#european descent israel population

[opencommunion]

Hi opencommunion - you are one of my favourite Tumblrs and I love hearing about Lebanese history from you. You say you are antiPhoenicianist - I hope you would tell us more about it. Hope you're having a great day.

aww thanks, I love your blog too <3

Phoenicianism is a Lebanese ethnonationalist ideology that basically argues that Lebanese people are ethnically/culturally unrelated to (and, implicitly or explicitly, superior to) not only other Arabs but other Levantine peoples. It's a secular ideology but it's extremely Islamophobic, so it posits that Lebanese Christians (especially Maronites) are the "purest" Lebanese people with a direct line of descent from the Phoenicians, who are portrayed as an almost supernaturally heroic and advanced culture who were supplanted by savage Arabs from the south (you probably recognize this as a Zionist talking point; more on that later). It's a narrative of Lebanese history that originates from rich European-educated Lebanese and their French & English orientalist buddies, and it bears all the hallmarks of European ethnonationalism and scientific racism. In my experience ascribing to Phoenicianism is associated with class and it doesn't represent the majority of Lebanese Maronites, who do consider ourselves Arabs. My family are dyed-in-the-wool Maronites from Wadi Qadisha, the cradle of Maronite culture, and for as far back as our family histories go we've always described ourselves as Arabs, with religion being the only difference—and an unimportant difference—between us and our Druze and Muslim neighbors. Phoenicianism predates the Zionist occupation but it started to take shape around the same time as Zionism, and is based in the same core orientalist myth: that the ancient Levant was populated by strictly separate and homogenous ethnocultures with exclusive claim over portions of the land, which were later supplanted by Arab Muslim invaders who oppressed a tiny remaining local population. (In reality, of course, SWANA cultures have always been internally diverse and mutually influential, and "Arabization" in the Levant was characterized by organic cultural shifts among local populations, with Arab culture influencing and combining with local cultures rather than replacing them). So when the Zionist settler project arrived they found easy allies in Phoenicianism. This relationship eventually culminated with the settler state backing the fascist Lebanese Phalanges Party (Kataeb in Arabic, a direct translation of Falange, the Spanish fascist party that inspired its founders) in the Lebanese Civil War. Israel used the Phalanges as a proxy to fight the Palestinian resistance in Lebanon, and it was Phalangists who collaborated with IOF to carry out the Sabra and Shatila massacres. This is the cruelest and ugliest moment in Lebanon's history and Phoenicianism enabled it; Phoenicianism enabled the cognitive dissonance necessary for Lebanese to participate in the occupation's genocide against our siblings and act as footsoldiers for the European fascist agenda in our region. The Phalangists and Zionists lost the war but there is still a Phalangist presence in the Lebanese government, and Phoenicianism is unfortunately alive and well among the Lebanese right wing at home and in the diaspora

[hailmaryfullofgrace55675]

“Ashkenazi Jews don’t actually have Levantine genetic ancestry” has been floating around lately among naïve and conspiracy minded anti-Zionists, a problematic claim that undermines actually correct anti-Zionist principles and defense of Palestinian rights. This claim is

absolutely irrelevant, as “blood” originating on the “soil” does not grant anyone any right to an ethnostate on any land. Using area-native ethnicity to justify discrimination and mass killing is bad when it’s Yamato Japanese discriminating against Korean, Mainland Chinese, and Taiwanese minorities in Japan and it’s bad when it’s Celtic-Germanic descent Brits oppressing Celtic-Germanic descent Irish who they’re genetically undifferentiatable from. It was bad when it was Hutus killing Tutsis and it was bad when it was the Khmer Rouge killing Chinese and Vietnamese Cambodians. The actions of the Israeli state in immiserating and slaughtering non-Jewish Palestinians would be equally harmful and wrong if the diaspora had never happened and every Israeli could trace their resident lineage in an unbroken line back to the time of the Second Temple, because it is bad to destroy people’s homes, burn their crops, imprison them, and kill them.

incorrect, at least according to current scientific consensus. Most genetic studies seem to indicate that Ashkenazim are of majority European descent and also have ancestry in the Levant, that is: the Ashkenazi population had some Levantine founders and there’s been significant amounts of intermarriage over the hundreds and hundreds of years of the diaspora into Southern Europe and from there across Central and Eastern Europe.

irrelevant again because even if, through a combination of conversions, adoptions, intermarriage, and adulterous and out of wedlock pairings between Jews and local gentiles, the diasporic European Jewish population had become completely genetically indistinguishable from local gentiles, those Jews would still have been the children of Israel. They still would have learned to read the Torah and celebrate its festivals. They still would have learned, from their families and communities in an unbroken line, to pray “Sh’ma Yisrael, Adonai eloheinu, Adonai echad” (Hear, Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one) as the rabbinic sages of Roman Judea observed in the Talmud that they were commanded to do. They still would have spoken languages with Hebrew and Aramaic elements, and they still would have written them with letters recognizable in the Dead Sea Scrolls. They still would have had the same interests, affirmed daily and yearly, in the land that their people left so many hundreds of years ago.

One formulation of the claim is “Israel bans direct to consumer genetic testing because it shows that (Ashkenazi) Jews don’t have Middle Eastern ancestry”. The Israeli government does ban DTC genetic testing as part of a genetic information privacy and nondiscrimination law passed in 2000, before companies like 23andMe existed. DNA testing for ancestry can be interpreted and presented many ways, and the ancestry breakdowns given by DTC GT companies just do not correspond to the question “where, how, and through what migrations did this population originate?”.

Once again, Zionism is not bad because people residing in places their ancestors are not from is bad. That is fine. Zionism is bad because from its beginning the Zionist project has been one of violent dispossession and because that violent dispossession continues in and through this very present moment.

