GENIUS FORUMS

Alex, you post will take a little more time so I'm going to answer Faust.

You don't get it. To be a Khazarian Jew doesn't mean anything because Khazars weren't a lost tribe of Israel!!!!

Only the lost tribes of Israel can be Jews? The Khazarians can't convert?

It means that you're a Khazarian that is all.

Well, yeah, that's what I said - she could call herself Khazarian. Although very few people would have a clue what it means. Not that she would - she identifies strongly with being Jewish because she considers them her people. Her religion is Christianity.

Regardless, the problems of an indifferent and also vengeful God still persist.

Yes, that is what I like to refute. It's just a crummy meme, that's all.

doesn't the fact that Zionists exploit Jews make the Talmudic Jewish nature even more dispicable?

I suppose the short answer is yes...so you think the blame lies mostly with the Talmud?
Isn't the shit between the shiite and sunni muslims pretty descpicable?

what's crazy about it? That we speak the ugly truth perhaps.

It is antilife and therefore evil. Truth isn't ugly.

what captivity???? Khazarians were tired of Paganism and when they came into contact with some Talmudic Jews the rest is history. Why would lost tribes of Israel become pagan, even if some did that's not what the Khazarians did. Hebrews participated in non-Jewish religions?? All this still doesn't refute the fact that Khazarians were not a lost tribe of Israel, the fact is so simple and harsh that Jews do not wish to hear it.

The Babylonian captivity in almost 600 BC, in which the Hebrew tribes were exiled to - Babylong - from which only two returned and ten were lost. Babylon being in Iraq. And the khazarians being of middle eastern descent...and being a little north of the area of Turkey and Iraq. But the most likely scenario is that all or most of them remained right where they were, and intermingled with Iraqis and/or some went to turkey and intergmingled there.

Yes, the Hebrews worthipped other Gods constantly. They were henotheists, remember. They accepted other gods, and their god Jehovah often said he could beat up the other gods. But sometimes he didn't. Like the time when the Bible says that Jehovah could not prevail in a battle because the other side had iron chariots. Even Solomon, who talked with God and whose own father was had an extremely close personal relationship with him, like nothing that ever, every happens today...and yet Solomon could not resist running with his wives to other temples.

I don't know whether most Jews would want to hear about their Khazarian origins. Seems like a breath of fresh air, in a way. Because it does greatly decrease the need to obsess over Israel. I only recently heard about the khazarian thing myself.

i don't know what the sermon on the mount is, i should look it up. what is the Jehovah type of Jesus?

Why didn't you explain what the feminized Jesus is?
There is no Jehovah type of Jesus. My opinion, Jesus taught a completely different outlook.

Leyla,

Since you claimed to be raised as a Christian, I assumed that that is what you meant. Hence the statement that “your ideas stem from….” Asterisked para below further indicates the likelihood the statement was correct coupled with the fact that you also indicate having since undertaken your own study on the matter from external sources. External to what, then, I must ask?

Yes, I was raised in the eastern Orthodox church, not fundamentalist or puritan. But my point was that NONE of them, not the Orthodox, or the fundies, or the puritans, want to be distanced from the unpalatable OT. They refuse to acknowledge that much of the OT is unpalatable and at odds with the God they claim to believe in.

External to mainstream. For example, I've got a great book on Jehovah from a gnostic, who thinks that the entire material world is by nature corrupt and not created by God but by a demiurge, semi-god, and that this explains the problem of evil. (Which it doesn't.)
Also, like I said, some of my ideas are my own thoughts, not a study.

by entire ball of wax I simply mean the Bible, although which books to include and exclude has been a work of many centuries...

Yes, there are some ideological connections between the OT and NT - but those connections have been greatly strengthened by incorporataing all the Jewish scriptures as equal in value and all inspired by God, and by incorporating the attitudes of what strikes Faust as a vindictive God.

You say Joseph's brothers sold him to the Ishmaelits. But he sold them to the Egyptians, and the Egyptians existed long before Abraham, let alone Ishmael.

20 pieces of silver! Do you think Jesus commanded a higher price, or is it just inflation?

What’s inconsistent about the Bible when understood like this?

That's the historical narrative.

Jehovah sends lying and deceiving spirits to trick earthly kings, he makes war and takes sides, he is called a man of war, he is often angry and sends death and destruction to vent his rage, he claims to be very jealous, he requires sacrifices, he commands the murder of women and children, and allows rape and slavery.

Jesus teaches that the perfection of God is demonstrated by his impartiality toward all, that forgiveness is without limit or payment, that the Father rejects no one, and the epistles teach that the nature of the Father is love, which is never envious, does not think ill thoughts, contains no darkness, is never angry or puffed up and remembers no wrongs.

jehovah displays rage, pride, jealousy, murder and lies.

Not sure what you mean. You’re just going to ignore all that and go for preaching random quotes for a bit-and-piece-Christ situational morality? Sure looks like it.

It is a certainty for those not in denial that the Bible has been changed, altered, interpolated, deleted from, added to, twisted, and mistranslated, both ignorantly and deliberately. And that's just the New Testament. Jesus came, in my opinion, as a reformer. by accepting the entire OT in one unexamined chunk as equally the word of the real, true, creative intelligence of the universe, you end up with something incoherent. And it castrates his efforts at reform. You seem to be arguing that it must all be accepted.

but accepted as what? As inspired by the Holy Spirit and therefore 'the word of God?'

It was annoying enough when Donna (avidaloca) started this rambling thread... now, it's which version of (holy scrip) is the better version of events for each and every one of us.

Um, Tomas---hello?? You mean "now" as in since this thread? Where have you been for the last 2000 years, oh fresh Prince of Jerusalem?

By the way, avidaloca is not Donna.

Anna: Yes, I was raised in the eastern Orthodox church, not fundamentalist or puritan. But my point was that NONE of them, not the Orthodox, or the fundies, or the puritans, want to be distanced from the unpalatable OT. They refuse to acknowledge that much of the OT is unpalatable and at odds with the God they claim to believe in.

External to mainstream. For example, I've got a great book on Jehovah from a gnostic, who thinks that the entire material world is by nature corrupt and not created by God but by a demiurge, semi-god, and that this explains the problem of evil. (Which it doesn't.)

Also, like I said, some of my ideas are my own thoughts, not a study.

by entire ball of wax I simply mean the Bible, although which books to include and exclude has been a work of many centuries...

Yes, there are some ideological connections between the OT and NT - but those connections have been greatly strengthened by incorporataing all the Jewish scriptures as equal in value and all inspired by God, and by incorporating the attitudes of what strikes Faust as a vindictive God.

Personally, I see no essential difference:

Faust: Regardless, the problems of an indifferent and also vengeful God still persist.

Anna: Yes, that is what I like to refute. It's just a crummy meme, that's all.

We can all observe that none of these Christians demand that the OT be stricken from the Bible---it would have no foundation at all, otherwise. Rather, they distance themselves from the unpalatable with this one idea: God made man in his own image. All events are the product of an act of an all-knowing, all-seeing, emotional God.

