term "aryan". The fact that it becomes prominent under Blavatsky is also interesting given the occult leanings of the Nazis. I think I have sometimes equated "Aryan" with "Indo-European" which, as a language group at least, is rather well established, isn't it? Are the two terms connected?

by **robertdreed** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 3:00 am

Wikipedia <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan">en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan</a> Misuse as a racial term is covered at the bottom of the article.

by **proldic** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 9:49 am

R, thanks for the clarification on the word "aryan". So much for sloppy words of convenience. I agree with you that the relationship has been complex, and is not easily reduced to stereotypes. I tend to disagree w/ you on the other points. Hyperbole? ???? Your study of history has led you to some VERY different conclusions than mine. What is "facile nonsense" is the idea that the role of jews in western & eastern were NOT very similar in many ways to India's lower-caste untouchables. "Being a pawnbroker isn't the same thing as being a dung collector." True. Being a pawnbroker or a tax collector would engender extreme resentment against jews among their neighbors, and deflect attention from the exploitation of the real ruling class. Which is the role that jews are playing in context w/ the current discussions on this board. "The Jews weren't the "proles" of Europe. They couldn't be. There weren't enough of them. They were a separate society reliant mostly on mercantilism and trade." That is not true at all. The jews of western & eastern europe were among the poorest of poor, partially-assimilated into the working-class masses, and a very significant and radical part of Europe's revolutionary class-struggle dynamic. AND they provided much of the dirtiest and most humiliating labor in that society for hundreds of years. They WERE essentially a slave caste, literally "living" at the whim of their neighbors, forced into menial labor, paid less than their non-Jewish equals, restricted in acheiving higher occupation and education, and subject to triple taxation, especially by the Church, who regularly seized their meager assests, forever preventing them from ever acheiving advancement over their neighbors. It perpetuates a dangerous stereotype to say that most of the Jews were "...a separate society reliant mostly on mercantilism and trade." The VAST MAJORITY of the jews in western & eastern Europe were poor as hell, sweatshop laborers, factory workers, and employed in marginalized trades like street sweeping, rag collecting, and dung collecting. When they did try to move up the ladder, so to speak, that's when they were prohibited from doing anything but pawns, tax collecting, etc. Although there was a segment of more "orthodox" religious jews who exacerbated their isolation from the masses with dress and practice, and were encouraged to take certain positions in trade and commerce, they were only a (highly visible) minority. "rich Jew - poor jew" Although the general assimilation of Jews into european society began long before the end of the war, I think it's quite valid to point out that the Bolshevik revolution (which included jews galore) completely halted the cycles of pogroms, and the end of the 2nd war brought about a general recognition of the depopulation of Europe's jewry and the reality of anti-semitism in general , AND of course freedom to the tens of thousands of slave-laborers. "And it's certainly no secret that the Rothschild banking dynasty rose to prominence with the full approval and participation of the Dukes and Princes of the German states..." Ahh, the Rothschilds. The good ole' Birchite boogeyman. You are dating youself, eh old-timer? You MUST know how that's been the oldest trick in the anti-semite's bag. The name and Jewish heritage of the Rothschilds have been given excessive prominence at center stage since at least the 50's in "conspiracy circles" as right-wing shorthand for jewish power, and as fuel for the "Jews were powerful, not persecuted" "meme". The only reason the Rothschilds, Disraelis, etc. were allowed to rise to the positions they did was due to the fact that they whole-heartedly rejected the political radicalism of the average jewish "bolshevik", and fully participated in planning their persecution. There are a few very wealthy and prominent black families who hold power and feed into the elite structures here in America. I would hope 100 years from now that isn't used to imply that the vast majority of blacks had acheived anything close to liberation, or parity with whites.