[fiercynn]

Like my father, I was born a refugee in the Jabalia camp of the Gaza Strip. When I was 10 months old my family moved to the United States. Since then, we have made frequent trips to Gaza. I remember once reaching the Tel Aviv Airport, thinking I was so close to my home in Gaza only to be sent back to Frankfurt the next morning after being detained for several hours by Israeli authorities. I was 11 years old. This was not the first or last time we were denied entry into our homeland. I remember asking my mother why we never visited Jerusalem. I always wanted to pray in the famous and sacred Masjid Al-Aqsa; I wanted to see up close the Dome of the Rock I was so used to seeing on TV and on postcards despite it being hours away from our home in Gaza. My mother explained this concisely by simply stating: “Because we are Palestinian.” [...] I am Palestinian; I am from Huj, yet I am not allowed to visit Palestine. I am not allowed to leave the 136 square mile open-air prison densely populated by 1.7 million people. On the other hand, my Jewish peers in my American high school would come back every summer boasting about their birthright trips. Most of them were born here, and their parents and grandparents were also born in the United States. Many times they were of European descent. However, none of them were actually born in Israel. Until this day I don’t understand how it is their right to visit a country which they have never been to or have never known to be home, but I, who — like so many generations before me — was born in Palestine, am not even allowed to visit my own home. How is it that other kids are getting free trips to travel across the world, yet when I was in the Jabalia refugee camp, I was not allowed to drive a few miles to visit the place where my father’s history yearns to be affirmed? Another “holy” site of sorts, off limits. Where was my birthright? [x]

- suha najjar for the michigan daily on march 12, 2014

[elbiotipo]

Isn't Argentina as much of a settler state as the USA, Canada and Israel? Say, what happened to the Indigenous and the Afro population after independence?

The independent Argentine state commited genocide against the native peoples of Patagonia during the "Conquista del Desierto", and the less known yet not-less brutal colonization of the Great Chaco, by displacing or outright killing native populations. With regards to the Afrodescedant population, there was not an organized campaign of genocide, but rather a process of "invisibilization" where Afrodescendants hid their heritage to assimilate to eurocentric society, same with mestizo people. These are historical and current debts that the successive Argentine state has not repaid or adressed properly despite recent advances.

Sarmiento was the first and main architect of the conception of Argentina as a country for European inmigrants that "to modernize" needed to get rid of the native and afro-descendant population, the now celebrated figure of the gaucho, the same people who fought for independence, was disgusting to him. Julio A. Roca was inspired by the genocide of the native peoples of the United States and tried to use the same mentality and tactics here. Despite there have never been formal laws of racial separation, this mindset continued as part of state policy until roughly the early-20th century and still shapes national attitudes today.

Despite the desires of these men to destroy them, they ultimately failed. Over a milion (probably undercounted) Argentines belong multiple native peoples, with 30-40% of Argentines (depending on region) from partial or full native descent and 4-7% from african descent. Culturally, because of the aftermentioned process of invisibilization and the way the concept of race expresses itself in Latin America, there are fewer people who identify themselves with such groups than genetics show: racism still exists against "morochos", that is, brown-skinned people, compared to the Eurocentric ideal.

These are not hidden facts, they are taught in Argentine schools and universities, widely discussed and regarded as shameful, and they still shape our society and politics.

When I read the term "settler state" it confuses me because every Latin American country is a settler state, because by definition they were colonized by Spain and Portugal. Independent nations in Latin American inherited the racial and colonial mindsets of their "parent" empire. From Chile and Brazil, which also commited similar genocides on native lands following the procesess of the Spanish and Portuguese, to the opression of native and afro-descendants in favor of the european-descended elite in places like Perú, Bolivia and México, and the overall "blanqueamiento" (whitening, or however you want to call it) theory common to all Latin America where mestizaje was encouraged to "whiten" the popluation. Every Latin American nation was born, like it or not, from these violent processes.

The genocide did not begin with Argentine independence, it began in 1492, and it continues to this day. Similiarily, it has not started or stopped with a single administration or another, and it expresses itself in multiple ways. The only way to solve such deep rooted problems is by the state assuming its political, social and economical debt, but also for the entire mindset of society to change, which will take generations. I like to think we are progressing on that front, but when I see recent events such as the repression in Jujuy, I also know we have decades, if not centuries as my grandfather says, to go.

[vergess]

Anonymous asked: If vergess is willing to answer I’ve been wondering what Zionism even is I keep hearing conflicting definitions

The reason you're hearing conflicting definitions is, there's two definitions you'll hear in general conversation.

Okay, so like 150 years ago (late 1800s), a guy was like, "Ahem, ahem. While we're inventing nationalism all over europe, I notice that Jews are constantly left out of national identities. What if, since y'all shitheads refure to acknowledge our humanity and shared history in Europe and elsewhere in the world, considering us to be middle eastern immigrants regardless of how long we've lived among you as your neighbors. So!! What if we made a Jewish National State where Jews could live peacefully as a politically influential block, ideally in the Jewish homeland to which we are indigenous, ie, Palestine."

From this, came two very different conclusions.

Most Jews will define Zionism as the Jewish right to self-determination in the Jewish homeland. Which is a fancy way of saying, "there's exactly one place on earth y'all will let Jews live, so let us fucking LIVE there instead of being executed en masse by the Christian European Bootheel."

Of course, one should always remember that while some pre existing tensions were capitalized upon, this remains a case of two indigenous groups (Jews, Palestinians) pitted against each other by colonial powers looking to expel one and hope we would both exterminate each other after other methods of eliminating us had failed.

Anyway.

Most gentiles will define zionism as Jewish Nationalism, and they'll say it in the same tone they say nationalist socialism out of fucking spite, because the concept of an indigenous group repatriating to their homeland is somehow indistinguishable from colonizers destroying indigenous populations.

The problem, of course, is that the Israeli Government uses colonizer techniques like "the enemy is both weak and strong" and "kill all their children" etc, and they use them against other indigenous groups, which very, very much makes it look like the second, shittier definition is "the real one."

However, it's important to remember that just because the Israeli government is doing a genocide or six, that doesn't mean the people in Israel, be they of middle eastern or global descent, are to blame.

Zionism is about the right of the people to self determine.

It is misused by propagandistic elements in the Israeli government to justify huge levels of violence, in a way directly copied from the US's use of racial propaganda.

Which means it's especially effective at confusing and muddying American conversations.

So, to put it another way:

If you want to remain ideologically consistent, and you hate "zionism" you must also hate all other nationalist movements, including and especially, nationalist movements focused on re-empowering and re-homing indigenous peoples.

Just because Israel's government is genocidal does not make all Jews who believe in the right to one day return home safely are also evil.

I hope that clarified things! If not, I am turning anon back on for a few days so you can ask followup questions directly.