Why is an evil vengeful God any more a crummy meme than a good compassionate one? I think this is precisely the same relationship the Greeks had with their (pagan) gods---but the Greeks were a little more forthright about it. They made their gods in man’s image. Sparta, for example, had as their token deity Ares, the god of war. Despite the fact that in the OT it is claimed that “God” made man in his image, the two are the same thing in the end; they are anthropomorphic---whether man is fashioned in “God’s” image, or “God” in man’s. But what about the animals, the oceans, the planets and stars and forces, the insects, rocks and flowers. In whose image are they made? So egocentric, these gods and men.

You say Joseph's brothers sold him to the Ishmaelits. But he sold them to the Egyptians, and the Egyptians existed long before Abraham, let alone Ishmael.

And long after him, no? Or were the Jews the only “race” to survive? Joseph was the son of Isaac, who was the son of Abraham. That is, Abraham appears to be Joseph's grand-daddy, no? Or have I misunderstood you?*

20 pieces of silver! Do you think Jesus commanded a higher price, or is it just inflation?

I know, fucking expensive, eh?

Definitely inflation. Couldn’t say for certain whether that was because there was an increase in silver or a decrease in slaves, though.

*Edited to add: To further elaborate on what I consider to be the salient point here: on the left of the total territory in question we have Egypt and, therefore, the “Eqyptians”; on the right we have Arabia and, therefore, the “Arabians.” In the middle, we have a guy who screwed a foreigner (Egyptian)--or a pagan?-- and had a baby from her, as well as an Israelite (producing another baby) and then cast out the foreign wife and their son into the desert of Israel. So, the Ishmaelites are Ishmaelites because their matriarch is Egyptian and this is the reason the “Jews” depend so heavily upon the matriarch…… (Right about now, I’m trying to recall who/what/from where Abraham’s parents were…)

.


tomas - It was annoying enough when Donna (avidaloca) started this rambling thread... now, it's which version of (holy scrip) is the better version of events for each and every one of us.


-plum jelly-
Leyla Shen - Um, Tomas---hello??



-tomas-
Greetings from planet Neptune!



-plum jelly-
You mean "now" as in since this thread?



-tomas-
Yes, it's become a bit too long for me to keep up with. Better to hop, skip, and jump for another thread.



-plum jelly-
Where have you been for the last 2000 years, oh fresh Prince of Jerusalem?



-tomas-
The winners write the history books. The government sanctions the denominations of religion.



-plum jelly-
By the way, avidaloca is not Donna.



-tomas-
My bad. Neglected to omit the Donna broad. Damn Canadians, anyway. The lot of them.

BTW - Where is the avid-a-loca?


Tomas (the tank)
Prince of Jerusalem
16 Degree
Scottish Rite Free Mason



.

Trevor Salyzyn wrote:Wait, Tomas, before you go: will we all be wiser for the experience? :)

-tomas-
Highly doubtful, 'cept for me.


ps- think i'll show up on page 16... my Prince of Jerusalem Degree in Free Masonry. (thanks Diebert)-enjoy your birthday? Mine (the 25th of July) cruised along quite well, thank you.

As winded as this thread is going should be about Sept. 1st...


Tomas (the tank)
VietNam veteran - 1971


.

Trevor Salyzyn wrote:With modern technology, I don't care how black your skin is, you aren't going to suffer problems in the north. We have furnaces.

Blacks don't suffer any climate related problems in the North, what the FUCK are you talking about. I've been refuting your idea that "race" is purely a social concept by showing the myth that we are all from Africa.

tomas,

ps- think i'll show up on page 16... my Prince of Jerusalem Degree in Free Masonry.

Ignorance being the root of fear, what do I not know?

Faust,

Blacks don't suffer any climate related problems in the North, what the FUCK are you talking about. I've been refuting your idea that "race" is purely a social concept by showing the myth that we are all from Africa.

Hmm. I don't feel like explaining Darwin's theories of natural selection, where they work, and where they fail. I'm not a biology teacher. You could not pay me to run through that gibberish again.

Either figure this one out on your own, or ask someone else here to help you understand what Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection was, and how it applies to human beings. I'm lazy.

Iolaus wrote:Only the lost tribes of Israel can be Jews? The Khazarians can't convert?

sure they can convert, but it doesn't really mean anything if anyone can be a Jew, the whole OT goes out the window.

Not that she would - she identifies strongly with being Jewish because she considers them her people. Her religion is Christianity.

HAHAH, what the FUCK is this???!!!!! How the fuck can she identify "strongly with being Jewish" if she's not even a descendant of Jacob!!! "Considers them her people" is PURE womanly Jew talk, as if the rest of the world aren't her people either. It reminds me of Woody Allen's "Deconstructing Harry":

woody: and if our parents converted to catholocism before we were born we'd be catholics! and that'd be the end of it. they're clubs, they develop the concept of the Other so you know directly who you should hate.

sister: oh stop it. something something rubbish.

woody: if a bosnian, or a gentile gets massacred, would that hurt you more than if a jew does?

sister: yes yes it does, i can't help it they're my people.

woody: they're all your people!!!

sister: you know, [someone's name] was right, you're a self-hating jew.

your mother is even more cuckoo when her religion is Christianity, since again, being a Jew means being a religious Jew as well.

I suppose the short answer is yes...so you think the blame lies mostly with the Talmud?
Isn't the shit between the shiite and sunni muslims pretty descpicable?

yes it is, except it doesn't say in the Koran that there shall be a seperation of Muslims, whereas the Talmud says all the bad stuff.

It is antilife and therefore evil.

uhhhh... this world is too wretched to bring children into it, if you have a conscience you would realize that. The whole "earning a living" and "life" is preoccupied with bullshit.

Why didn't you explain what the feminized Jesus is?

meek, submissive, compassionate, etc etc...

either way Trevor the whole origin from Africa thing is a big myth, which refutes your idea that "race" is purely a social concept.

Anna wrote:

"Jesus teaches that the perfection of God is demonstrated by his impartiality toward all, that forgiveness is without limit or payment, that the Father rejects no one, and the epistles teach that the nature of the Father is love, which is never envious, does not think ill thoughts, contains no darkness, is never angry or puffed up and remembers no wrongs."

And with that said, let's atom bomb them.

It is interesting that, as far as I know, in the Tanach (OT) there is no unflawed character, nor perfect individual. It is a narrative filled with people who are filled with flaws, and constantly dealing with their flaws.

In contradistinction, in the New Testament, you have a perfect figure, and the perfect formulation (what is written above), which is unattainable, and really no one has the slightest interest in acting in that way. It is in essence a pretty outrageous lie. In a sense, even if there is an external 'God', 'it' is in reality far more like the OT God if looked at through the lens of what we understand through science, the basis of a modern revolution in thinking. Jealous powers move through our biology, and are imbedded in our genes; we are intimately involved in a struggle for survival and our 'will-to-power' despite what we may say. And there are very good reasons for this, and we can examine them in a different light, and not through an almost story-book version, a child's tale, as is the Christian version.
________________________________________

He's 'one of them' but it may interest you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Fromm

Faust,

either way Trevor the whole origin from Africa thing is a big myth, which refutes your idea that "race" is purely a social concept.

