Tăriceanu: MCV reprezintă “un atac direct la suveranitate”

Calin Popescu Tariceanu

Yesterday at 12:00 AM ·

Sunt câțiva ani de când tot atrag atenția public că ceva nu e în ordine cu rapoartele MCV privind România. Par să fie compuse după ureche, ori poate sunt livrate gata scrise de cineva din țară, iar la Bruxelles sunt doar semnate și asumate. De altfel, asta susțin și unele asociații profesionale ale magistraților de la noi, legat de ultimul MCV și nu doar de el, atunci când denunță public faptul că oficialii europeni sunt profund subiectivi.

Rapoartele MCV au excelat, ne amintim, inclusiv în a cere eludarea unor decizii legitime ale Parlamentului, consfințite și de CCR, adică un atac direct la suveranitate.

Circulă deja o ironie amară în media, conform căreia, anul ăsta, Bruxellesul a confundat România cu Bulgaria, țară în care nu a fost condamnat niciun mare corupt, niciun ministru, niciun parlamentar, în timp ce la noi numărul lor e de ordinul zecilor.

Ca să fie tacâmul complet, șeful anticorupției din Bulgaria și-a dat recent demisia pe motiv de corupție. De fapt, vecinii noștri nici nu au catadicsit să-și facă un DNA, având o droaie de organisme mai mici și circulă la ei glume gen „dacă fiecare stat are mafia lui, în Bulgaria mafia are un stat“.

Și atunci cum de Bulgaria e mângâiată duios pe cap, iar România e ținută pe mai departe la zid, sub amenințarea puștii MCV?

Nu știu și nu pot să înțeleg.

Și nici nu vreau să dau crezare teoriei conform căreia ridicarea MCV ar consfinți, de fapt, frângerea definitivă pe genunchi a unei țări din Est, adică exact situația Bulgariei, unde corupția e în floare, dar nu există crâcneli față de puterile ”protectoare”. La loc de cinste Rusia și Germania, care și-au împărțit egal economia țării.

E România pedepsită cu MCV, pe mai departe, pentru că nu s-a predat încă total? Pentru că încă mai are zvâcniri de orgoliu și de demnitate și nu înghite necondiționat tot ce i se livrează din exterior?

Cred că a venit momentul ca povestea să înceteze, iar UE să abandoneze acest mecanism tendențios, incorect și inegal numit Mecanismul de Cooperare și Verificare, în fapt o riglă de bătut la palmă copiii care nu își fac ”lecțiile” strict conform viziunii ”profesorilor” de la Bruxelles.

Why Is The Elitist Establishment So Obsessed With Meat?

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

I don’t know how many people have noticed this, but in the past three months it has been impossible for a person to throw a beef burger patty in any direction on the compass without hitting a news article on the “destructive effects” of the meat industry in terms of “climate change”. There’s also been endless mainstream articles on the supposedly vast health benefits of a vegetarian or vegan diet. This narrative has culminated in a tidal wave of stories about vegetable-based meat companies like Beyond Meat and their rise to stock market stardom. The word on the street is, meat based diets are going the way of the Dodo, and soon, by environmental necessity, we will ALL be vegetarians.

For at least the past ten years the United Nations has been aggressively promoting the concept of a meat free world, based on claims that accelerated land use and greenhouse gas emissions are killing the Earth. In the west, militant leftists with dreams of a socialist Utopia have adopted a kind of manifesto in the Green New Deal, and an integral part of their agenda is the end to the availability of meat to the common man (it’s interesting the Green New Deal agenda matches almost perfectly with the UN’s Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030). Some of these elitists have argued in favor of heavy taxation on meat products to reduce public consumption; others have argued for an outright ban.

The problem with this dietary revolution is that it is based primarily on junk science and cherry-picked data, along with outright lies and propaganda. The majority of studies and articles covering this issue are decidedly biased, left leaning and collectivist in nature. Now, I plan to touch on this issue, but what I really want to focus on is the “WHY” of the matter – Why are the elites targeting human meat consumption, and why are they willing to lie about its effects in order to get us to abandon our burgers and steaks? What is the real agenda here…?