[ghostpalmtechnique]

Israel exists where it does because that was the only place it was conceivably going to exist. Every statement about "they should have put it in [x]" is intellectual wanking that is completely divorced from anything that was ever feasible in historical context. That is the short version for why I think Israel should exist (within roughly it's 1949 borders, to the extent that any state should exist).

I am not impressed by historical arguments from either side. If you start talking about "settler colonialism," I am already assuming you are both a fool and a scoundrel. The modal Israeli a) is not of European descent, and b) is third- or fourth-generation Israeli.

If you argue that Palestinians were there first (more or less credible depending on where, specifically, "there" is), then you should have to answer the question: After how many generations does a land claim expire? You obviously believe in such an expiration date, because otherwise you would have to acknowledge the Jewish claim.

-----

There are two possible Jewish responses to the world's long history of anti-Jewish hostility. One is to form an enclave; the other is to try and create a society where ethnicity doesn't matter. The argument against the former is that the proper term for an ethnic enclave walled off from encirclement by hostile forces is "ghetto," and this does not substantially change if there are guns inside the walls. The argument against the latter has been the continuous undercurrent of Christian Nationalism on the right in the United States (let's be clear here --2/3 of the global Jewish population lives in either the US or Israel; everywhere else is irrelevant as a survival strategy, except to the extent that dispersal itself is a strategy).

As you can tell from the fact that I live in the United States, I prefer the latter strategy, and have spent my entire life politically in what I regard as a life-or-death struggle with SoCons. But what I keep gesturing at, and people stubbornly refuse to absorb, is that watching my ostensible allies in this struggle downplay antisemitism when it comes from the left comes off as a stab in the back and is a damaging argument against the viability of strategy #2.

[beardedmrbean]

Hey Nunya can you explain the difference differences between Yiddish and Hebrew? Is Hebrew is to Yiddish what Italian is to Latin?

Sorry, ugh why we know so little about Jewish history? It’s like it just went from ancient history to the holocaust like in one paragraph

Wait, probably because the left don’t want to admit that the Nazis had a “Eat the Rich” mindset towards the Jews. And have you notice a lot of European countries pretend they didn’t have centuries of antisemitism leading up to the holocaust?

Given the current situation with Israel and Palestine…yeah.

Yiddish is a weird combo language it's going to be indigenous to Ashkenazi Jews came to being in central Europe as a mix of Hebrew, German, some Polish, and other local languages at some point 1000 or so years ago and has refined itself over the centuries before almost being wiped out along with Jewish population of Europe in the 1940's with the Holocaust. Makin a come back though which is good.

There's a lot of high quality snarky insults in there too, there's a good wikipedia article that's going to be way more detailed and informative than I could be on the subject, not just the insults either.

I gave it a skim to make sure I wasn't giving bad info. Says it's High Germanic which that's a lot of languages in the family tree

As for their history, there's a lot they don't know either, starting with the northern kingdom of Samaria being scattered by the Babylonians, 10 lost tribes and all, there were still Samaritans after that whole thing obviously, kingdom of Judea not big fans of them as you may remember from some stories in the Jesus part of the bible. There's still a few there too, dwindling population of them in Israel.

They've been looking and trying to bring people home if they'd like to come home and their current home country will allow it too, one group that tickles me every time I think about them is the Kaifeng Jews random community in China that popped up in the records here and there, couple others in China as well. Ethiopian royal family which is not really around anymore claims descent from Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, there are Ethiopian Jews living in Israel some racism accusations that may carry water there I haven't dug.

A lot of their history for the ones that landed in Europe is fairly parallel to everyone else's history there other than the whole Pope thing, and the various pogroms where the local Christian community to our eternal shame tried to go in and wipe them out for a multitude of reasons mostly false and related to superstition and or ignorance. Check out the places that got hit by the plague the least and you'll see why ritual washing is a good thing.

Then there was that whole inquisition thing and England actually banned them from living there completely for a while, that mildly recent in the grand scheme of history.

Short short short version of Jewish history can be summed up with the traditional toast "they tried to kill us, we survived, let's eat" which is both sad and hilarious all at the same time.

The history is there though, it's just not something you're going to pick up a lot of in primary (k-12) school, same reason as a lot of things that get a glossed over treatment, there's a whole lot of it.

People are lucky the internet is a thing now, not only can you find a whole bunch of pictures of raccoons wearing different hats and outfits, the whole world of information is at our fingertips and anything we're interested in, provided it's not a national security threat, is there to be learned about.

[sunglassesbot]

My buddy pointed me to to an article in a very liberal Jewish newspaper. He's, like, a semi-practicing Orthodox Jew and an outspoken supporter of Israel and this paper was very anti-zionist.

Now, glossing over discussion of where–and to what degree–anti-zionism intersects with anti-semitism, what interested me about this article was that it postulated that indigeneity was either determined in 1492, with the European “discovery” of the new world, or shortly there afterwards. 

Of course, this definition excludes some groups who you would typically think of as being indigenous, most notably some Southern African ethnic groups who did not arrive in what is presently considered their Homeland until after 1492. However, contrary to what certain extremists would tell you, they were there before the Afrikaners arrived. But, I don't think this was the general intention of the article and I suspect the author wasn't acquainted with the various squabbles about indigeneity in South Africa as the article seemed to be written with the Levant in mind. 

Nonetheless, I keep thinking of that article because it reveals that there's not really a standard view of indigeneity, or what benefits and rights indigeneity entitles a people to. 

There is another definition for indigeneity of which I have heard; that a people is indigenous to the land in which it underwent ethnogenesis. Ethnogenesis is, of course, the creation of an ethnic group. Aside from the obvious difficulties–defining an ethnic group and defining ethnogenesis–there are serious issues with this definition. The Afrikaners are generally considered to have experienced ethnogenesis in Africa. This is surprising because Afrikaners are largely of Dutch and French descent, their ancestors arriving as settlers in what is now South Africa. This credible claim of indigeneity is often seized upon by certain extremists to claim that the Afrikaners have a right to a racially, or at least ethnically, homogeneous independent state. This claim is, at best, highly dubious because South Africa is populated by many different ethnic groups and the Afrikaners do not comprise a majority population anywhere geographically with the exception of some very small areas. There is also a lot to be said for the idea that the Afrikaner identity is intrinsically exclusionary as individuals of mixed race are often not considered Afrikaners. 

