@Rajk999 saidJews are originally from Iraq. They migrated to Palestine from Iraq.
Jews have always been in Palestine for thousands of years. Its just that several colonial powers took it over for the last 2000 years. The Zionist movement started in 1890, some 130 years ago, with the buying of a state and other plots of land. The Jews bought land. In 1915, the British took over from the Ottoman Empire, so it was British territory. The very same way the O ...[text shortened]... L. Well they will end up with NONE, because if they continue to harrass the Jews they will all die.
And most of the Jews in Israel are more European than the are middle eastern so they belong in Europe.
@Earl-of-Trumps saidYes we had this discussion some time ago. Ashkenazi Jews are legitimate Jews and not some pretend batch of people trying to be Jews. They have roots in Israel. Here is the detailed breakdown from Perplexity.... again.
Rajk: Jews have always been in Palestine for thousands of years.
EoT: Misnomer. *Sephardic* Jews have been there for thousands of years, but the invading Ashkenazi Jews from Europe,
who created the Zionist movement, were new to the region starting in the late 1800's. But we've been here before, haven't we now, Rajk?
Rajk: The Jews bought land.
EoT ...[text shortened]... torate of West Bank and East Jerusalem.
But you know all that, didn't you, Rajk. Have a god day.
***************************************
Modern genetic, historical, and linguistic evidence shows that Ashkenazi Jews do have substantial ancestral roots in ancient Levantine (i.e., Israel/Palestine) populations, though they are also heavily mixed with European ancestors; the claim that they are “not from Israel at all” is not supported by current scholarship.
Scholarly consensus in brief
Genetic studies (autosomal DNA, Y‑chromosome, and mtDNA) consistently find that Ashkenazi Jews are a mix of Near Eastern/Levantine and European ancestry, with a significant portion traceable to historic Jewish populations from the Levant.
Large-scale genome analyses indicate roughly an even mixture of Middle Eastern and European sources overall, rather than a purely European or purely “Khazar” origin. This means their origins are not exclusively Levantine, but it is incorrect to say they “do not have roots” there; rather, they are a diasporic population with Levantine roots and later European admixture.
The “Khazar theory”
The Khazar hypothesis claims most Ashkenazi Jews descend from a Turkic kingdom (Khazaria) whose elite partially converted to Judaism in the 8th–9th centuries. Comprehensive historical and genetic reviews find no solid evidence that Khazars contributed more than a minor component, and mainstream scholars regard the idea that Ashkenazim are “mostly Khazar” as unsupported.
A 2014 historical analysis by Shaul Stampfer, for example, concludes there is no reliable evidence for a mass Khazar conversion forming the basis of Ashkenazi Jewry.
What genetics actually shows
Y‑chromosome (paternal) data show strong Near Eastern origins for many Ashkenazi male lineages, aligning them with other Jewish and Middle Eastern populations.
mtDNA (maternal) data show a mix: some lineages point to Middle Eastern origins, while others trace to women in prehistoric or medieval Europe, with a small number of “founding mothers” whose lineages expanded in Europe about a thousand years ago.
A major sequencing project (the Ashkenazi Genome Consortium) found that modern Ashkenazi Jews descend from a fairly even mixture of European and Middle Eastern ancestors, with intermarriage occurring after Jewish migrants arrived from the Levant and settled in Europe.
How to interpret the “roots” question
If “roots from Israel” means any substantial ancestral connection to ancient Judeans/Levantines, then yes: genetic, historical, and linguistic evidence all support that Ashkenazi Jews share those roots, alongside European ancestry.
If “roots” is taken to mean a completely pure, unmixed lineage, then no major population—Ashkenazi or otherwise—meets that bar; diaspora, migration, and intermarriage are central to Ashkenazi history. Claims that Ashkenazi Jews are “not really from Israel” or are “just Europeans/Khazars” are at odds with the evidence and are often used polemically rather than analytically.
********************************************
@shavixmir saidThat is not what happened, and you continue to misrepresent the truth. The Jews bought some land. According to EoT it was about 6% of the land area. Judaism and Islam are not compatible, so the British partitioned the land which they were entitled to do as a colonial power of that time. The Muslims refused any partition, and chose war instead with the bold claim that they will kill all Jews and have complete control over Israel. After 75 years they have continued to fail and have been pushed back into smaller and smaller territories. As it stands now they have nothing of value while the Jews a mere 7 million people are now a world power. Your eyes are closed to the truth.
