Columbus Discovered America

It is possible that Africans discovered South America before Columbus. It is certain the Viking discovered North America before Columbus. But only Columbus truly discovered the New World.

None of the Vikings, none of the Africans, not a single person prior to Columbus, successfully incorporated the knowledge of the Americas into the culture from which they came.

If you stumble over a chair in the dark, you haven't discovered a chair. You just figured out a new way to stub your toe.

Columbus stumbled over the chair in the dark, figured out that it was a chair, communicated to the rest of the world that chairs existed, and then incorporated into his own culture a new culture that used chairs as a matter of course. Columbus discovered the New World. Everyone else just stubbed their toes in the dark.

Best Evidence for Historical Jesus

 This is a very good answer

Matthew Hogan

Author has 333 answers and 1.1M answer viewsUpdated Aug 5

Probably the best single-piece of evidence is the work of the Roman Emperor Julian, aka Julian the Apostate (b. 330 C.E. -- d. 363 C.E.) and the logical inferences one can derive from his argumentation.

Flavius Claudius Iulianus (aka “Julian the Apostate”), reigned 361–363 C.E.[A.D.]

While there is a lot of other very very good multiple sets of evidence and sources and logical deductions for the life of a religious figure Jesus of Nazareth circa 30 C.E., Julian may have put forth the best single go-to item of evidence for there having been an actual historic Jesus of Nazareth.

Here’s why.

Julian as Emperor rejected the newly dominant religion of Christianity and fiercely sought to discredit and to reverse its influence. So he wrote and/or commissioned in his own name an entire treatise rather savagely disparaging Christianity and its founder Jesus, with intent to discredit the religion, using the extant historic record from the first century to his time.

But in doing so he never disputed Jesus’ historical existence and even somewhat separately offered to prove it.

Julian wrote a book (Contra Galileos) which is not challenged as to its authenticity though it only survives in quotings and copies of major portions of it by Christian adversaries, as well as smaller fragments.

In the book, he ridicules Christian believers and the alleged miracles, divine status, and wisdom of Jesus that are claimed for him by Christians. But there is no assertion or even hint made by Julian that Jesus the individual never was.

Why is that important & powerful evidence?

SLIGHT EDIT: Because he was a lot closer in time to the time of Jesus than today, living before the barbarian ravagings of Rome and the final collapse of the western empire, and he had access to and power over all the still extant rumors, hard record-keeping, and broad literature of the Roman Empire in which Jesus was said to have lived and die under, including all the earlier texts often cited separately and together by all sides of the debate on Jesus’ existence today. And he had every motive to use any evidence or even credible speculation he could find that was or had been going around in the few centuries during and after Jesus’ alleged lifetime, and which would throw doubt on the real existence of a Jesus of Nazareth.

All he had to do, if non-existence of the man was indeed the case, was to assert the absence of likely official records or accounts or reports about Jesus. Or just cite the presence of significant contemporary arguments, “buzz’ and primary reports questioning Jesus’s existence, or even pass along viable credible rumors. Such steps would fire a powerful solid direct arrow of doubt at the new religion whose discrediting was a major, even central, issue for him.

And he had the resources to do that effort. He was, after all, the Emperor of a still-unified Roman Empire which had not yet seen the heavy destructions of later centuries. He had access to imperial documentation, archives, great ancient libraries and so forth.

But when addressing and challenging his own Christian contemporaries, he ridicules Jesus as a charlatan and as someone of little greatness or worth or note, but he doesn’t even remotely question Jesus’ factual existence.

At one point, this ancient Roman anti-Christian researcher-writer even offers to independently prove the opposite: that Jesus was real:

Even Jesus, who was proclaimed among you, was one of Caesar's subjects. And if you do not believe me I will prove it a little later, or rather let me simply assert it now. However, you admit that with his father and mother he registered his name in the governorship of Cyrenius.

….

Further, he ridicules Jesus and Paul for being insignificant, and rather dishonest, preachers, and Julian then explicitly employs and endorses the process of critically reviewing and assessing contemporary documentary evidence specifically in order to ascertain the status and impact of Jesus and early followers. That indicates he was conscious of, and favorable towards, using methods of contemporary document research in disputes about Jesus. And that is precisely what modern skeptics argue as the vital methodology to use for analysis today —though with less documentation available to today’s disputants.

But when doing this method, Julian doesn’t at all conclude or contend from it that Jesus or Paul was fictional: he merely says the two were just fools from the backwater misleading other ignorant lower-class fools and of course— as he expresses further down below in the spirit of 4th century patriarchy — those gullible womenfolk.

Yet Jesus, who won over the least worthy of you, has been known by name for but little more than three hundred years: and during his lifetime he accomplished nothing worth hearing of, unless anyone thinks that to heal crooked and blind men and to exorcise those who were possessed by evil demons in the villages of Bethsaida and Bethany can be classed as a mighty achievement.

Julian thus argues that Jesus and Paul were obscure and of very low impact, and not likely to have created much of a buzz in their day. But he does not contend even slightly that they were imaginary.

As for purity of life you do not know whether he so much as mentioned it; but you [Christians of Julian’s era] emulate the rages and the bitterness of the Jews [towards idols], overturning temples and altars, in the same fashion as yourselves. But these are rather your own doings; for nowhere did either Jesus or Paul hand down to you such commands.

Julian thus argues here that they (Jesus and Paul) were actual independent people distinct even from their own movement and who may have spoken differently from their followers.

In short, they were real people. The movement didn’t invent them or their original ideas. They had agency, as it is termed today.