More importantly, the way we think about indigeneity is often shaped by the assumptions of 18th century nationalism, where the norm is homogeneous nation states occupying cleanly divided territories. In reality, different ethnic groups often occupy the same territory without a majority ethnic group.

Anyway, I don't really know what the point of this post is.

[loujillvillano]

RELIGION

-The religious affiliation of the Israeli population as of 2022 was 73.6% Jewish, 18.1% Muslim, 1.9% Christian, and 1.6% Druze. The remaining 4.8% included faiths such as Samaritanism and Baháʼí, as well as "religiously unclassified".

source: google

BOARDER (GAZA STRIP)

- 2,000,000+ Gaza strip population. It is almost 38 years to took it from Egypt in Middle East war. Israel controls the goods that entering the gaza and they are limiting the people who enter or exit gaza.

source: https://youtu.be/R5OF_eCzSmQ?si=qWUWR1ff-I2_QMBM

TERRITORY

- Israeli live to the Palestine because they want the Palestine to be their territory because they believe that god give that to them. Palestine did not want the government of the israel.

source: From ma'am love's lecture

RESOURCES

- Water sharing issues form an important part of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The 1990s in particular witnessed extensive efforts to reach a peace agreement and to cooperate on water sharing issues. Yet in the context of a stalled peace process, both sides have failed to isolate the issue of water from the conflict.

source: https://climate-diplomacy.org/case-studies/israel-palestine-water-sharing-conflict

ORIGIN OF THE PEOPLE

-Nearly half of all Israeli Jews are descended from immigrants from the European Jewish diaspora. Approximately the same number are descended from immigrants from Arab countries, Iran, Turkey and Central Asia. Over 200,000 are of Ethiopian and Indian-Jewish descent.

sources: google

NOVA MUSIC FESTIVAL

- On October 07, 2023 Hamas attacks militarians and Israeli boarders. They use snipers, drones, motorized paragliders, bulldozers, pick up truck and speed boats. Because of that surprise attack, almost 900 Israeli died including the 200 people who attended Nova Music Festival.

source: https://youtu.be/R5OF_eCzSmQ?si=qWUWR1ff-I2_QMBM

ARE YOU A PRO PALESTINE OR PRO ISRAEL?

-If by pro Israeli you mean that you accept that Jews should a nation for them, and that they have a claim to this land. If by pro Palestinian you men that you accept that palastinians should have a nation for them, and that they have a claim for this land. Sadly, most people are more interested in being anti Palestinian or anti Israeli than being pro Palestinian or pro Israeli.

source: quora

[weatherwhim]

One of the aspects I think everyone needs to recognize about bigotry is that public perception of "how bad" a particular flavor of discrimination is compared to all other kinds has very little to do with which groups are the most tangibly harmed or harassed, and a lot more to do with the oppressed group's ability to politically organize.

One of the reasons that specifically anti-black racism- in specifically the United States- is so recognized is because black people make up about 15% of the population of the US. In Europe, the issue is literally smaller- not because Europeans are any less racist, but because the portion of Europeans that are black is far lower (Wikipedia says ~1.2% in 2019, only counting Europeans of African descent). That's a much more convenient number of people for regional media to ignore. That's a much smaller number of bodies that can form a crowd to visibly protest in city plazas. It's fewer voices to shout out. And thus, it's a much harder task for protest organizers to win awareness for, even when anti-black racism absolutely exists all across Europe.

Without an education that is able to explain what discrimination is in general, how it systemically works, and how bigoted attitudes are able to take root in ordinary people (no, you are not exempt), any minority group that doesn't have the benefit of an active civil rights campaign with a footing in their home-region is going to continue to have their struggles swept under the rug, and their oppression outright denied by the same people who are oppressing them- even if those people think of themselves as good liberals who would never do that kind of thing to the specific groups whose fights against oppression they've been sold on.

We can make fun of Europeans for writing off their beyond-parody racist treatment of the Romani, but the reality is, without a general education about the inner workings of bigotry and systemic discrimination, we're just going to end up repeating it towards every minority group that hasn't specifically been singled out by an organized civil rights movement as "one of the oppressed people who we need to stand up for".

Think of how comparatively little anyone in America talks about the Americans Indians, who were subjected to such thorough genocide that they now make up a tiny fraction of the population of their native continent. Think of how much casual anti-asian sentiment gets thrown around in the United States. And if you want to turn back to Europe, think about how the recent immigrations of Middle Eastern refugees have almost single-handedly triggered a backslide into nationalist and isolationist policies. The United Kingdom choked so hard on its own Islamaphobia that it isn't even in the EU anymore.

Think about how oppression against groups with more ability to lobby is weaponized against groups with less. Consider Israel and Palestine. People forget to look at things as simple as where the bombs are falling, and on who. People talk about the horrors of the Holocaust as something that must be prevented from reoccurring as an argument for supporting a government that's literally filtering Palestinian civilians into concentration camps, and don't see the irony because it's different people from the ones in their history books. The horrifyingly disparate number of deaths among Jewish Israelis and Palestinians should be enough evidence by itself to demonstrate where the lion's share of the region's current systemic oppression is being directed, but people aren't looking at the deaths. Nobody can trace what "protecting ourselves from oppression" does or does not excuse, because it's become an abstract game of "avoid bigotry" that isn't based on bigotry's connection to tangible harm, only the public perception of it. That comes down entirely to which side has more ability to sway public perception.

When people in Europe look down on Americans for being racist against black people, then turn around and cheer for bulldozers to demolish Romani homes, and treat the possibility that some of them are just innocent people legally living in their country with contempt, that's because it's not the action of denying people human rights that they're paying attention to. That's not their conception of bigotry. Bigotry is only when it happens to the particular cultural or ethnic groups they've been told they have to defend. As long as this line of thinking stays in place, no minority group will ever have protections against bigotry any greater than their own individual ability to advocate for themselves. At that point, it's just a numbers game.