First, lets tackle the climate change issue. The UN claims that human food production must change drastically in order to stop global warming and damage to the environment, and these changes must focus mainly on meat production and ‘methane gases’. In other words, they assert that cow farts are killing the planet. This is a rather convenient story for the elites as they push their carbon taxation agenda. It seems everything we do as humans must be monitored, restricted or taxed, from breathing to procreating to eating meat, otherwise the Earth is “doomed”.

In past articles I have written extensively on the direct ties between the UN’s global warming hysteria and the push for global government. In particular, I’ve mentioned the writings of former UN assistant secretary general Robert Muller. In his manifesto collected on a website titled “Good Morning World”, Muller argues that global governance must be achieved using the idea of “protecting the Earth” and environmentalism as the key components. Through fear of environmental Apocalypse, the public could be convinced to accept global government as a necessary nanny state to keep society from destroying itself.

Muller initiated such programs in the early 1990’s, which were similar in tone to the Club Of Rome think tank, a group of consultants to the UN which called for a stop to human population growth. In their white paper titled ‘The First Global Revolution’, the Club of Rome stated:

In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes. and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”

The statement comes from Chapter 5 – The Vacuum, which covers their position on the need for global government. The quote is relatively clear; a common enemy must be conjured in order to trick humanity into uniting under a single banner, and the elites see environmental catastrophe, caused by mankind itself, as the best possible motivator.

From public admissions from UN officials and the Club Of Rome, we can see that climate change is a narrative driven by ideology, not science, and that the real goal is global governance, not saving the planet. As for the “science” these ideologues say supports their demands, there is none.

There is absolutely no hard evidence to support the claim that a cause and effect link between carbon emissions and rising temperatures exists.In fact, there is more evidence to show that the reverse is true – that higher temperatures result in greater animal populations and thus more carbon emissions and thus more food for vegetation. Ask any global warming “expert” from the NOAA, NASA or the IPCC what percentage of a temperature increase is caused by cars versus cows and what evidence there is to support their assertions? They won’t be able to produce an answer.

They will simply claim that the evidence is irrefutable because the temperatures are rising and so are carbon levels. In other words, their argument is that correlation always equals causation. But are temperatures really rising? What if the entire basis for global warming hysteria is fabricated?

The NOAA has been caught on multiple occasions doing just that. By going back to previously recorded temperature stats and tweaking them to make them lower, the NOAA then makes it appear as though the Earth is warming in a historic trend. However, the unaltered temperature record shows that the Earth has always had warming periods which run in natural cycles, followed by cooling and using tracking increased solar activity. You know that giant nuclear reactor in the sky that is 1.3 million times bigger Earth? Yeah, it has a lot more to do with the Earth’s climate patterns than cow farts do…

If one compares NOAA data on temperature changes over the past century from 1999 to the data the NOAA has released over the past few years, it is easy to see the adjustments they made to their own older data in order to make it appear as though steady global warming is taking place. The NOAA’s changes also make it appear as though temperature changes are closely tracking rising carbon emissions.

Here we see the climate change hoax in action, as well as the UN and the Club Of Rome conspiracy to engineer an environmental threat that will provide a rationale for global government. But what does all this have to do with meat?

The climate change myth is simply a means to multiple ends.

And, one of the things the elites are using it to unravel is society’s eating habits. The purpose behind the war on meat is less clear, but I do have some theories based on historical evidence as well as scientific evidence that shows ruling oligarchies have always tried to restrict meat consumption by the “peasant class” whenever possible.

In feudal Europe in the middle ages, the presence of meat in a diet was rare for the peasant class. Farm animals were strictly controlled property, given to peasant farmers as tools for working the land, not for eating. Hunting wild game was difficult as the ruling royal families often claimed ownership of all the best hunting grounds within the country. After multiple peasant revolts, such as the Great Peasant’s Revolt of 1381 in England, the elites banned hunting parties, as they were suspected of being used as cover for peasants to train in military tactics and to plan rebellions.

Peasants caught poaching “the king’s deer” were punished severely – this including hanging, castration, blinding and being sewn into a deer carcass and chased down by ferocious dogs.