by **slimmouse** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 10:31 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Ahh, the Rothschilds. The good ole' Birchite boogeyman. You are dating youself, eh old-timer? You MUST know how that's been the oldest trick in the anti-semite's bag.<hr></blockquote> Only if you work on the premise that the Rothschilds , Rockerfellas and Co. are "Jews". That is almost as absurd as suggesting that Bushco are Christians. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>There are a few very wealthy and prominent black families who hold power and feed into the elite structures here in America. I would hope 100 years from now that isn't used to imply that the vast majority of blacks had acheived anything close to liberation, or parity with whites.<hr></blockquote> Lets face it proldc. this is a truly pathetic analogy. If anything like the ratio of Afro carribbean , muslim, Hispanic or any other group had risen to the same relative positions of social prominence as those you so deceptively describe as a kind of "caste" victims, then there would be absolutely no one else represented. So much for prejudice. Id say that theres far too much of this prejudice in your own mind as opposed to actually out there

by **antiaristo** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 10:33 am

Hey Proldic, If you want to talk to a victim of the Zionists, talk to me. The last time I addressed you by name I got either no response or a response headed "Trenchmouth". Any questions? I have an ailing mother, now in her eighty-first year and completely alone. At whatever risk to my own safety I am going back to tend to her, and I will tell you why with a little family history. Like Alfred Dreyfus I too come from a cultured people, persecuted for centuries, which then saw one-third its number murdered in four years. I too am the offspring of a death camp survivor. My late father lived through four years of hell in Burma as a war prisoner of the Japanese. When the hero came home broken and riddled with disease he was not the man my mother had married. He was put to work cleaning lavatories at Imperial Chemical Industries in Milbank. Deeply embittered, friendless, and racked by pain he turned to alcohol, then violence. We grew up in the slums of South London and my poor dear mother had a truly terrible time. When my father collapsed and died age 59 (walking to work at five in the morning) it was a release for her. I still remember how she would get up, walk to Victoria, clean offices, walk home and then, and only then got the three of us up and ready for school – every day. I love my mother very much and, as my own difficulties have mounted, I have come to admire deeply her stoic courage, good cheer and fortitude. I know that every extra day I spend on this earth is a gift from God to be used and I will not allow her to be alone at the end of her life, come what may. So I say that the British Harlot Queen can go and fuck herself. That’s what Peter Cook said and he’s dead. That’s what John Smith said, and Mr Blair stepped into his shoes. That’s what Jill Dando said. That’s what the Princess said too. Tom Wolfe’s stoics all. But the Harlot gang attacked me and used force on 6 June 1994 (D Day +50). They have robbed me of more than a million pounds. And I am an Irish citizen. We will see if any counts for aught. I have a very simple system of personal belief. I believe in the story of Eden and the final judgement. I believe each of us is put here by God for one purpose only – to learn the knowledge of good and evil. All other fruit is free but we must learn to tell the difference for ourselves. We then make the final judgement when we choose the path of one or other. The final judgement is made not of us, but by us. This year, signposted by scripture since time immemorial, that judgement is being made by men and women of power throughout the world. Whither thee, Janet? DreamsEnd They work for the US. If they are meant to let a nuke go, they will. Hey, and then we can blame the nuclear destruction on Israel instead of the US. Convenient. That's the best piece of victimhood I've seen since Lady Mary Archer<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/laugh.gif ALT=":lol">

by **proldic** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 10:55 am

The "trenchmouth" comment wasn't directed at you, it was to someone else on the board who wanted "kisses", or something. Sorry if I left you out, I don't remember what the question was. I might have overlooked it, or I equally well might have ignored it. I get an overwhelming number of questions/challenges to my posts, so forgive me if I didn't respond. Sometimes it's hard for me to keep up w/ all the posts in these threads. I feel like I've got to triage my responses to questions, and I'm not going to respond if I don't have the energy, feel like I've said my piece, or don't see the need. How does this working-class background qualify you as "a victim of zionists"? Unless you're saying that the Irish Holocaust, the first example of "planned shrinkage", was planned by the Zionists. You were destroyed like Dreyfuss, so that negates the stain of anti-semitism on your people? You don't think other working-class folks have suffered, too? For example, my family grew up as the poorest of poor -- Geordies -- in a place not that far removed from your world. That didn't turn them into haters and scapegoaters, though.