So pardon me if this is a silly idea, but maybe if we're trying to form a litmus test for what bigotry is that doesn't immediately crumble from the slightest lack of self-awareness, maybe a good starting point is the bombs and the bulldozers. If you want a specific type of person's home to be destroyed so that they have nowhere to exist anymore, that's definitely bigotry.

somebody will rightfully notice that europeans are really fucking weird about romani people and there will always be 1 person in the comments going "okay it's not racist, you just don't understand, bleeding heart americans, i promise my brother tony had an experience which proves they're all raping theives and hitler was right about them" and not seem to be aware of how much they sound like americans talking about black ppl

[baebeylik]

B'nai Israel Religious School. 1920(probably). Oklahoma City.

Around the 1920s to 30s the Jewish population of Oklahoma City had grown to around 1200 to 1250. Tulsa was higher, at about 2400 or higher. Tulsa remained the hub for Oklahomans of Jewish descent, attracting Jewish citizens from smaller towns throughout the state and causing their populations to drop in smaller towns. Jewish migrants to Oklahoma came from largely Central European and Eastern European stock.

[hotilhotil]

Israel is known for its

Israel is known for its rich history, beautiful landscapes, religious sites, and vibrant culture. It is also a country where the escort industry is thriving. Escort girls in Israel are highly sought after for their beauty, charm, and seductive skills. The escort industry in Israel has been around for decades, but it wasn’t until recently that it gained mainstream recognition. Today, escort girls are a common sight in cities like Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, and Haifa. These women come from different backgrounds and offer a wide range of services to meet the diverse needs of their clients. One might wonder what makes the escort industry in Israel so popular. The answer lies in the unique qualities of the women themselves. Israeli escort girls are known for their stunning looks, intelligence, and sophistication. They are well-educated and come from various professions such as modeling, acting, and even law. The escort industry in Israel is also highly regulated and legal. This means that clients can be assured of a safe and discreet experience. The government imposes strict guidelines for escorts and agencies to follow, ensuring the protection of both the clients and the workers. This has also resulted in a reputable and trustworthy industry that continues to attract clients from all over the world. <a href="https://www.allsex.co.il/%d7%a0%d7%a2%d7%a8%d7%95%d7%aa-%d7%9c%d7%99%d7%95%d7%95%d7%99/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.allsex.co.il/%d7%a0%d7%a2%d7%a8%d7%95%d7%aa-%d7%9c%d7%99%d7%95%d7%95%d7%99/</a> One of the prominent reasons for the popularity of escort girls in Israel is their versatility. These women are not just about providing physical pleasure; they also serve as companions and confidants to their clients. Many clients seek the company of escorts for a variety of reasons, including loneliness, boredom, or simply for a fun and adventurous evening. Whatever the reason may be, Israeli escort girls are skilled in providing the type of companionship the client desires. Furthermore, the booming economy of Israel has also contributed to the growth of the escort industry. With a high-earning population and a growing number of tourists, the demand for escort services has significantly increased. This has also led to the rise of luxury and high-end escort agencies, providing top-notch services to their affluent clients. The diversity of Israel is reflected not only in its culture but also in its escort industry. Clients can choose from a variety of Israeli escort girls, including blonde, brunette, and redhead beauties. The country’s melting pot of cultures has also influenced the escorts’ backgrounds, with many coming from European, African, and Middle Eastern descent. Many may view the escort industry as taboo or controversial, but in Israel, it is widely accepted and respected. These women are not victims of exploitation but are empowered and independent individuals who have chosen this profession as a means of supporting themselves. Some may even use their earnings to fund their education or other aspirations. In conclusion, the escort industry in Israel is a thriving and legitimate business. It offers clients a unique and unforgettable experience, whether it be for companionship, a night of fun, or a sensual encounter. Israeli escort girls are not just beautiful faces; they are also intelligent, well-mannered, and professional individuals who provide an exceptional service for those seeking their companionship. So the next time you find yourself in Israel, don’t hesitate to indulge in the company of a gorgeous escort – it may just be the highlight of your trip.

[walkfromhome]

Where did the Rh-negatives come from? If they are not the descendants of prehistoric man, could they be the descendants of the ancient astronauts?

All animals and other living creatures known to man can breed with any other of their species. Relative size and color makes no difference. Why does infant's haemolytic disease occur in humans if all humans are the same species? Haemolytic disease is the allergic reaction that occurs when an Rh negative mother is carrying a Rh positive child. Her blood builds up antibodies to destroy an alien substance (the same way it would a virus), thereby destroying the infant. Why would a mother's body reject her own offspring? Nowhere else in nature does this occur naturally. This same problem does occur in mules - a cross between a horse and donkey. This fact alone points to the distinct possibility of a cross-breeding between two similar but genetically different species.

No one knows where the Rh-negative people came from. Rhesus negative blood simply means that the blood doesn't have any Rhesus antigens on the surface of the red blood cells. An "absence" of a protein does not necessarily have to originate from anywhere. The simplest explanation is that Rh-negative blood is caused by a mutation on the first chromosome which rendered individuals incapable of producing functional Rhesus proteins. As for why there are so few people with Rh-negative blood, Rh-negative is a recessive trait, so all an individual needs is one functional Rhesus gene to produce Rh-positive blood. Since Rh-negative blood does not hinder an individual's survivability or confer any evolutionary disadvantage other than the inability to receive Rh-positive blood (which is pretty much a non-factor during the time period when blood transfusions weren't available), people with non-functional Rhesus genes continued to thrive and reproduce which is why there are still individuals with Rh-negative blood.

Most, familiar with blood factors, admit that these people must at least be a mutation if not descendants of a different ancestor. If we are a mutation, what caused the mutation? Why does it continue with the exact characteristics? Why does it so violently reject the Rh factor, if it was in their own ancestry? Who was this ancestor? Difficulties in determining ethnology are largely overcome by the use of blood group data, for they are a single gene characteristic and not affected by the environment.

The Basque people of Spain and France have the highest percentage of Rh-negative blood. About 30% have (rr) Rh negative and about 60% carry one (r) negative gene. The average among most people is only 157%-Rh negative, while some groups have very little. The Oriental Jews of Israel, also have a high percent Rh-negative, although most other Oriental people have only about 1% Rh negative. The Samaritans and the Black Cochin Jew also have a high percentage of Rh-negative blood, although again the Rh negative blood is rare among most black people.