No, it does not. You haven't a clear thought about the origins from Africa, therefore you cannot know the extent of genetic differences.

There is far more genetic diversity across Africa than between a European and a Chinaman, for instance.

Hello Alex,

I try not to associate with stupid people, and that is why I chose a forum with this name.

Well, now that's funny. Not that the people here are stupid, but they are pretty dysfunctional and crazy.

I came to this list, somehow, after randomly finding a tract by Makow dealing with feminism.

Oh! I thought it was me that sent you there.
And why do you think his contructs are out of whack on feminism, anyway?

Anyway, ferreting out global conspiracies isn't a way I like to spend time.

Me neither. I like to spend my time as a mystic, constantly aware of the presence of God. These David Icke books, they were given to me by a voracious reader like myself, in a big stack, and I never even got to it for months. And I read one, but it was mostly spiritual, and yes, I would agree it is full of ideas, but then I read And the Truth Shall Make You Free and that really blew my world apart. Then I got on the net and found Aaron Russo and his videos and documentaries, like Freedom to Fascism, and then Makow.

"Sure but didn't I say that any global conspiracy, or the zionist movement, is not about all Jews?"

As far as I know, Zionism is the movement that brought Jews back to Palestine, so it is pretty exclusively a Jewish thing.

What I meant was, that only a few Jews know about and/or run the behind the scenes manipulations and scheming. The rest fall for the propaganda, or are used by them.

If there is a 'global conspiracy' I am not sure that Jews are heading it up.

I'm not sure either, and both Icke and Makow say that it is an elite or illuminati group which have intermarried, wealthy jewish bankers with wealthy and royal caucasians, perhaps a few noncaucasians as well.

To understand the Jewsih perspective, you'd have to be willing to examine some material.

It's interesting, but not really pertinent, I think, to the global elite. The masses and the elite are two different things. It might be pertinent in that it is possible the Talmud is driving it. Or maybe more than possible. Nonetheless, it takes a pretty startling drive and insistence on interpreting it in such a way as to actually pursue world dominion, not openly through conquest but secretly. Nonetheless, there is some of that in the OT, and I have no idea what's in the Talmud.

The problem or a problem with this fact-finding and sleuthing is that that is a subjective process and cannot be separated from ideology.

Suppose your wife were murdered under very suspicious circumstances, and you wanted to hire a lawyer and make a case. But all your evidence, and there is a lot, is dismissed because all that sleuthing is subjective and cannot be separated from personal motivation.

It may be true that you prefer literature. this isn't everyone's cup of tea. But the topic of this thread was Hitler and the holocaust, and in order to properly discuss it from a revisionist point of view, we should learn what really happened, and for that we need to go back at least a century, where we find Rothschild among others, starting the zionist movement.

You might think that you are convinced by the 'facts' but you have been taken over emotionally.

All I am interested in is whether the facts are true. If even 30%, maybe less, of Icke's facts are true, then you are not living in the world that you think you are. The emotional implications are startling enough. He does not need to lay them out.

So, I don't think there can be a pure sleuthing or a simple matter of getting to the covered-over facts, as if revelation will arise from that.

I was just getting into the Oklahoma City bombing, leading up to 9-11, when my book got stolen. So the parallels between the two were very striking. so in Oklahoma you have people reporting more than one explosions, a very impressive government expert who stated that there was no way a Ryder truck parked outside could have done the damage, and he sent a memo to one thousand government officials, senators or whatever, and many news outlets, and he was removed from the case and you never heard about this in the media, and there were 17 surveillance cameras outside this federal building and all of the tapes were concealed by the FBI and never, ever shown, despite the fact that a man was executed for the crime, and the FBI also lost about 4,000 pages of relevant information wanted by the defense, which wouldn't be so bad except that when you read through one item after another you find that the FBI losing vital records seems to be par for the course. Oh, and of course all the debris which would have shown whether there were explosives inside the building as that expert said there had to have been was very quickly removed just as was done in 9-11.
But it's really all subjective. There's no point in even trying to figure out what might have happened or even if we're being lied to. There's nothing we can do really. So just read your literature, watch the game on TV, and make you interest payments to the bank. There's a good boy.

In other words, in their way, David Icke is ideologically driven, and so are Leyla and Trevor. And you and me too.

You're damned right I'm idealogically driven. I want the truth.

Many Jews feel that Judaism, over-all, is superior to Christianity, and I think in most senses I share that opinion.

I'd like to know why.

I identify 'spiritually' as a Jew because it is that general system that gives me the most freedom,

I have total freedom. God is my religion, and I am totally free.

How you could have a conversation about something you fundamentally don't believe in, as if you believe it, must be a gentile passtime.

Ha, well, I'm half Jewish, I mean Khazarian, and Leyla is Turkish, so we're not the best gentile represetatives.
It's not that simple. We don't know how much of the historical narrative is true, but a lot of it may be fairly true. Maybe Abraham never existed at all. Maybe he did. a fair amount of the historical references in the OT are real. I can't prove Jesus existed, and a lot of people are sure he didn't. But I like to think he did, and that wisdom came from somewhere or someone. As a person from a Muslim background, she focuses on some of that stuff in a way that doesn't reverberate as strongly for a european.

I guess Icke said the truth would set people free because until they see through the manipulation they are, well, easily manipulated. Only by seeing our situation accurately can we begin to take steps to remedy the situation. Also, he likes to set people free spiritually.

Faust,

sure they can convert, but it doesn't really mean anything if anyone can be a Jew, the whole OT goes out the window.

Well then why did the rabbis convert them?

your mother is even more cuckoo when her religion is Christianity, since again, being a Jew means being a religious Jew as well.

But that is your take on it. Others disagree. I just don't see why a tribe can't meander their way through history if they want to. Their bloodlines aren't pure, but so what? That isn't really a top priority of tribes. Tribal identity is what matters.

How the fuck can she identify "strongly with being Jewish" if she's not even a descendant of Jacob!!!

Well, she doesn't know that. I only found out about the khazarian thing a couple months ago. 1300 years, though, is still a long while.

as if the rest of the world aren't her people either.

Well, and how about you - do you consider all the world your people without preference?

meek, submissive, compassionate, etc etc...

You just don't like that because you're a groupie here. Jesus wasn't always meek, but he did teach that, and compassion as well.

By the way, I think they're teaching them at university that race is a social construct, and I argued about that for a while over at another forum till I was blue in the face but it did no good. I don't know that it matters whether we came from Africa or not...what do you think is the origin of the races?