This did not stop peasants from eating meat at times though. When possible they would eat small game. But their diets consisted primarily of pottage and porridge made from grains, beans and root vegetables, along with black rye bread. Going into the middle ages onward, researchers will find that for the serfs and the poor, a meat dinner was treated as a special event.

In feudal Japan, meat eating, not just hunting, was specifically banned for over 1000 years, starting in 675 AD. The ban was based on the melding of Buddhist beliefs and Shinto. Of course, while the law was enforced for peasants, the elite ruling class and the samurai warrior class never actually gave meat up. Meat was often eaten by the elites, under the auspices of improving health. When given as a gift to a feudal lord, pickled meats were labeled “medicine” in order to avoid open defiance of the laws.

This selective ban continued until Europeans arrived on Japanese shores, and the reintroduction of meat dishes began to spread. By the late 1800’s the meat ban was officially lifted. It was believed by the Japanese of the era that Westerners had superior physiques because of their meat based diets, and that Japanese physiques had been subdued by their vegetable and grain based diets. There is some truth to this observation.

Today, the vegetarian ideology is not a stand-alone philosophy. It is tied inexorably to other ideologies such as socialism, globalism and extremist forms of environmentalism. There are very few vegetarian promoters that are not politically motivated. This has caused a rash of propaganda, attempting to rewrite the history of the human diet to fit their bizarre narrative.

Even though human beings have been omnivores for millions of years, the anti-meat campaign claims that humans were actually long time vegetarians. They do this by comparing humans to our closest evolutionary relatives, like chimpanzees and gorillas, and arguing that these animals have a strict vegetable diet (which is not exactly true).

Of course, Native American tribes, living closest to how our prehistoric ancestors lived long ago, had meat heavy diets, but don’t expect the environmentalists to accept this reality. What they conveniently do not mention is that over 2 million years ago human ancestors broke from their vegetable diet and began eating meat. Not only this, but the diet changed our very physical makeup. We grew far stronger, and smarter.

Yes, that’s right, the rise of meat in the human diet tracks almost exactly with the rise of human intelligence and advances in tools and technology.

Vegetarian and vegan diets have been shown to lower overall IQ due to lack of nutrients required for brain health. This is because the human brain NEEDS fatty acids such as Omega 3 which is only found in saturated fats in meats. There is no substitute in the plant world. Saturated fats from animal protein have been shown to increase cognitive function as well as memory.

The brain uses almost 20% of the human body’s calorie intake in order to function, and much of this intake requires saturated fats and even cholesterol. Contrary to decades of misinformation, animal fats are good for you. Pro athletes also must often revert to a meat based diet in order to build up superior muscle structure, and another factor which is rarely mentioned is the increase in estrogen-like compounds in plant based foods (mainly soy), which can reduce testosterone.

And here we get to the crux of the issue. It is perhaps by mere coincidence, or perhaps just observation on the part of elitist dynasties, but meat consumption has always been connected with an unruly peasant class. This is because meat eating contributes directly to greater cognitive function, as well as better memory and muscle mass.

While much is discussed about how artificial meat like Beyond Meat has effectively copied the taste or appearance of a normal hamburger, very little is discussed about what it is lacking. Beyond meat has zero cholesterol and no amino acids or fatty acids like Omega 3 or vitamins like B12. It uses coconut oil to mimic saturated animal fats, which does not duplicate the animal fat value to the human brain or body. Essentially, a Beyond Meat burger is designed to copy the taste of a burger without any of the benefits.

My theory? That meat is a cognitive enhancer as well as a strength enhancer and the elites at the UN and other globalists organizations are seeking to remove it from our diet based on lies because such a change could contribute to a dumber and weaker population that would be easier to control.

Fake meat is also highly processed and uses a complicated method to mimic beef protein structures. It can only be created in a lab and mass produced in a factory. You will never be able to make your own Beyond Meat burger. Meaning, by banning or taxing meat into oblivion and replacing it with an industrial substitute, the establishment will have made society effectively dependent on them for a significant portion of their dietary needs. Not only do they hope to make us dumber and weaker, they also hope to make us desperately dependent.

Who are Extinction Rebellion – the ‘eco-activists’ grounding planes & shutting down cities?