The Rh-Negatives Factor is considered a "Mutation" of "Unknown Origin", which happened in Europe, about 25,000-35,000 years ago. Then this group spread heavily into the area of what is now Spain, England, Ireland, etc. 5% of the Earth's population are currently Rh-Negatives. But, they are 15% of the population of the England and the USA. The most distinctive members of the European branch of the human tree are the Basques of France and Spain. They show unusual patterns for several genes, including the highest rate of the Rh-negative blood type. Their language is of unknown origin and cannot be placed within any standard classification.

Consider Iceland, 1% of its population is Rh-negative. The population of Iceland is about two-third of Scandinavian and one-third of Irish descent. Scandinavia, Ireland, and the British Isles show from 16% to 25% and above Rh-negative. The other populations with a proportion of Rh-negative individuals similar to Iceland occupy the eastern half of Asia, Madagascar, Australia and New-Zealand. The people of the Basque region have a greater than 50 percent concentration of the RH negative gene,. The frequency decreases in relation to the distance from the Basque region into the rest of the world until there is very little evidence of this gene.

This genetic mapping helps to show that a mutation from RH positive to RH negative occurred somewhere in the Basque area of Europe maybe as much as 40,000 years ago. Science tells us that the red hair DNA did not originate with human beings but was Neanderthal DNA. "When we look at the Y-chromosomes in Wales and Ireland, we find a very close match with the Basques." Other genetic evidence, he says, strongly suggests that the Basques are the descendants of the Paleolithic inhabitants of Western Europe prior to the arrival of farmers between 9,000 and 6,000 years ago". During a period in history known as the Dark Ages, which happened around 1200 - 800 B.C. The "Tribe of Dan" was shipped into Western Europe with the aid of the Phoenicians from the Mediterranean Sea at about the same time in history. They came into Spain, France (Languedoc Area of France).

We also know that the 10 Lost Tribes of Israel known as the Hebrews migrated into Europe and became a blended group who would later become known as the Scythian, aka Aryan Races. They migrated into Europe from the Caucasus and Carpathian mountain ranges while the Tribe of Dan into Spain, France and the British Isles from the Mediterranean Sea. Phoenicians helped transport the Tribe of Dan into Spain, France, and the British Isles by way of the "Sea Route," from the Middle East. Phoenicians appear to be the Siberians of Russia, the Yakuts, Sakha and the Buryats. THEY ARE THE SAME RACE WITH THE SAME DNA. They have the same spiritual and historical traditions: the same names of landforms, rivers.

(Source)

[mithliya]

Australia, Armenia and Israel still regularly compete in Eurovision and, in the past, Morocco has also put forward an act. The reason they get to participate is that they have a broadcaster that is operating within Europe as part of the EBU

yeah ik about morocco (made 0 sense and the least sense). armenia is in eurasia so i get it, azerbaijan too. israel is more or less european too, often european run & controlled with a massive european population & couldn’t have existed without europe & america so that was ultimately understandable to me too. some of that is why cyprus is in there too probs, altho they’re technically in the middle east, the country is considered european, under the EU, & most of the population is of significantly greek descent. australia makes the least sense bc of all countries it’s like still predominantly european n all but like cyprus and israel and the rest are all right by europe or partially in europe whereas australia is in bumfuck nowhere

[womenfrommars]

Debunking myths about Jewish history

1. ‘’Ashkenazi Jews are white Europeans’’

Let’s start with the claim that’s been propagated the most on the Internet. The claim is that some ethnic Jews are indeed Middle-Eastern (e.g. Sephardi and Mizrahi), but that the Ashkenazi Jews specifically are (white) Europeans. This claim simply isn’t supported by scientific evidence.

The results support the hypothesis that the paternal gene pools of Jewish communities from Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East descended from a common Middle Eastern ancestral population, and suggest that most Jewish communities have remained relatively isolated from neighboring nonJewish communities during and after the Diaspora.

(...)

The m values based on haplotypes Med and 1L were ~13% ± 10%, suggesting a rather small European contribution to the Ashkenazi paternal gene pool. When all haplotypes were included in the analysis, m increased to 23% ± 7%. This value was similar to the estimated Italian contribution to the Roman Jewish paternal gene pool. (Hammer et al. 2000)

About 80 Sephardim, 80 Ashkenazim and 100 Czechoslovaks were examined for the Yspecific RFLPs revealed by the probes p12f2 and p40a,f on TaqI DNA digests. The aim of the study was to investigate the origin of the Ashkenazi gene pool through the analysis of markers which, having an exclusively holoandric transmission, are useful to estimate paternal gene flow. The comparison of the two groups of Jews with each other and with Czechoslovaks (which have been taken as a representative source of foreign Y-chromosomes for Ashkenazim) shows a great similarity between Sephardim and Ashkenazim who are very different from Czechoslovaks. On the other hand both groups of Jews appear to be closely related to Lebanese. A preliminary evaluation suggests that the contribution of foreign males to the Ashkenazi gene pool has been very low (1 % or less per generation). (Benerecetti et al. 1993)

A sample of 526 Y chromosomes representing six Middle Eastern populations (Ashkenazi, Sephardic, and Kurdish Jews from Israel; Muslim Kurds; Muslim Arabs from Israel and the Palestinian Authority Area; and Bedouin from the Negev) was analyzed for 13 binary polymorphisms and six microsatellite loci. The investigation of the genetic relationship among three Jewish communities revealed that Kurdish and Sephardic Jews were indistinguishable from one another, whereas both differed slightly, yet significantly, from Ashkenazi Jews. The differences among Ashkenazim may be a result of low-level gene flow from European populations and/or genetic drift during isolation. (Nebel et al. 2001)

Here, genome-wide analysis of seven Jewish groups (Iranian, Iraqi, Syrian, Italian, Turkish, Greek, and Ashkenazi) and comparison with non-Jewish groups demonstrated distinctive Jewish population clusters, each with shared Middle Eastern ancestry, proximity to contemporary Middle Eastern populations, and variable degrees of European and North African admixture. Two major groups were identified by principal component, phylogenetic, and identity by descent (IBD) analysis: Middle Eastern Jews and European/Syrian Jews. The IBD segment sharing and the proximity of European Jews to each other and to southern European populations suggested similar origins for European Jewry and refuted large-scale genetic contributions of Central and Eastern European and Slavic populations to the formation of Ashkenazi Jewry. Rapid decay of IBD in Ashkenazi Jewish genomes was consistent with a severe bottleneck followed by large expansion, such as occurred with the so-called demographic miracle of population expansion from 50,000 people at the beginning of the 15th century to 5,000,000 people at the beginning of the 19th century. Thus, this study demonstrates that European/Syrian and Middle Eastern Jews represent a series of geographical isolates or clusters woven together by shared IBD genetic threads. (Atzmon et al. 2010)

2. '’Ashkenazi Jews are the descendants of the Khazars’’

Another popular idea on the Internet, which is also associated with the alt-right, is that Ashkenazi Jews are the descendants of the Khazar people, from the Khazar empire (roughly 600-1000). This culture completely died out and there are no direct descendants, so genetic testing is a bit difficult.