"In March, developmental biologist Armand Leroi published an op-ed peice in the New York Times rebutting the conventional wisdom that race does not exist. (The conventional wisdom is coming to be known as Lewontin's fallacy: that because most genes may be found in all human groups, the groups don't differ at all. But patterns of correlation among genes do differ between groups, and different clusters of correlated genes correspond well to major races labeled by common sense).

---Steven Pinker (From an essay in 'What is your Dangerous Idea?)

This is a video on his specialty, not the idea presented above, it is pretty interesting.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 6299738997
__________________________________________________

You have opened a Pandora's box in terms of what-his-name's feminism ideas. I think that when it comes to a good portion of the style of thinking that is what you could call reactionary, or resisting (both on the left and the right) you have to watch very carefully for reductive thinking and to thinking that seeks to draw conclusions too quickly, that has an agenda. I think a big portion of what he presents in his anti-feminism is that sort of thinking: ideologically criven, reductive. And that is the same criticism I have of some of the originators of what is called 'second-wave feminism'. It is charged with emotion and romanticism, nit necessarily with 'facts'. But when emotion and omanticism are confused with 'fact' there is always trouble.

"I like to spend my time as a mystic, constantly aware of the presence of God."

A diffficult arena to be working in, I'd say, given that there seems to be a sea-change in terms of how any part of this is defined and what possible relationship it can have to our lives. In respect to this, it seems that we either remain locked into convention and to a 'graveyard' of ideas, words and meanings or we find a new language and a new way to experience this mysticism but in the context of science and what science exposes (that wasn't a very elegant way to put it, but...)

Also, I think that when we deal with mysticism and spiritism and things like belief in angelic hierarchies, we are indeed involved in what one might call medieval patterns of thought. I can't really comment on Icke, but promise I will examine his thinking a little, but from what I have gleaned it is built upon a sort of standard model, and that model is sort of the polarity between an angelic world or reality and a terrestrial world, angels and demons, etc. Down on the earth you have these devilish agents who are doing everything they can to control all the resouces and the real-estate, while the angels up above strum their harps and play tunes on light-beams trying to attract the attention of earth-bound mortals locked into cycles of birth and death. More than anything it is a cosmology and a metaphysic. You can find the same basic core in all sorts of different areas, in many different belief systems. I think you won't be able to escape that Icke is proposing----and it is integral to his system---that there is an alien race among us, the reptilians, and that they are dominating the planet.

"It's interesting, but not really pertinent, I think, to the global elite".

Oh no, I think it is highly pertinent. For the following reasons. This idea of a global conspiracy, with Jews at the helm, is an anti-semite's construct. It can be looked at as a projection of psychic and psychological material. It may not have any basis in 'fact', but it functions as if it were fact. When I said that it could be relevant to examine other material I meant to understand how anti-semitism as a 'philosophy' and as a construct of the medieval mind came into existence. It came into being about a thousand years ago and is a branch of demonology, and so hinges into an elaborate, but binary, metaphysic. When they start to bring in ideas having to do with extra-terrestrial reptilians, there is aonly a certain class of mind that could get interested in it, though it could e argued that that is our substrata: a primitive, psychological cosmology.

Ferreting out the real facts of global control and how that is coming about (it is a real thing I assume) is a separate thing. I don't think an elaborate metaphysic is required nor a demonology. It has to do with power, getting and maintaining it. I don't know if it is such a complex thing.

And I don't really see what it would have to do with your spiritual life, your sense of God...but I'm all ears.

(It is ridiculous, utterly ridiculous, to assert that the Talmud is somehow a document that would be used by a global elite. This is standar fare as far as classical, medieval anti-semitism is concerned. A thousand years ago semi-educated priests scared their flocks with the idea that the Jew was a demonic implant, and that all their devilish secrets were contained in the Talmud, which no one could read, and no one understood. Perfect slate for a dark projection! You (they) are merely repeating the same idea in new form).

"Suppose your wife were murdered under very suspicious circumstances, and you wanted to hire a lawyer and make a case. But all your evidence, and there is a lot, is dismissed because all that sleuthing is subjective and cannot be separated from personal motivation."

Suppose my wife were murdered and instead of looking at the very precise facts, the tangible forensic evidence, I came up with the idea that the murderer was not really a human but a reptilian-human who translated here from another galaxy or dimension, and that if you examined this 'evidence' and that evidence you would clearly see. That evidence would lead you on a wild goose chase (or Jew-chase) but wouldn't help you solve the murder. What I mean is that we don't need such complex metaphysics to explain more or less simple terrestrial facts.

"All I am interested in is whether the facts are true."

I am not sure if as it pertains to Icke and people with these strange metaphysics that what you have written is true. It seems to me that people---you and me---are often more invested in our 'cherished illusions' than in 'facts'. To get a sense of this, go to some seminar given by some cult and see how the same ideas are there, functioning. I think people like their fantasies, in fact. they might even prefer them to 'reality'. What do you think of that?

What world are we living in, or what world am I living in that your revelation would shake my foundations?

"There's no point in even trying to figure out what might have happened or even if we're being lied to. There's nothing we can do really. So just read your literature, watch the game on TV, and make you interest payments to the bank. There's a good boy."

Please. don't forget the hot milk with a dash of cinnamon, then I'll really be a good boy. What you have written (about Oklahoma and 9-11) makes me think of Orwell and 1984, and the '5 minute hate' or whatever it was called. And then there is Emmanual Goldstein, the perfect hatable figure, who turns into a bleating lamb. For all I know, B=bin Laden could be a mere media creation, in any case he is functioning like that. None of that surprises me, necessarily. I would though find it remarkable if indeed they carried out 9-11, it is just more than is required to be able to do what they did. But anyway, this is not my area of interest, and anyway I am again curious to know why you think any of this terrestrial warfare and manipulation has so much to do with your spiritual life?

"You're damned right I'm ideologically driven. I want the truth.''

Funny, the only non-monodimensional character in the Gospels asked this question. He was the Roman general, the voice of the terrestrial empire.

Ideology is a little more complex:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology

Anyway, I don't know what 'the truth' is, so don't ask me.

"I'd like to know why". (Jews consider Judaism, with all its defects, to be superior to Christianity, overall).

Because the emphasis in Judaism is not in transcendentalism or other-worldliness, and places the focus on your daily routines, your conduct. Christianity is founded on a sort of unreal platfrom, a romantic platform, and the core of that platform is the ethics of the Sermon of the Mount. No one can live like that. The figure of Christ is, for all intents and purposes, an unreal figure. After all, who could really emulate him? How can you be like that? Oddly enough, this position (not some elements of it, which we all hold in esteem to a greater or lesser degree) is that of a suicide, someone who makes a noble declaration and then exits the Earth. It is a strange example to set, if you think about it. To live in the earth, to grow and to prosper, to build n the earth, to survive, require very different skills and values. It seems to me that Judaism, in this specific sense, is naturally more concerned with day to day issues, absent of this grandiose transcendentalism, and these strange demonologies.