What’s that got to do with the point in hand.
You can’t claim ownership over land or house, because ancestors of your fvxking religion lived there 2000 bloody years ago.
It’s complete moronity.
1 edit
@Rajk999 saidVery good article, although in reports I have read, they capped the % of Sephardic genes in Euro Jews at 4%.
Yes we had this discussion some time ago. Ashkenazi Jews are legitimate Jews and not some pretend batch of people trying to be Jews. They have roots in Israel. Here is the detailed breakdown from Perplexity.... again.
***************************************
Modern genetic, historical, and linguistic evidence shows that Ashkenazi Jews do have substantial ancestral roots i ...[text shortened]... d are often used polemically rather than analytically.
********************************************
If you ever saw a Sephardic Jew you would understand. These people are black, not just dark, black.
@Rajk999 saidIt's really amazing that no matter how many times you are corrected and shown by undisputed facts to be completely wrong, you persist in claiming that the British Empire "partitioned" Palestine, never mind that they would have been legally entitled if they had (which they didn't).
That is not what happened, and you continue to misrepresent the truth. The Jews bought some land. According to EoT it was about 6% of the land area. Judaism and Islam are not compatible, so the British partitioned the land which they were entitled to do as a colonial power of that time. The Muslims refused any partition, and chose war instead with the bold claim that they ...[text shortened]... lue while the Jews a mere 7 million people are now a world power. Your eyes are closed to the truth.
I won't respond to your predictable nutty response, so say whatever lies you desire.
@Earl-of-Trumps saidWell, I have to confess that I am not a scholar on the origins of modern-day Jews, so Im relying heavily on these AI programs to pull relevant data so that this matter, which we discussed more than once before, can be put in a more truthful light. Here is Perplexity's response to your post :
Very good article, although in reports I have read, they capped the % of Sephardic genes in Euro Jews at 4%.
If you ever saw a Sephardic Jew you would understand. These people are black, not just dark, black.
*********************************
The “4% Sephardic genes” claim doesn’t reflect how population genetics actually works, nor does it match the main peer‑reviewed studies on Jewish ancestry. Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews are both branches of a broader Jewish population with substantial Near Eastern roots; the split between them is historical and cultural, not a hard genetic wall.
Also, saying “these people are black” as if there is one fixed Sephardic phenotype ignores the wide variation in skin tone and appearance among Sephardi and Mizrahi Jews. Modern racial categories are a poor guide to pre‑modern population history. If we are serious about ancestry, we should rely on genetics and historical evidence, not on impressions of who looks “black” or “European” today.
**********************************
I am curious about this topic as well, so if you have other relevant info,. please post it.
@no1marauder saidYour 'facts' are twisted, and you lean towards the idea that Muslims should be in full control of Palestine, and that Jews should be living under Islam.
It's really amazing that no matter how many times you are corrected and shown by undisputed facts to be completely wrong, you persist in claiming that the British Empire "partitioned" Palestine, never mind that they would have been legally entitled if they had (which they didn't).
I won't respond to your predictable nutty response, so say whatever lies you desire.
Nothing I posted is incorrect. Lets summarise:
- There was a time prior to 1900 there were around 5,000 Jews in Palestine.
- The British Empire took control of the region in 1915
- Zionism encouraged the purchase of land and inflow of Jews from around the world
- Constant minor fighting ensued between Jews and local Arabs from 1915 to 1948
- UN together with the British partitioned the land
- Arabs refused, Jews accepted
- Local Arabs joined with 5 surrounding Arab states to wipe out Israel.
- They failed and many were chased out
Thats the story, but your version says that the partition was illegal and full control of Palestine should be given to Muslims. Well thats tough, because nobody wants to live under Islam, not even Muslims. Proof of that is that millions of Muslims all over the world leave their home country to escape Islam and seek refuge in some western non-muslim nation
@Rajk999 saidyes, I am curious, too.