However, there still has been done genetic testing that confirms this hypothesis to be false.

Employing a variety of standard techniques for the analysis of population-genetic structure, we find that Ashkenazi Jews share the greatest genetic ancestry with other Jewish populations, and among non-Jewish populations, with groups from Europe and the Middle East. No particular similarity of Ashkenazi Jews with populations from the Caucasus is evident, particularly with the populations that most closely represent the Khazar region. Thus, analysis of Ashkenazi Jews together with a large sample from the region of the Khazar Khaganate corroborates the earlier results that Ashkenazi Jews derive their ancestry primarily from populations of the Middle East and Europe, that they possess considerable shared ancestry with other Jewish populations, and that there is no indication of a significant genetic contribution either from within or from north of the Caucasus region. (Behar et al. 2013)

However, if the R-M17 chromosomes in Ashkenazi Jews do indeed represent the vestiges of the mysterious Khazars then, according to our data, this contribution was limited to either a single founder or a few closely related men, and does not exceed ∼12% of the present-day Ashkenazim. (Nebel et al. 2005)

3. '’Palestinians are indigenous to the land of Israel, so the Jews can’t be indigenous’’

First off, it has been established that Jews and Palestinians share the same ancestry:

Archaeologic and genetic data support that both Jews and Palestinians came from the ancient Canaanites, who extensively mixed with Egyptians, Mesopotamian and Anatolian peoples in ancient times. Thus, Palestinian-Jewish rivalry is based in cultural and religious, but not in genetic, differences. (Arnaiz-Villena et al. 2001)

If Palestinians are considered native, then so should Jews, since both descend from the ancient Canaanites.

Furthermore, the Hebrew Bible states that Philistines (’’Palestinians’’) came from Caphtor, which has been identified as modern-day Crete, an island that is part of Greece (see also Finkelstein 2002). Other contestants for Caphtor include Cyprus and Cilicia (modern-day Turkey).

Archeological evidence also supports this theory:

Modern archaeologists agree that the Philistines were different from their neighbors: Their arrival on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean in the early 12th century B.C. is marked by pottery with close parallels to the ancient Greek world, the use of an Aegean—instead of a Semitic—script, and the consumption of pork. (National Geographic)

This was more recently confirmed by DNA evidence:

Now, a study published today in the journal Science Advances, prompted by the unprecedented 2016 discovery of a cemetery at the ancient Philistine city of Ashkelon on the southern coast of Israel, provides an intriguing look into the genetic origins and legacy of the Philistines. The research appears to support their foreign origin, but reveals that the reviled outsiders were soon marrying into the local populations. (...) The four early Iron Age DNA samples, all from infants buried beneath the floors of Philistine houses, include proportionally more “additional European ancestry” in their genetic signatures (roughly 14%) than in the pre-Philistine Bronze Age samples (2% to 9%), according to the researchers. While the origins of this additional “European ancestry” are not conclusive, the most plausible models point to Greece, Crete, Sardinia, and the Iberian peninsula. (Idem)

Now, this doesn’t mean that modern-day Palestinians are mostly European, as the research also found that the Philistines were mixing with the local populations. This also explains why modern-day Jews and modern-day Palestinians are genetically very similar (see above). It is highly unlikely that modern-day Palestinians are the direct descendants of the ancient Philistines.

However, the name ‘’Palestine’’ is derived from ‘’Philistia’’:

The first records of the Philistines are inscriptions and reliefs in the mortuary temple of Ramses III at Madinat Habu, where they appear under the name prst, as one of the Sea Peoples that invaded Egypt about 1190 BCE after ravaging Anatolia, Cyprus, and Syria. After being repulsed by the Egyptians, they settled—possibly with Egypt’s permission—on the coastal plain of Palestine from Joppa (modern Tel Aviv–Yafo) southward to Gaza. The area contained the five cities (the Pentapolis) of the Philistine confederacy (Gaza, Ashkelon [Ascalon], Ashdod, Gath, and Ekron) and was known as Philistia, or the Land of the Philistines. It was from this designation that the whole of the country was later called Palestine by the Greeks. (Encyclopædia Britannica)

Modern-day Palestinians are the descendants of local populations who converted to Islam due to Islamic conquest. Likewise, Jews are the descendants of local populations who left the country. Despite this, both groups are genetically related to each other. This is because Jews have been a relatively isolated group of people, since the religion of Judaism doesn’t permit interfaith marriage (unless a non-Jew converts into the faith). In other words: the fact that the Palestinians may be indigenous to the land of Israel doesn’t negate the fact that the Jews are indigenous to the land of Israel.

Our findings corroborate previous studies that suggested a common origin for Jewish and non-Jewish populations living in the Middle East (Santachiara-Benerecetti et al. 1993; Peretz et al. 1997; Hammer et al. 2000).

(...)