Judaism, as I understand it, is really a conversation, an argument, a struggle, and is not a series of conclusions, not something you swallow without examination. Overall, that is what Christian theology ask for, more than the other it seems to me. Christianity, in rought comparison, seems immature, Judaism more mature.

"I have total freedom. God is my religion, and I am totally free."

You make it sound as if God is one thing, or a thing-in-itself. But if this were true, all who believe in God would automatically be free, and we don't even know how to define freedom. I don't in any sense want to offend you, please don't take it like that, but our limitaions are far more evident than our lack of them. We are all limited beings. So, for this any many other reasons just by opening the subject we open into a whole complex realm. What does it even mean to use the word 'God'? Who is saying it and 'what' God are they referring to? What does this God do? How does this God operate? Where have we come from and where shall we go, and when here, what shall we do? These are all the Grand Questions, and no one has answers to them.

If 'Judaism' has a position (it is not a singularity it is a plurality) it might be that it is our fate to deal with these questions, to pose them, to consider them, to think about them, and to make an attempt to live in accord with what we believe.

"Ha, well, I'm half Jewish, I mean Khazarian, and Leyla is Turkish, so we're not the best gentile represetatives."

I could have told you that Leyla was a Turk---Fucking Turks! Those Khazarians are a strange bunch, according to Wiki. Do you live with your horse in some sort og yurt and stuff like that?

I had a Kurdish-Turkish GF who grew up in Germany some years back who was a delightful lay, and a keen intellect too. She was facinated by Beavus and Butthead and it was hilarious to hear her immitate them.

"Also, he likes to set people free spiritually."

And what do the 'spiritually free' do, I'd like to know.

Alex,

"Jesus teaches that the perfection of God is demonstrated by his impartiality toward all, that forgiveness is without limit or payment, that the Father rejects no one, and the epistles teach that the nature of the Father is love, which is never envious, does not think ill thoughts, contains no darkness, is never angry or puffed up and remembers no wrongs."

And with that said, let's atom bomb them.

Actually, you prove my point. My point is that christians can't progress toward the christ ideal when they are confused and internally divided by a simultaneious teaching that is at odds with it.

It is interesting that, as far as I know, in the Tanach (OT) there is no unflawed character, nor perfect individual.

Shouldn't that unflawed character be the LORD God?

"I like to spend my time as a mystic, constantly aware of the presence of God."

A diffficult arena to be working in, I'd say, given that there seems to be a sea-change in terms of how any part of this is defined and what possible relationship it can have to our lives.

You don't seem to have undertood what I said. I have no interest in how society defines such things.

In respect to this, it seems that we either remain locked into convention and to a 'graveyard' of ideas, words and meanings or we find a new language and a new way to experience this mysticism but in the context of science and what science exposes (that wasn't a very elegant way to put it, but...)

I don't know what you've got in mind, but I do find science very inspiring to my spiritual life, and I am particularly interested in the brain, and how it relates to mystical experience and states of consciousness, among other things.

I think that when we deal with mysticism and spiritism and things like belief in angelic hierarchies,

Oh, not at all. I've been a mystic for years and never gave angels or demons almost any thought at all. It is somewhat disturbing, I suppose, but lately I have been willing to reexamine that.

I think you won't be able to escape that Icke is proposing----and it is integral to his system---that there is an alien race among us, the reptilians, and that they are dominating the planet.

Different people have described in different ways that the human race seems oddly bewitched, that may be it doesn't have to be this way, wasn't always this way, including Carlos Castaneda. Yes, he believes that certain blood lines are partially of some sort of different DNA pattern, but what interests me is, is he correct that 34 of 37 presidents have all been related to Chalemagne? Is it true that Al Gore and Bush are both related to the Queen of England? If so, what the hell is going on?

Oh no, I think it is highly pertinent. For the following reasons. This idea of a global conspiracy, with Jews at the helm, is an anti-semite's construct. It can be looked at as a projection of psychic and psychological material. It may not have any basis in 'fact', but it functions as if it were fact. When I said that it could be relevant to examine other material I meant to understand how anti-semitism as a 'philosophy' and as a construct of the medieval mind came into existence. It came into being about a thousand years ago and is a branch of demonology, and so hinges into an elaborate, but binary, metaphysic. When they start to bring in ideas having to do with extra-terrestrial reptilians, there is aonly a certain class of mind that could get interested in it, though it could e argued that that is our substrata: a primitive, psychological cosmology.

I see your point, I really do, but I don't care about any of that shit and I don't think I've been exposed to almost any antisemitism, although my mother complains of it a little in the church. I only care if it is true, and if it is true, the "projection of psychic material' is just so much horseshit. Is there a global conspiracy or not? Jews may or may not be at the helm. That may be just a faction. Wishing it away because you've been convinced of long and elaborate tales of an analytic nature is just another delusional logical construct of intelligent minds. Or not. Maybe it is all a psychological play. The question is: do the facts support a shadow government or not? Philosophising won't give you the answer. Only sleuthing for facts will.

Ferreting out the real facts of global control and how that is coming about (it is a real thing I assume) is a separate thing. I don't think an elaborate metaphysic is required nor a demonology. It has to do with power, getting and maintaining it. I don't know if it is such a complex thing.

Well, that is a fairly straightforward statement. I could almost agree, except some sort of metaphysic is probably required, since the spiritual is the underlying component of human behavior, really. I do not demonize Jews, even if some of them are running the conspiracy, and I don't know that they are, although the Rothschilds seem to be kingpins. The English royalty and other Euopean royalty are high up there as well, especially England, and do I blame the English?

And I don't really see what it would have to do with your spiritual life, your sense of God...but I'm all ears.

I'm not sure what that relates to, unless my remark tha I prefer to live a spiritual life, not a political one. I mean, by nature, I'd rather not focus on politics, and negativity in general.

(It is ridiculous, utterly ridiculous, to assert that the Talmud is somehow a document that would be used by a global elite.

I have not read up on that too much...that was Faust, but I certainly have heard some troubling things are contained in there, and you have not refuted that. There are equally objectionable things in the Koran I think, or at least nearly so, and also in the Bible.

Suppose my wife were murdered and instead of looking at the very precise facts, the tangible forensic evidence, I came up with the idea that the murderer was not really a human but a reptilian-human

Look, I'm going to give up if you ignore the fact that I have been constantly stating that I am interested in precise facts, not ideas about it. What I need to do is find a couple of articles online for you, or perhaps just dig up some stuff from an Icke book. But I can't do it tonight.

It seems to me that people---you and me---are often more invested in our 'cherished illusions' than in 'facts'.

yes, that is true of many, many people, but do I have to be one of them? I try my best not to be.

To get a sense of this, go to some seminar given by some cult and see how the same ideas are there, functioning. I think people like their fantasies, in fact. they might even prefer them to 'reality'. What do you think of that?

I see it all the time and the more I see it the lonelier it gets.