Calling for civil disobedience in the face of climate change, Extinction Rebellion protesters have been remarkably successful in thrusting themselves into the headlines. But what is the movement all about? And who’s behind it?

Best known for shutting down the streets of London in April, Extinction Rebellion upped its game on Thursday, with a protester affiliated with the group grounding an Aer Lingus flight from London City Airport to Dublin. Another protester – Paralympian James Brown – clambered onto the roof of a British Airways plane and refused to budge, prompting police to eventually remove him.

The disruptions came as Extinction Rebellion threatened a “Hong Kong-style” occupation and shutdown of the airport, and as similar protests hit more than 60 cities worldwide.

“Ultimately, it is part of Extinction Rebellion’s aim to get people arrested,” read a flyer circulated by activists in Dublin. To that end, the group has been successful. More than 1,000 activists have been arrested in London alone this week, including 50 at London City Airport.

What do they want?

The group’s demands are threefold. First, they call on governments to “tell the truth by declaring a climate and ecological emergency,” a similar demand to that made by Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg at the UN Climate Action Summit in New York last month. A seemingly benign demand, but one that paints opponents as ‘anti-truth’.

Secondly, they demand that “government must act now to halt biodiversity loss and reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2025.” Finally, the group demands that government partner up with activists, and “create and be led by the decisions of a Citizens’ Assembly on climate and ecological justice.”

While a ‘Citizens’ Assembly’ would draw on a cross-section of society, it would be government-created and guided by a collection of NGOs and academics, as was the case in Ireland when the government convened such an assembly to pave the way for referenda on gay marriage and abortion in recent years. Extinction Rebellion make no mention on whether NGOs with opposing views will be included in the deliberation.

At XR’s rallies, protesters have called for any number of ways of meeting these goals and more, including government bans on meat and private cars, abolishment of the airplane, boycotts of the fashion industry, and disbandment of the military. Disrupting commerce is fair game for making their points, as is disrupting vital services. As a cancer patient in London was forced to walk to hospital treatment due to XR’s roadblocks, spokesperson Savannah Lovelock told Sky News that while she was “really sorry,” such action is necessary for the good of the planet.

An appeal to authority

Central to all of the group’s demands is a radical expansion of state power. Reducing greenhouse gases to net zero – if a state-led effort – would give government the power to restrict or outright deny its citizens freedom of travel, freedom to choose their own diets, and freedom to build their homes however they want. In the US, draft text of ‘Green New Deal’ legislation gives a sneak-peek at just how all-encompassing this would be, working wealth redistribution and reparations for “historic oppression” into the mix for good measure.

A potent illustration of the group’s appeal to authority came last November, when XR co-founder Gail Bradbrook marched on Buckingham Palace and read aloud a message to Queen Elizabeth “with great humility,” calling on the monarch to save the planet by royal decree.

“It isn’t enough to live a life of voluntary simplicity,” academic and XR campaigner Rupert Read wrote at the time. The implied meaning is clear: people will have to be coerced into complying.

Who’s behind it all?

Here’s where things get interesting. Exploding onto the scene with a recognizable logo, coherent imagery across multiple continents, a dominant social media presence and a slick website, the leaders of Extinction Rebellion are no rabble of bong-smoking malcontents.

Especially not Dr. Gail Bradbrook. The co-founder of the movement told the BBC that she came up with the idea after praying “in a deep way” while under the influence of “psychedelic medicines” on a retreat last year.

In truth, Bradbrook has made a career out of activism, and has for two decades worked as a professional campaigner. Speaking at a talk in 2016, she admitted that this role is “mostly about securing your own paycheck.”As director of Citizens Online – a charity campaigning for “digital inclusion,” Bradbrook has worked with BT to lobby the British government.

Joining Bradshaw are former organic farmer Roger Hallam, and also involved are Occupy London veteran Tasmin Osmond – a granddaughter of British nobility – and ex-UN worker Laura Reeves.

Behind the movement is a bulwark of elite cash. Heiress Aileen Getty has kicked in nearly £500,000 of her family’s oil wealth to the group via the Climate Emergency Fund, claiming that “disruption” is necessary to take on climate change. According to its own data, Extinction Rebellion has raised just short of a million pounds in large donationssince March, from groups like the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation, set up by a hedge fund manager and run by a former vice-chairman of billionaire financier George Soros’ Open Society Institute.