According to historical records part, or perhaps the majority, of the Moslem Arabs in this country descended from local inhabitants, mainly Christians and Jews, who had converted after the Islamic conquest in the seventh century AD (Shaban 1971; Mc Graw Donner 1981). These local inhabitants, in turn, were descendants of the core population that had lived in the area for several centuries, some even since prehistorical times (Gil 1992). On the other hand, the ancestors of the great majority of present-day Jews lived outside this region for almost two millennia. Thus, our findings are in good agreement with historical evidence and suggest genetic continuity in both populations despite their long separation and the wide geographic dispersal of Jews. (Nebel et al. 2000)

4. ‘’Well, the Palestinians were there first’’

As discussed before, the ancient Philistines from the book of Deuteronomy are said to have immigrated from Caphtor, which has been identified as island in southern Europe. The ancient Philistines have no direct descendants because they mixed with local populations. The ancient Philistines are also mentioned in the book of Genesis, which mentions they came from Egypt. According to rabbinic sources, this refers to a different people from the Philistines mentioned in the book of Deuteronomy. As discussed before, modern-day Palestinians descend from neither of these people. Palestinians maintain they are the descendants of the ancient Canaanites:

Both Israeli and Palestinian politicians claim the region of Israel and the Palestinian territories is the ancestral home of their people, and maintain that the other group was a late arrival. “We are the Canaanites,” asserted Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas last year. “This land is for its people…who were here 5,000 years ago.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, meanwhile, said recently that the ancestors of modern Palestinians “came from the Arabian peninsula to the Land of Israel thousands of years” after the Israelites. (National Geographic)

As discussed, modern-day Jews and modern-day Palestinians are genetically very similar. This was again established by a recent study:

Finally, we show that the genomes of present-day groups geographically and historically linked to the Bronze Age Levant, including the great majority of present-day Jewish groups and Levantine Arabic-speaking groups, are consistent with having 50% or more of their ancestry from people related to groups who lived in the Bronze Age Levant and the Chalcolithic Zagros. These present-day groups also show ancestries that cannot be modeled by the available ancient DNA data, highlighting the importance of additional major genetic effects on the region since the Bronze Age. (Agranat-Tamir et al. 2020)

According to the Bible, when the Israelites left Egypt, they conquered the Canaanites, who were already living in the land of Israel. Joshua 10:40 mentions there are no survivors of the ancient Canaanites. However, the Bible was written much later after these events took place. The study referenced above supports the hypothesis of continuity, i.e. the ancient Canaanites were not completely wiped out by the Israelites. Instead, Canaanite culture slowly morphed into other cultures, including the culture of the Israelites. As referenced under 3., it is likely both Jews and Palestinians came from the ancient Canaanites.

The Bible itself also mentions the Canaanites continued to exist in Judges 3:1-3 and explains the command to the Israelites was only given to teach them warfare (not to actually annihilate the Canaanites). It is more likely the Canaanites indeed continued to exist:

We show that present-day Lebanese derive most of their ancestry from a Canaanite-related population, which therefore implies substantial genetic continuity in the Levant since at least the Bronze Age. (Haber et al. 2017)

To put it differently, in the land of Israel, the ancient Canaanites were not destroyed, but rather subsumed by the Israelites. The Jews have maintained this culture and tradition. The Palestinians, on the other hand, have not. Palestinians didn’t maintain any tradition from the ancient Canaanites. Instead, their culture, tradition, and language can be traced back to the Hejaz, a region in the west of modern-day Saudi Arabia. This is also the birthplace of the religion of Islam.

Indeed, up until recently, Palestinians were not even called ‘’Palestinians’’. Instead, they were referred to as ‘’Palestinian Arabs’’. A report from 1946 gives more insight. In Chapter VI, titled ‘’The Arab Attitude’’, it states the following:

The Committee heard a brief presentation of the Arab case in Washington, statements made in London by delegates from the Arab States to the United Nations, a fuller statement from the Secretary General and other representatives of the Arab League in Cairo, and evidence given on behalf of the Arab Higher (committee and the Arab Office in Jerusalem). In addition, subcommittees visited Baghdad Riyadh, Damascus, Beirut and Amman, where they were informed of the views of Government and of unofficial spokesmen.

Stopped to the bare essentials, the Arab case is based upon the fact that Palestine is a country which the Arabs have occupied for more than a thousand years, and a denial of the Jewish historical claims to Palestine.

This report states Arabs have lived in Palestine ‘’for more than a thousand years’’, referring to the Islamic conquest of Palestine in the 7th century. Clearly, Palestinians are identified as Arabs here, by Palestinian leaders themselves.

Another report from the same year supports this view:

In addition to the question of right, the Arabs oppose the claims of political Zionism because of the effects which Zionist settlement has already had upon their situation and is likely to have to an even greater extent in the future. Negatively, it has diverted the whole course of their national development. Geographically Palestine is part of Syria; its indigenous inhabitants belong to the Syrian branch of the Arab family of nations; all their culture and tradition link them to other Arab peoples; and until 1917 Palestine formed part of the Ottoman Empire which included also several of the other Arab countries. The presence and claims of the Zionists, and the support given them by certain Western Powers have resulted in Palestine being cut off from other Arab countries and subjected to a regime, administrative, legal, fiscal and educational, different from that of the sister-countries. Quite apart from the inconvenience to individuals and the dislocation of trade which this separation has caused, it has prevented Palestine participating fully in the general development of the Arab world.

You can see the story changed overtime. The Palestinian claim to Canaanite blood is an ad hoc claim that is meant to predate the Jewish presence in Israel.

In general, the Palestinian claim to Canaanite roots also erases the fact that the Israelites drove the Canaanites out of Israel, to Lebanon. The remaining Canaanites were subsumed by the Israelites. Therefore, if Palestinians are native to the land of Israel, and if they descend from the Canaanites, then they must also descend from the Israelites. However, Palestinians attempt to bypass the Israelite link, claiming to not descend from the Israelites. I believe they likewise deny that the Jews descend from the Israelites, claiming that instead the Jews are just Europeans.

This wouldn’t be the first time the Palestinians changed their narrative either. They used to claim they descend from the ancient Philistines, referring to Genesis 21:34 as proof:

And Abraham stayed in the land of the Philistines for a long time. (New International Version)

As such, the Palestinian PM argued they have lived in the land of Palestine before Abraham. (Video is in the article.)

As explained earlier, the Philistines immigrated from southern Europe, and the Palestinians are not directly descended from them, given the DNA evidence. The ancient Philistines have disappeared as a people, because they mixed with local populations. That also explains why modern-day Palestinian DNA is not mostly European, as would be the case if they directly descended from the Philistines.

Recommended further reading

‘’Are Jews Indigenous to the Land of Israel?’’

‘‘Jews and Arabs Share Genetic Link to Ancient Canaanites, Study Finds‘‘

‘‘The Canaanites weren’t annihilated, they just ‘moved’ to Lebanon‘‘