by **Dreams End** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 11:01 am

Antiaristo, as usual, I have no idea what you are talking about. You typically post long excerpts from documents (this is one of your shorter ones) but when I asked you one time for some summary of what the heck it was all about, you said you didn't have time to make one. Fair enough...and I don't have time to read all your volumes of letters. So if this post has something to do with all the other things you post, I will simply have no way to understand it. I saw stuff about a Queen in there, I think stuff about Ireland..nothing about Zionism as the title of your thread suggested, so I remain clueless as to what this post has to do with anything.

by **antiaristo** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 11:26 am

proldic, I, ME MYSELF PERSONALLY am a victim of the Zionists. It does not rely on the history of my people. That is self-evident from what I posted, let alone the fifty or so documents in Data Dump. I smell a straw man. DreamsEnd, Not True. What I said is that this matter is likely to end up in court and so I am reluctant to provide a synopsis which could come back to hurt me. It's not a question of laziness, as you imply, but of simple common sense. You don't understand the concept of "victimhood"? And there I was praising your mastery! Freemasons are Zionists. The top Freemason is the Queen. The top Shadow Freemason is the Prince of Wales. Their annual ritual is held at St George's Chapel, Windsor, every St John's Day. The "stuff" is evidence acceptable to a court of law. It includes two sworn affidavits. If you were really interested in learning the truth you might be less dismissive. Or do you prefer to argue hypotheticals?

by **Dreams End** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 11:56 am

I just have no idea what any of this has to do with Zionism. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>That is self-evident from what I posted, let alone the fifty or so documents in Data Dump.<hr></blockquote> What you posted has nothing to do with Zionism. It's talking about the Queen. I don't think the Queen is Jewish, from what I can recall. Nor does she live in Israel. And you go ahead and keep your documents unexplained. I'm just letting you know that nothing you are saying makes any sense to me. I'm not even arguing with you really, though "I'm a victim of the Zionists" statements when all you talk about are Masons makes me think that I probably won't like your contentions if I do come to understand them.

by **antiaristo** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 12:12 pm

What you posted has nothing to do with Zionism. It's talking about the Queen. I don't think the Queen is Jewish, from what I can recall. Nor does she live in Israel. What you posted has nothing to do with Zionism. It's talking about Dick Cheney. I don't think Dick Cheney is Jewish, from what I can recall. Nor does he live in Israel.

by **Dreams End** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 12:42 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>What you posted has nothing to do with Zionism. It's talking about Dick Cheney. I don't think Dick Cheney is Jewish, from what I can recall. Nor does he live in Israel.<hr></blockquote> What are you talking about? I haven't brought up Dick Cheney in this thread. But yeah...he's not Jewish and he doesn't live in Israel. Just like the Queen. So now that we agree that Zionism isn't the issue, let's move on.

by **darkbeforedawn** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 3:40 pm

the word "zionism" is inflammatory and ambiguous in many ways, I agree. The "issue" is politics, money, state sponsored terror and the loss of American democracy (if in fact we ever had it). Isreal is up to its neck in this. Sorry if you think that is anti semitic because that is the last thing on my mind. The original concern of this post was that it seemed as if yet another link was in place to put Israel in the position of using U.S. force for its own desperate need to control the middle east . Perhaps they "deserve" this land--perhaps not. I am not making any judgments on zionism per se. The results of this drive to maintain their control has led to very dangerous aliances. ...including world wide drug and arms cartels of which many high figures in gov. right now have played major roles. See Gary Webb's stuff among much other info. Zionism is just one arm of the horrible octipus.

Israel in control of US nukes?? Could this be true?????

"Aryans"

Re: "Aryans"

Mercenaries?

Re: Mercenaries?

the term "Aryan"

Re: Jews In (western & eastern) Europe

Re: Jews In (western & eastern) Europe

Persecution

antiaristo

Re: Persecution

Persecution

Re: Persecution

Zionism

Re: Zionism

zionism

Who is online