What has the group achieved?

Aside from annoying motorists and boosting superglue sales, Extinction Rebellion has achieved some of its aims. Eleven countries and dependencies, beginning with Britain and Ireland, have declared a state of “climate emergency,” even if Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar did say afterwards that the declaration was a “symbolic gesture.”

What Extinction Rebellion has also been successful in is pandering to the wishes of global financiers and the new captains of green industry. The group’s call for “net zero” carbon emissions is echoed by the World Bank, and a host of investment firms, including HSBC, JP Morgan Chase and Citi, that see “profits to be had” in “climate-related sectors.”

None of this is a bad thing on the surface, except that these groups – which have banded together to form the Climate Finance Partnership and Blended Finance Action Taskforce – want access to taxpayer money and pension funds to do this. This Western money, according to the groups, will be funnelled into projects in Africa, Asia, and South America.

Rarely do the demands of activists and the will of international finance line up, but not everyone is happy. In London, Police Commissioner Nick Ephgrave has warned that the current protests will hamper officers’ ability to tackle “street-based violence,” and leave the city more vulnerable to terrorism.

Street blockages and airport disruptions may put Extinction Rebellion at odds with the majority of the population, but majority support is unnecessary. XR co-founder Roger Hallam has repeatedly referenced Gene Sharp as an inspiration. An American political scientist, Sharp’s theory of nonviolent action – that only 3.5 percent of a population need to back a protest movement before it reaches critical mass and triggers change – has been adopted and put into practice by ‘color revolutionaries’ around the world, from US-sponsored student protesters in Serbia at the turn of the century, to Arab Spring revolutionaries more recently.

Celebrities have lined up to endorse Extinction Rebellion – from gloom-rockers Radiohead chipping in £300,000 to Benedict Cumberbatch joining protesters camped in Trafalgar Square. With elite cash and backing, as well as round the clock media coverage, Extinction Rebellion is well on its way to Sharp’s tipping point, and has well and truly glued itself to the public consciousness already.

America is a ‘predatory hospital’ monetizing on the sick & dying, disguised as a country – Keiser Report

Millions of Americans receive a surprise medical bill every year, bankrupting families and raising health care costs for everyone.

RT’s Keiser Report says the reality of America where people live paycheck to paycheck is “legalized plunder.”

The health industry is one of the largest employers in the entire nation, Stacy Herbert says, explaining that around 19 percent of the US GDP is hospital care, medical spending, and so-called health care.

“America is essentially a corrupt hospital disguised as a country,” Max Keiser says. So-called medical billing professionals are “the greatest at sending out bills for services they don’t provide. They don’t provide health care, they just simply extract wealth.”

Max says the health industry “extracts people’s money from their pockets, similar to the energy industry extracting oil and gas from the Earth,” but makes them “a lot more ill.”

Jews of Khazaria Busted

…by Jonas E. Alexis

The idea that Jewish behavior is genetic is like a house full of smoke, which can suffocate and assault a serious thinking person. It is filled with contradictions and no apologist has ever bothered to explain those contradictions.

The New Jewish Encyclopedia (1962) by David Bridger and Samuel Wolk reinforces what the old Jewish Encyclopedia (1906) said about the history of the Khazarian people. It states that Hasdai Ibn Shaprut (915-975) was a

“Physician, diplomat and patron of Jewish learning in Spain. Hasdai served under two Cordova caliphs, and carried out important diplomatic missions. A famous scholar, he surrounded himself with learned Jews of his day and sponsored important literary works.

“With him, it is said, was inaugurated the Golden Era of Jewish literature in Spain…Hasdai’s name is particularly remembered in connection with his correspondence with Joseph, king of the Khazars, who embraced Judaism.”[1]

It also states that there is a story about “the Khazars and their king Bulan” converting to Judaim in 740.[2] Then we find this. The Khazars are

“A Mongolian people who embraced Judaism and flourished from the 8th through the 10th centuries on the territory extending between the Don and the Volga rivers, and the shores of the Blacks, Caspian and Azov Seas.

