http://www.livescience.com/40247-ashken ... genes.html

Interesting article.

Here's an excerpt from the comments section on teh website that I largely agree with.

beginExcerpt

Ajani Willis
I think DNA simply exposes the fact of how much of the world we are made of gentetically speaking. What makes the alleged Jews interesting is that they want to choose an iota of their DNA and make claims that they are only Jewish?! This is like somebody from lets say Hungary making claims that he is Iraqi not Hungarian because he has a "trace" of Near East in him or lets say somebody from China stating that they are Indian because they have traces of India in them. I think the comparison of what the DNA is being compared to see if somebody is "jewish" or not is flawed within itself. It definitley does not give them a right to relocate to a land they havn't lived in for thousands of years based on the fact they MAY have a trace of Jewish DNA. Imagine if everybody were to do something like this? I think want to go and conquer Nigeria from those who live there now because I have DNA that states I have Nigerian blood, hmmmm, or maybe I will go to Denmark and stake claims there because I have Scandinavian DNA. People you are HUMAN, leave it at that for crying out loud!!!!
Reply · 15 ·
· October 28, 2013 at 5:40pm

end

A proper understanding of the origins of genetic Jewry ... goes a long way in separating Jewish ethnic identity from Zionist ideological affiliation. To this end, Zionists are those in affiliation with those who founded Zionism: Rothschild banksters and conspiring minions in the financial, industrial, and priesthood classes. Few Jews outside this select elevated band of thieves ... financial, industrial, spiritual thieves ... and certainly, no decent Jew supports Zionism.

Here's a brief overview of Zionism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Zionism

Pax

The history of Zionism is so complex, I don't even know what it is anymore. I see that Tel-Aviv was built on desert land purchased from Arabs. That sounds legitimate, but the forceful possession of Palestinian land by Israel that has been occurring in the last few decades seems like a heinous war crime to me. There is something terribly wrong with Israel, and the state of Israel apparently was the primary goal of Zionism, so naturally it implies there is something terribly wrong with Zionism. I also see that land in Uganda was considered as an alternate location for Israel in 1903, which makes me wonder if the same un-neighborly aggression Israel unleashed on Palestine would have occurred in Uganda had Israel started there. I suspect it would have. Israel seems to have hard-core sociopaths at the helm, and I suspect Zionism may have also had the same throughout much of its history. Is Zionism really the story of unbridled sociopathy?

Complex, true. But we can make reasonable deductions from the documented record (of the most recent century) to simplify the complexity.



Not very meaningful unless we have additional information, for instance, were the sellers (Arabs or otherwise) the legal owners of the land being sold? Purchased is a loaded term, to be sure.



Exactly.



Indubitably.



Certifiably.

Pax

ps: To understand Zionism, one must first understand that the tribe of banksters is neither the thirteenth tribe nor any of the twelve purported lost tribes of Israel. Zionism has no connection to Israel other than the contrived tether that was designed for it by fatted banksters ex post facto.

There are many dangers in doing so. For example, the documented record is incomplete, inaccurate, and even deliberately skewed. Nor should we ignore the problems of simplification or the human tendency to oversimplify. We can certainly make deductions, and we will, but that does not mean they are correct or even reasonable. That's why uncertainty is a necessity, in my view, though I know you consider that to be untrue.


Can we be certain of the historical accuracy of the lost tribes of Israel? Is there really a "tribe" of bankers? Isn't it more like a private club? Are you certain that you are not reading more into your understanding of Zionism than is justified by the historical record, which is mostly, if not entirely, propaganda?

As an aside, I have to say I enjoyed the succinctness of your reply. Undecorated, one-word replies were a pleasant surprise coming from Uncle Zook!

Simplification and oversimplification have different meanings. There are no problems to the method of simplification if done properly. It becomes a problem, however, when the given term - in the given context - is displaced with a different term, e.g. oversimplification. Changes the meaning. There is more than sufficient evidence to identify the tribe of banksters. A tribe simply refers to a group of persons (need not be genetic).