What world are we living in, or what world am I living in that your revelation would shake my foundations?

the world where 9-11 was an inside job, perpetrated and planned by insiders, as was the Oklahoma City bombing. The world where Bush and Clinton and the CIA are world class drug dealers and in which people who see things they shouldn't are killed. A world where America and Europe were dragged into world wars that were equally planned.

and anyway I am again curious to know why you think any of this terrestrial warfare and manipulation has so much to do with your spiritual life?

Disrupts it. But I am trying to understand it.

Funny, the only non-monodimensional character in the Gospels asked this question. He was the Roman general, the voice of the terrestrial empire.

Silence was the correct answer.

"I have total freedom. God is my religion, and I am totally free."

You make it sound as if God is one thing, or a thing-in-itself. But if this were true, all who believe in God would automatically be free,

I'm not sure I follow your line of thinking. My guess is that god is the only thing that can be a thing in itself...

We are all limited beings.

You took my statement to much to heart. I was referring to, first of all, a subjective feeling of great freedom that I did not used to have, and second, it is very freeing to see through the need to 'belong' to a particular religion, although that does not mean that one can't belong or be part of them.

What does it even mean to use the word 'God'? Who is saying it and 'what' God are they referring to? What does this God do? How does this God operate? Where have we come from and where shall we go, and when here, what shall we do?

I like to use the word God. Our relationship to the above questions is all of what we are doing here, some of us know that, some of us don't.

These are all the Grand Questions, and no one has answers to them.

There are answers. They are not final answers. The questions are the point, not the answers. Because the questions and the answers are an ongoing relationship, an adventure.

Do you live with your horse in some sort of yurt and stuff like that?

Don't mess with my identity that I have just figured out after wondering all my life.

And what do the 'spiritually free' do, I'd like to know.

They enjoy their relationship with the divine, and don't have a lot of guilt or resentment.

If I make a little joke here and there, say about yurts and horses, it is completely light-hearted and I don't mean any offense whatever, even in the most minimal sense. I am a big fan of Gorki, and there are some very nice Gorki stories that are narratives about people probably very much like these Khazarians. But until today I had not heard of the Khazarians. I was just reading a Korolenko story where the narrator lived in yurt with the horse nearby. Nothing more.

"My point is that christians can't progress toward the christ ideal when they are confused and internally divided by a simultaneious teaching that is at odds with it."

Personally, I don't see how any of us can advance toward the ideal if the ideal stands in stark contrast to the basic facts of existence. That seems to me to be the main point. To be a Christian is to will oneself out of existence according to the values expressed in the Sermon of the Mount. I think it was Schaupenhaur who wrote of that as an ideal only he came at it through Buddhism. That is the highest form of existence, the sense that you must move beyond this plane of existence. Essentially to death. (I.e. no longer to fight for life here). Nietzsche seemed to have had a massive reaction against that proposition, and in his writing basically explored that conflict in stunning detail. (Trevor seemed to feel it was distracting to refer to writers and philosophers, I hope you don't mind. We are by no means the first to approach these questions, in some way its all 'old hat'. I can't think of questions that are more interesting, myself, or more vital).

When I wrote that the path of a mystic, these days, is a complex one or a difficult one, I was not referring to how society viewed these issues and more to how philosophers are dealing with them. And there is a certain history in all that. I am also interested in the brain, and in evolutionary psychology, and am trying to read more.

"Well, that is a fairly straightforward statement. I could almost agree, except some sort of metaphysic is probably required, since the spiritual is the underlying component of human behavior, really. I do not demonize Jews, even if some of them are running the conspiracy, and I don't know that they are, although the Rothschilds seem to be kingpins. The English royalty and other Euopean royalty are high up there as well, especially England, and do I blame the English?"

I wasn't talking necessarily about you, please keep in mind that I am new to this forum and I have no history with you or anyone here. It takes a certain amount of time to even begin to grasp someone's basic orientation, and more intricate levels of what they think is even more difficult. You say that the 'spiritual' is an underlying component of human behavior, but surely you are aware that there are ways to describe behavior that do not at all rely on any notion of the 'spiritual'? When you use the term 'spiritual' what do you mean?

"Look, I'm going to give up if you ignore the fact that I have been constantly stating that I am interested in precise facts, not ideas about it. What I need to do is find a couple of articles online for you, or perhaps just dig up some stuff from an Icke book. But I can't do it tonight."

Well, I can't help you with any precise facts in relation to the subject of your interest, so I'm likely not the best person to talk to about it. I have already come to a few conclusions about, please excuse me, the 'psychology of conspiracy theories', and I just tend to state what I think, but I have no final and factual knowledge...about anything, and certainly not that. I tend to feel that the very best descriptions of 'reality' and the ones that help us the most, are really poems. I don't mean that they are literally poems, and that I could quote you one, but it seems to me there is a sort of delicacy to describing 'reality', and especially a sense of the 'spiritual nature' of all things, that can only be expressed in a poem form, an allusion, nothing solid. So you see, I can't be of much help to you. But I hope you'll dig up a link or two, I will defintely look at it. (And don't 'give up').

"Yes, that is true of many, many people, but do I have to be one of them?" (Invested in cherished illusions).

My implication was a somewhat different one. I was not and am not necessarily talking about you, because I don't know you, and given that this is only a written medum I might never be able to know you. I really meant many people, or most people, but I also meant you and me too. It may be unavoidable. Sometimes I think that there is just too much that interposes itself between ourselves, the perceivers, and what there is to be perceived. And I think the nature of our 'incarnation', our being here in flesh, in this strange place under such strange conditions, is a little unfathomable. I would really like to know if you think that knowing specific details about a global conspiracy, whatever it is and whatever shape it takes, can really help us with these essential questions? I have not been able to see that it could, but I would like your opinion.

"The world where 9-11 was an inside job, perpetrated and planned by insiders, as was the Oklahoma City bombing. The world where Bush and Clinton and the CIA are world class drug dealers and in which people who see things they shouldn't are killed. A world where America and Europe were dragged into world wars that were equally planned."

That is earth-shaking for you? A reading of Noam Chomsky would lead one to the same basic conclusion, and there is no 'metaphysic' in Chomsky, none. It seems to me only prudent to assume that the terrestrial powers, in a process of consolidation of power, will do what is necessary to 'hold empire'. You know, Castaneda proposed that they could dominate the 'tonal' but never the 'nagual' but I am not sure if that division (matter and spirit) is a 'real' one. What do you think?

I do think that that moment when Pontius Pilate asks that question is one of the better ones in the NT, I mean in a theatrical sense, like in Shakespeare. And I guess you are right, silence was the best answer.

Tomas:

It was annoying enough when Donna (avidaloca) started this rambling thread... now, it's which version of (holy scrip) is the better version of events for each and every one of us.

Why was it "annoying"? avidaloca is (at least partially) German, so it is of interest to him therefore.

Yes, it's become a bit too long for me to keep up with.

Believe it or not, I can relate!

BTW - Where is the avid-a-loca?