“The story of the existence of such converts to Judaism reached the Jewish statesman Hasdai ibn Shaprut of Cordova in the 10th century. As a result, Shaprut wrote a letter which was ultimately received by Joseph, king of the Khazars, with the help of Jewish tradesmen from Germany and Hungary.

“In his reply King Joseph gave a detailed account of the history of the kingdom of the Khazars and their conversion to Judaism. Bulan, the pagan ruler of the Khazars, in his desire to embrace the ‘true religion’ had summoned representatives of the Christian, Moslem and Jewish faiths to expound their views on the superiority of their respective religion.

“Bulan thus became convinced of the truth of the Jewish faith, and he, as well as many of his noblemen, embraced Judaism, which later spread widely among the common people of the Khazar kingdom…

“The story of the mass conversion of the Khazars to Judaism was used by Judah Halevi as background for his philosophic work the Kuzari, designed as a defense of the Jewish faith.”[3]

The New Jewish Encyclopedia moves on to say that Khazarian “Jews” spread across Europe, and some moved to places like Poland.[4] “During that early period Jews seemed to have enjoyed a privileged status, evidenced from current tales about a Jewish king in Poland, and from the fact that some polish coins had Hebrew inscriptions.”[5]

Those people, we are told, also had a powerful influence in places like Romania and Russia in the 8th century and beyond. “Jews came to Russia as early as the 9thcentury from the kingdom of the Khazars, and later from Crimea, Ukraine, Lithuania, Poland, Galicia, and Bessarabia, which had at different periods been under Russian rule.”[6]

Sad to say, much of the modern Jewish literature, with a few exceptions, do not cite standard reference work or primary sources when it comes to dealing with this very specific issue. A classic representative of this would be Steven T. Katz.

Instead of looking at works such as the Jewish Encyclopedia and interacting with the serious argument, Katz argues that the Khazar theory “has been an influential theme among American anti-Semites since the immigration restrictionists of the 1920s…”[7]

Katz—who believes that “the word ‘genocide,’ if correctly understood, could be applied only to the travail of European Jewry in World War I”[8]—briefly mentioned Arthur Koestler’s The Thirteenth Tribe.

Yet Katz never pointed out that the Jewish Encyclopedia was published one year after Koestler was born, which is to say that Katz should have dealt with the arguments presented in that reference work first. Sadly, he never did. Therefore it is a categorical and historical mistake to postulate that Koestler was the progenitor of the Khazarian theory. He just popularized it.

In the old Jewish Encyclopedia, which provides a lengthy bibliography, we read in part:

“According to A. Harkavy (‘Meassef Niddaḥim,’ i.), the conversion took place in 620; according to others, in 740. King Joeph, in his letter to Ḥasdai ibn Shaprut (about 960), gives the following account of the conversion:

“Some centuries ago King Bulan reigned over the Chazars. To him God appeared in a dream and promised him might and glory. Encouraged by this dream, Bulan went by the road of Darlan to the country of Ardebil, where he gained great victories [over the Arabs].

“‘The Byzantine emperor and the calif of the Ishmaelites sent to him envoys with presents, and sages to convert him to their respective religions. Bulan invited also wise men of Israel, and proceeded to examine them all.’

“‘As each of the champions believed his religion to be the best, Bulan separately questioned the Mohammedans and the Christians as to which of the other two religions they considered the better. When both gave preference to that of the Jews, that king perceived that it must be the true religion. He therefore adopted it.’

“This account of the conversion was considered to be of a legendary nature. Harkavy, however (in ‘Bilbasov’ and ‘Yevreiskaya Biblioteka’), proved from Arabic and Slavonian sources that the religious disputation at the Chazarian court is a historical fact.

“Even the name of Sangari has been found in a liturgy of Constantine the Philosopher (Cyrill). It was one of the successors of Bulan, named Obadiah, who regenerated the kingdom and strengthened the Jewish religion.

“On the whole, King Joseph’s account agrees generally with the evidence given by the Arabic writers of the tenth century, but in detail it contains a few discrepancies.”