Reasonable deductions extending from what is actually documented (including primary and secondary sources; cross-references; assessment of authenticity vs forgery; studying the output states derived from the documentation; etc.) ... as opposed to what may or may not exist in incomplete records ... is a valid science.

Those that throw too much caution to the wind will never sail the sapient seas, or plumb the depths of deeper meaning, for having found the moonlit beach, like starfish they will cease.

Yet again, tua culpa for generalizing without a warrant.

The real danger, once more, is the option of uncertainty when certainty is warranted.



Not germane to my argument, which is why I used the qualifier, purported.



A tribe simply refers to a group of persons. Are you sure you are not reading less than what I offered?



I was gifted with facilities across the spectrum of the English language, the spectrum of imagination, the spectrum of observation, the spectrum of deduction ... and I don't believe in false modesty. If I can swing a bat, I'll swing it. And I'm equally comfortable exchanging ids and ideas with the monosyllabic mobs as with the polysyllabic princes.

That said, I also have a talent for appearing to be narcissistic and egotistical, without actually being either. But I'm not alone in that talent. Most of us have that ability in us ... but first, we must take the courage to shed peer pressures; to overcome our personal vanities (which keep us submissive to what others might think); to actually trust our own observations, intuitions, and abstractions.

If I can give some advice, my friend, the patterns contain it all. Rarely will you be lead astray by the patterns.

Pax

Is it not better to recognize the common denominator behind all of these groups (Zionists, banksters, Bilderbergers, Jesuits, politicians, etc.) rather than blame any specific group? The common denominator clearly appears to be the deviant psychology of sociopaths. If we find a way to solve this one problem, all groups are corrected.

It's more useful to understand the hierarchy of denominators than the common denominator(s).

The issuance of money is at the root of the corruptions, with money being the fuel.

Those who have seized control of the issuance of money and the money supply ... were banksters first and foremost before anything else (more specifically, moneylenders).

Zionists, Jesuits, Bilderbergers, Illuminati, Freemasons ... these are the masks that arrived late at the masquerade ball.

The most prominent of these masks is the Zionist face ... it is ubiquitous as well as the favorite face worn by the moneylenders.

Begging indulgence is not required to point a finger at the favorite face, for the facts indulge us generously in this regard.

There's good reason why Bankster Occupied Government (BOG) is synonymous with Zionist Occupied Government (ZOG) ... and not as synonymous with JesuitOGs or IlluminOGs or BilderbOGs. It has to do with hierarchy.

The bankster capstone established the state of Israel (by appropriating land away from its rightful inhabitants) ... then gave the stolen land a new label and a nature (Zionism) ... surreptitiously supplied it with over 400+ nuclear weapons. Now stop and reflect.

You might want to ask yourself, if the Jesuit mask is equally prominent for the bankster tribe ... then are there 400+ nukes under the Vatican? And if the argument of prominence is to be extended to the mask of the Bilderbergers, are there 400+ nukes under Hotel de Bilderberg in Oosterbeek, Netherlands? How about the Illuminati or Freemasons?
Is each grand masonic lodge a missile silo?

When we step back from the ridge of the ridiculous, Chico ... we are left with the obvious.

The patterns hold it all.

Pax

You left out Shill Occupied Forum (SOF)

I admit, I'm shilling for a change away from this upside-down world

A world manouevred into position by bankster beelzebubs ... and subservient sociopaths, psychopaths, and sycophants ... the kind you find everyday in your mirror, Andy. The kind trapped in Dickens' inkwell before being liberated in the obsequious tendency of Uriah Heep.


Pax.

I don't think so. The hierarchy of denominators leads to a hierarchy of solutions, each solution specific to its denominator and addressing only that denominator. Understanding the common denominators leads to a common solution. You essentially solve many problems with one solution. Identify and manage the sociopaths, and the vast multitude of problems simply disappear.


No, it's not the issuance of money, it is the psychology of the controllers of that issuance.


Again, I disagree. They were likely sociopaths from the moment of conception, long before they chose a livelihood.


No, they are just variations of the sociopath theme.


One will always be prominent. Strike it down and another variation will take its place, unless you solve the common denominator, which is sociopathy.