Probably out there indulging in all sorts of sin and debauchery?

~

Anna:

By the way, I think they're teaching them at university that race is a social construct,...

It’s socio-political. What you have with the “Jew” in particular is a culture/ethnicity based on a sublimated notion of “race” through the purity and community of a matriarch and the ultimate negation of “the father.” Interesting to consider in this light Jesus's words to the effect, "None come to the father except through me."

~

Faust, how would you define the term "race"?

Alex,

If I make a little joke here and there, say about yurts and horses, it is completely light-hearted

Of course - I thought my answer was also lighthearted enough, but you picked up on the truth of it - I've never been quite comfortable being half-Jewish, since it isn't really something to be, isn't the same as being half Irish or half Ukrainian.

Personally, I don't see how any of us can advance toward the ideal if the ideal stands in stark contrast to the basic facts of existence.

It isn't really all that impossible. It's alright if few people attain an ideal, like few people get enlightened, so long as the ideal is consistent and one can make strides toward it. Perhaps it isn't always possible to turn the other cheek. People often misunderstand subtleties. you know, it is hard to understand something that is not already at least slightly within one's own experience; therfore the oft-noted pradox that spiritual words of guidance slip off our well oiled feathers when we need it most and begin to make sense only when we have begun to get at least a glimpse of the level of the person leaving the teaching. Jesus himself was obviously not always meek, yet he said he was meek and lowly in heart, and I understand that completely.

There's a Buddhist story that seems very Christ-like to me. Some sage was sitting in his little hut and a thief came in and demanded his money. The sage was meditating or something, and said yes, don't disturb him but the money is in that drawer there. The thief went to get it. then the sage called out, oh, please leave a certain sum needed to pay taxes tomorrow, and take the rest. The thief did so, and as he was about to leave, the sage said, "You know, it is customary to give thanks for a gift." so the thief thanked him. Some days later, the thief was caught elsewhere, and the police called the sage in as a witness. The sage said, "I gave this man some money, and he thanked me for it. I have nothing against him." the thief served some time for his other robberies. He was so impressed with the sage that he became his disciple after his release.

I think it was Schaupenhaur who wrote of that as an ideal only he came at it through Buddhism.

could you explain that?

Trevor seemed to feel it was distracting to refer to writers and philosophers, I hope you don't mind.

No, so long as your list of known philosophers isn't incredibly long...Nietzsche I try to like but I just don't. I can't stand his style, altho I have actually found a few of his remarks pretty sublime. Mostly I can't slog through it. I prefer eastern philosophy. But you are welcome to tell me what you have gleaned from reading him.

When I wrote that the path of a mystic, these days, is a complex one or a difficult one, I was not referring to how society viewed these issues and more to how philosophers are dealing with them.

Well, every mystic is surely a philosopher.

You say that the 'spiritual' is an underlying component of human behavior, but surely you are aware that there are ways to describe behavior that do not at all rely on any notion of the 'spiritual'? When you use the term 'spiritual' what do you mean?

Sure there are. There are atheists, too. I ain't one of 'em. The way I see it, there is only one reality, and it is spiritual. There is no division between material and spiritual. There's just one seamless continuum called existence. And existence has no opposite - there is no 'nonexistence.' What the materialists don't understand is that the spiritual is perceived via subtle senses, just as the spiritual itself is subtle, and yet they want to use only their crude senses, and complain that there is no evidence for a spiritual world. It's a matter of perception. The way things work is that those things which are harder, denser and bigger are built up out of the smaller and finer. The inner driving force of a person is therefore spiritual.

I tend to feel that the very best descriptions of 'reality' and the ones that help us the most, are really poems.

Yes, at least for a lot of it. But would you be using poems in your murder investigation of your wife?

"Yes, that is true of many, many people, but do I have to be one of them?" (Invested in cherished illusions).

I really meant many people, or most people, but I also meant you and me too. It may be unavoidable.

I have indeed wondered, to what extent it may be unavoidable. But what I am fairly sure of is that a huge span of possibility exists between the least aware person and the most aware person. And when I top the amount of consciousness possible for the human form to attain, well, I'll worry about it then! But until that point, I continue to strive. If you really work at it, you can keep peeling away at layers. Getting started is the hardest part. Once you've got a little crack in what I call the rabbit world, you can pick away at it.

And I think the nature of our 'incarnation', our being here in flesh, in this strange place under such strange conditions, is a little unfathomable.

Damn it, I'm beginning to like you.

I would really like to know if you think that knowing specific details about a global conspiracy, whatever it is and whatever shape it takes, can really help us with these essential questions? I have not been able to see that it could, but I would like your opinion.

Well, let's see. Perhaps it can be of use in the sense that it helps us to understand the greater reality, esp. in light of what I said above about the underlying spiritual motivations and forces. For me, it has been sad and shocking. My mystic reality is a very blissful one, and I could easily stay there. The idea that there are disembodied entities is one I am considering in real earnest, and I am aware that it is the old Christian one, which is also disconcerting. But not only christian!
But these entities are not required for the global conspiracy - they may or may not be a factor. But what is a factor is that I see the human race as extremely gullible. Not much different than the children who easily accept stories of Santa Claus. So they can be taken advantage of. I suspect that the gullibility is an aspect of or opposite side of the coin to the need or desire to hold on to cherished illusions. The sort of Hindu/eastern metaphor is that people are dreaming. From the moment I heard that it resonated with me. I think it is not merely metaphor, but quite literally true. No wonder we're confused! No wonder nothing really makes a lot of sense! No wonder when you examine things closely they unravel! No wonder we like our storylines!

Another way to describe the deepening awareness of and knowledge of and relationship to God is that of awakening. There is only one thing to awaken to and that is reality, and God is the only reality. Whew! It's intense and it's no wonder a lot of people want no part of it. God is an acquired taste. There's only one way to hide from God and that is with unawareness.

That is earth-shaking for you? A reading of Noam Chomsky would lead one to the same basic conclusion,

Obviously, I need to read Noam Chosky. But in that case, why do you go on about 'the psychology of conspiracy theories'?

and there is no 'metaphysic' in Chomsky, none.

I told you, in the book I mentioned, there is little metaphysics, and what there is I think is mostly at the beginning, and maybe the end. But his chapters that go into details of the conspiracy are very straightforward. And no reptiles.

It seems to me only prudent to assume that the terrestrial powers, in a process of consolidation of power, will do what is necessary to 'hold empire'.

It is totally fucking bat-shit crazy. Sneaking, lying, creating famine and terror and poverty, betraying your word and all for what? There is so much evil in it, that I am questioning the origins and depth of that kind of motivation.

In fact, I've come to the conclusion that we're actually in a hell situation now. We don't realize it or we deny it, which is part of the problem. Gotta see the problem in all its stark reality before you can take seriously the need for remedy. There are a lot of myths about hell designed to perpetuate and lengthen our stay. One of them is that it is somewhere elsewhen. Another is that the people in hell understand their situation, but actually confusion is one of the hallmarks of hell. And a third is that the inmates are not there voluntarily.