You can dismiss all this evidence as sheer nonsense, but let us be clear: an avalanche of historical scholarship has pointed to that conclusion in one way or another.[9]

“The Khazars underscored their allegiance to the Jewish faith by adopting the Hebrew script and Hebrew personal names,” says historian Kevin Alan Brook, “even to the extent of naming some of their children after Jewish holidays such as Pesach and Hanukkha.”[10]

More recently, historian Jim Wald wrote in the Times of Israel:

“It is well known that, sometime in the eighth to ninth centuries, the Khazars, a warlike Turkic people, converted to Judaism and ruled over a vast domain in what became southern Russia and Ukraine.

“What happened to them after the Russians destroyed that empire around the eleventh century has been a mystery. Many have speculated that the Khazars became the ancestors of Ashkenazi Jews…

“Until now. In 2012, Israeli researcher Eran Elhaik published a study claiming to prove that Khazar ancestry is the single largest element in the Ashkenazi gene pool. Sand declared himself vindicated, and progressive organs such as Haaretz and The Forward trumpeted the results…

“Israel seems finally to have thrown in the towel. A blue-ribbon team of scholars from leading research institutions and museums has just issued a secret report to the government, acknowledging that European Jews are in fact Khazars. (Whether this would result in yet another proposal to revise the words to “Hatikvah” remains to be seen.).”

“Having heard of the report, Netanyahu said off the record:

“We first thought that admitting we are really Khazars was one way to get around Abbas’s insistence that no Jew can remain in a Palestinian state. Maybe we were grasping at straws. But when he refused to accept that, it forced us to think about more creative solutions.

“The Ukrainian invitation for the Jews to return was a godsend. Relocating all the settlers within Israel in a short time would be difficult for reasons of logistics and economics. We certainly don’t want another fashlan like the expulsion of the settlers in the Gaza Hitnatkut[disengagement].”[11]

Some have dismissed all this research by saying that DNA evidence shows that the Khazarian theory is false. What those people will never have the courage to say is that a large section of the so-called DNA evidence has been shown to be false[12]and that other extrapolations which are built on the same hypothesis are simply functions of the Talmudic literature, which rabbis have propounded for years. This is why rabbis can say things like,

“The difference between a Jewish soul and the souls of non-Jews—all of them in all different levels—is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle”—Rabbi Kook the Elder[13]

“the body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of (members) of all nations of the world…A non-Jew’s entire reality is only vanity.”—Rabbi Menachem Mandel[14]

“The body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of [members] of all nations of the world…The Jewish body ‘looks as if it were in substance similar to bodies of non-Jews,’ but the meaning…is that the bodies only seem to be similar in material substance, outward look and superficial quality.

“The difference of the inner quality, however, is so great that the bodies should be considered as completely different species. This is the reason why the Talmud states that there is an halachic difference in attitude about the bodies of non-Jews [as opposed to the bodies of Jews] ‘and their bodies are in vain…’”—Rabbi Schneerson[15]

The laughable thing about this whole issue is that the people who believe that Jewish behavior is genetic argue that those Rabbis and Talmudic literature are liars and racists! Which is it?

I pointed out a few months ago to a proponent of the genetic theory that if Jewish behavior is primarily about DNA—which by the way is what the rabbinic literature propounds—then one must go all the way. That is, on what rational basis can we say that the same rabbinic literature is wrong when it postulates that the Goyim are just beasts? Are we not playing dice with the enemy when we are adopting their fraudulent and unnecessary theories?

I also pointed out that the rabbinic literature makes a diabolical case for killing the Palestinians, since they argue that “Jews” were in Palestine in the first place.

The same proponent quickly pointed out that the Old Testament claims that other people were there before the Hebrews came along. Now get this: this proponent did not even believe in the stories of the Old Testament but he was building his case using the Old Testament!

I asked him to explain this inevitable contradiction to me, but he never could. I also asked him to explain how people like Gilad Atzmon, Brother Nathanael Kappner, among others, got rid of their bad DNA. He did not have an answer, either.


Because the idea that Jewish behavior is genetic is like a house full of smoke, which can suffocate and assault a serious thinking person. It is filled with contradictions and no apologist has ever bothered to explain those contradictions.

This article was first published in 2015.