Well, I have to confess that I am not a scholar on the origins of modern-day Jews, so Im relying heavily on these AI programs to pull relevant data so that this matter, which we discussed more than once before, can be put in a more truthful light. Here is Perplexity's response to your post :
*********************************
The “4% Sephardic genes” claim doesn’t reflect ...[text shortened]... *****
I am curious about this topic as well, so if you have other relevant info,. please post it.
One last statement on it, as it applies to modern Jewry in the Levant, They have no right to treat the Palestinians as they do.
2 edits
@Earl-of-Trumps saidi think you're confusing Ethiopian Jews with Sephardim. Sephardic Jews have the classic Mediterranean look somewhere in the range of Sicilians or Egyptians. Not black in skin tone but olive or light brown.
Very good article, although in reports I have read, they capped the % of Sephardic genes in Euro Jews at 4%.
If you ever saw a Sephardic Jew you would understand. These people are black, not just dark, black.
None of the people in the region are that dark in skin tone. Truly dark skin comes from sub-Saharan Africa or maybe southern India or the Australian aborigines. Or parts of Latin America.
@AThousandYoung saidYes, the Ethiopian Jews. But a particular ethnic Ethiopian. Did you ever see one...?
i think you're confusing Ethiopian Jews with Sephardim. Sephardic Jews have the classic Mediterranean look somewhere in the range of Sicilians or Egyptians. Not black in skin tone but olive or light brown.
None of the people in the region are that dark in skin tone. Truly dark skin comes from sub-Saharan Africa or maybe southern India or the Australian aborigines. Or parts of Latin America.
The have black skin and faces that look caucasion
@Earl-of-Trumps saidYes Ethiopians do look like that. The phenotypes that Black Americans have - short, wide noses, bigger lips, etc come from the Niger-Congo people but there are other black skinned people in Eastern Africa who look different. There are also brown people (Khoi-San) in east and south Africa who look kind of like Chinese people.
Yes, the Ethiopian Jews. But a particular ethnic Ethiopian. Did you ever see one...?
The have black skin and faces that look caucasion
Here is an interesting lecture/classroom discussion analyzing the different phenotypes of white people. Africa is even more diverse than Europe and has all kinds of different features.
2 edits
Besides the Niger-Congo, there are extremely black skinned people called the Nilo-Saharans who are really tall and skinny. Ethiopians are neither of these - they are actually Afro-Asiatic like Jews, Egyptians, Arabs and Moors.
EDIT There is a name for Ethiopians which Robo-Mod thinks is inappropriate language possibly because it has the word sh* in it. If you look at the image at the following tinyurl you can see the other name of Ethiopians which looks like a marijuana strain.
tinyurl.com/352b3hu5
@Earl-of-Trumps saidWell, people have to do what they need to do to live. In the case of Palestinians there are two types. There are those who live among the Jews in Israel, about 2 million of them, in peace and harmony. They practice their religion, they work, the sit in the Knesset, and some are even in the military. Then there are those whose life mission is the killing of Jews. So the first group chose life and the latter chose death.
yes, I am curious, too.
One last statement on it, as it applies to modern Jewry in the Levant, They have no right to treat the Palestinians as they do.
1 edit
@Rajk999 saidThere was "minor fighting" by the Zionists against the British Empire even when the latter was at war with a Nazi regime that was exterminating millions of Jews in Europe. Most of the operations by Zionists against Arabs that you describe as "minor" were based on ethnic cleansing and were War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity.
Your 'facts' are twisted, and you lean towards the idea that Muslims should be in full control of Palestine, and that Jews should be living under Islam.
Nothing I posted is incorrect. Lets summarise:
- There was a time prior to 1900 there were around 5,000 Jews in Palestine.
- The British Empire took control of the region in 1915
- Zionism encouraged the purchase of ...[text shortened]... the world leave their home country to escape Islam and seek refuge in some western non-muslim nation
The British didn't, and couldn't, partition Palestine. They didn't even vote for the UN plan (they abstained) as I have told you at least a dozen times.
The partition plan by its terms was a proposal directed at the People in Palestine. They were under no obligation to accept it and it was a ridiculous and unfair plan dividing the country into three non-contiguous regions and giving a minority of 1/3 of the population almost 60% of the territory. Palestine was partitioned by force not because of a plan that was never accepted or implemented.
Most of the rest is your silly lies; as everyone here who pays any attention knows whatever I think of the original partition, I support a two-State solution.