You know, Castaneda proposed that they could dominate the 'tonal' but never the 'nagual' but I am not sure if that division (matter and spirit) is a 'real' one. What do you think?

I already answered that, but I think if I understand your question, you are asking if earthly forces can have a reach into the spiritual lives of people? The answer is of course yes, only the very strong and aware are immune. Fear and intimidation are powerful decreasers of consciousness.

Even though there is no real division, nonetheless, natural things tend to progress in leaps and layers. So there are probably gaps, bridgeable but gaps nonetheless, between the layers of reality aka material and spiritual. Maybe like electrons in orbits occupying certain shells until they leap to the next one.

And I guess you are right, silence was the best answer.

It was the right answer in the sense that ultimate truth cannot be described, but I also have always wished to know what he might have said if he had decided to give it a try.

Well, I gotta go to bed but I have links or quotes for you on my to-do list.

Leyla,

What you have with the “Jew” in particular is a culture/ethnicity based on a sublimated notion of “race” through the purity and community of a matriarch and the ultimate negation of “the father.”

Whaaat??

You know, it's really VERY simple: they take the concept mother, make it pure and with it invent the idea of race and, thereby, pure Jewish racial identity. But, it ain't so, I'm afraid.

Do you understand the term socio-political?

You know, it's really VERY simple: they take the concept mother, make it pure and with it invent the idea of race and, thereby, pure Jewish racial identity. But, it ain't so, I'm afraid.

But I think you have read all sorts of things into it that aren't there. Why do you have more of a problem with people considering the mother's line than the father's line?

Mr Jacob wrote:

I could have told you that Leyla was a Turk---Fucking Turks!

Yeah, fucking barbarians! Trading our pristine water for your civilised arms…

China
Israel has a long history of military co-operation with China and is currently China's second biggest arms supplier. It helped China build its current F-10 fighter jet, which is virtually identical to Israel's discontinued Lavi fighter.50 Israel has also provided China with instructors, advisers and technicians. This unlikely friendship has been a persistent cause of friction between the US and Israel; matters came to a head in 1999 when Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) agreed to sell China a Phalcon airborne early warning system for $250m.51 Although Israel insists that the radar system does not contain US technology, US officials claim that the Phalcon closely resembles the US AWACS system.52 The sale of such advanced military technology, the Pentagon argued, would tip the military balance between China and Taiwan in China's favour. After a year of US pressure, Israel withdrew from the deal.53 A year later in April 2000, a close encounter between a US surveillance plane and a Chinese warplane revealed, through photographs, that the Chinese jets were armed with Israeli-made Python missiles.54 The US is worried that Israel's advanced technology could end up in the "wrong hands". In 1999 Israel itself raised concerns that China was transferring missile technology to Iran.55

India
Since India normalised relations with Israel in 1992, the two countries have developed serious and substantial contacts around military and security issues. It has been alleged that Israel played a role in the development of India's nuclear programme.56 In fact, Jane's Defence Weekly reported that India's top nuclear scientist Dr Abdul Kalam visited Israel twice in 18 months before the 1998 Pokhran tests.57 Jane's also revealed that Israel has recently upgraded Indian Jaguar bombers, made by India under licence from the UK, to allow them to carry nuclear weapons.58
Israel has sold India fire control and artillery equipment, ammunition for its tanks, unmanned aerial vehicles, Dvora MK-II patrol boats, electronic warfare systems for the Indian air force's MiG-21s and helicopter upgrades.59 Israeli firm Elta is collaborating with Indian firm HAL on radar production.60 Israel is now India's second largest weapon and military equipment supplier, with military transactions signed or in the pipeline exceeding $3bn.61 Defence analysts predict that Israel's exports are set to overtake those of Russia, India's traditional military trading partner. High level visits, the most recent of which was that of Israel's foreign minister Shimon Peres in January 2002, have secured this burgeoning friendship. The two countries now exchange intelligence on Islamic terrorism and India has granted Israel access to its new reconnaissance satellite.62 Israel also hopes to sell its Arrow anti-ballistic missile system to India, however this has raised concern in the US.63

Turkey
Turkey is now a major ally of Israel, and they have forged a military alliance that has altered the strategic map of the Middle East. One key target of this partnership is Syria. It is likely that Israel hopes that pressure from Turkey along Syria's northern frontier will force Syria to the negotiating table over the Golan Heights.64 Turkey and Israel's burgeoning friendship began in May 1994 with a security and secrecy agreement and was secured by other treaties throughout the 90s. They also use each other's air space and Israel has been willing to sell Turkey top-of-the-range military hardware. Israel has contracts worth $715m to upgrade Turkish F-4 and F-5 combat planes, and a 1997 agreement to co-produce advanced Popeye II missiles.65 Turkey has also ordered an airborne photography system from Israeli firm Elbit Systems.66 In 1999, despite being a major contender for Turkey's main battle tank programme worth $7bn, Israel gave in to US pressure and agreed not to sell its tanks to Turkey. The US was concerned about Syria's reaction.67 However, in March 2002, Turkey signed a $668m deal with Israeli firm Israel Military Industries (IMI) to modernise Turkey's ageing fleet of US-made tanks.68 An IAI bid, in collaboration with Russian firm Kamov, to sell Turkey Kamov-52 combat helicopters has been reopened and is under consideration.69

http://www.caat.org.uk/publications/cou ... php#turkey

~

AJ: I had a Kurdish-Turkish GF who grew up in Germany some years back who was a delightful lay, and a keen intellect too. She was facinated by Beavus and Butthead and it was hilarious to hear her immitate them.

More incest! When will the descendants of Esau and Jacob wake up?! (All these years and I’ve never screwed a Jew or a Turk. Must’ve been some sort of genetic intuition, I reckon.)

[laughs]

Anna wrote:

But I think you have read all sorts of things into it that aren't there.

Me, reading all sorts of things into it that aren't there? Are you serious? Tell me what's there, Anna. Do you think that Jews are a race, descended from Jacob--Esau's twin brother--entitled by god-given right to the Promised Land because of their matrilineal heritage and, then, through deception in the form of sibling rivalry? Wasn't Abraham originally from Ur (somewhere between today's Iran and Iraq)?

I mean, fair fuckin' dinkum, what is this "connection" between Jews and the land we now call Israel and Palestine?

I think you fail to make the connections, as if each story is unrelated to the purported events preceding it, and proceeding from it.

Why do you have more of a problem with people considering the mother's line than the father's line?

"More" of a problem? Nah, that's your inference.

PS:

AJ,

I could have told you that Leyla was a Turk---Fucking Turks!

If you are in a position I feel competent enough to treat me for some medical condition, then I will allow you to conclude, based on my physical constitution, whether or not I am a woman or a Turk or just plain ol' flu-ridden. Otherwise, I decide what I am, in every moment's thought, on factors much more lofty than the sound of a name.