Julian: The reason for this is that they never even hoped that you would one day attain to such power as you have; for they were content if they could delude maidservants and slaves, and through them the women, and men like Cornelius and Sergius. But if you can show me that one of these men is mentioned by the well-known writers of that time, – these events happened in the reign of Tiberius or Claudius, – then you may consider that I speak falsely about all matters.

Notice here that to discredit Jesus and Paul, he is again not questioning they existed (“these events happened” not “were alleged to have happened”}. And it clearly would have been to his advantage to make such an argument if it had any credible legs to stand on from the Roman documentation available to an emperor or even just by general logic.)

Instead, in terms of Jesus (and Paul’s) presence in history, Julian is just arguing that they were no big deal and wouldn’t rate, didn’t rate, and shouldn’t have rated any contemporary first-century chatter.

The fact that he confidently challenges his rival Christians regarding the literature of Jesus’ time suggests a solid broad familiarity with the documentation about Jesus from Jesus’ day. And Julian had far more primary literature and records available to him then than we do now. Someone would not make such a dare unless he’d done heavy homework in the documentation and literature of Jesus’ time.

Julian’s work is therefore a hostile, informed, ancient authority supporting the argument that a mere lack of very much immediate contemporary biographical evidence - a big obsessional point made by modern “skeptics”/”mythicists” - is not likely to be proof of non-existence.

Rather it is just strong proof or evidence of the relative obscurity of the historic Jesus (and Paul) in their original time.

Now, there are elsewhere in the fuller record of history, outside and before Julian, heaps and piles of corroborating primary and secondary evidence over time and/or supportive logic about the existence of a historical figure named Jesus (see some other Quora answers on this, for starters).

But perhaps the “best evidence”, meaning evidence found conveniently in one place, may simply be that the guy who had:

a) full access to the best independent primary record evidence of and argumentation about Jesus, and

b) full access to the same ancient sources that are kicked around in modern day debate (with far more material and information still extant in his day), and

c) every motivation to use against Christianity and its founder(s) whatever facts and arguments he could find in all that,

nevertheless he — the very capable and very anti-Christian Emperor Julian — never once, as far as we can tell, brought up the question of whether the historical figure Jesus of Nazareth existed at all.

Further, he even somewhat offers at one point to independently prove that Jesus DID exist historically, and in a specific personal legal status as a subject of Caesar.

Julian’s work is one-stop shopping for the entire historical Jesus evidence debate. His commentary and analysis is from someone who had access to far far more primary and contemporary reams of data and stacks of argumentation than we have today.

And who had the motive to use any and all credible negative arguments he could find there about Jesus of Nazareth.

If anyone would have had knowledge of any coherent total or partial usable or valid evidence, or even valid speculation, of Jesus of Nazareth’s historical non-existence in the ancient Roman world, and would have the overriding interest and broad resources to broadcast that fact loud and clear in a published work, it would have been Emperor Julian.

But he never went there.

When Jews Helped Kill Christians

The status of Jews in the Roman Empire:

The Theodosian Code shows us that those immunities which had been granted to the Jews by the pagan  emperors, and which had made them a privileged class dwelling within the Roman world, were continued by the Christian emperors.5 At the opening of the fourth century Jews were classed as Roman citizens and enjoyed all the advantages of civic status. They were in every economic stratum of the empire; many were rich, many were poor. Some were merchants, others artisans, and still others farmers. They had their own cult organizations called synagogues. If any Jew did not belong to such an organization he had to pay the Roman government poll tax and sacrifice to the Roman gods. Only a Jew within the synagogal organizations could escape these munera (civic duties).... The main Jewish privilege was that Jews could not be forced to perform any task which violated their religious convictions. This meant that they were exempt from the crushing burden of the decurionate, that responsibility for the collection of imperial taxes which was gradually impoverishing the middle class of the Roman world. And Jews were neither compelled to celebrate state worship nor forced to attend pagan temples

The Jewish Chronicle notes this about the Muslim invasion of Spain:

"Within a century of the death of Mohammad, in 632, Muslim armies had conquered almost the whole of the world where Jews lived, from Spain eastward across North Africa and the Middle East as far as the eastern frontier of Iran and beyond. Almost all the Jews in the world were now ruled by Islam. This new situation transformed Jewish existence. Their fortunes changed in legal, demographic, social, religious, political, geographical, economic, linguistic and cultural terms - all for the better."

The Times of Israel notes this about the Holodomor, Stalin's starvation of the Ukraine:

In 2009, Ukraine’s security service released a document naming those who it alleged to have been responsible for the Holodomor. Most of the names on the list were Jewish.

Christians in Israel claim attacks by Jews go unpunished:

 Christians in the Holy Land say they’re under attack as Israeli-Palestinian violence soars

Church officials and Christian leaders in Israel blame a minority of Jewish extremists for the attacks. They say Israel’s far-right government has fostered a culture of impunity.

Why Zionism Requires Dead Jews

 In the Muslim-Israeli conflict, both sides want a war of annihilation, but not for the reason you think.

Israel was created based on the existence of a mountain of Jewish corpses. The rational for the secular state of Israel has ALWAYS been that it will provide sanctuary for the world's Jews, providing a place of protection against the ceaseless persecution Jews face. From Israel's point of view, the worst possible thing the world could do is to STOP persecuting Jews. If no one paid any attention to Jews, if there was no persecution, Israel would not need to exist. It would have no purpose. Jews could live anywhere, they wouldn't have to live in Israel. And let's face it, most people don't really want to live in a desert. It's not like the Middle East has a lot of creature comforts. So, Israel is necessarily the Al Sharpton of nations. It REQUIRES persecution in order to justify its position on the political stage. If there is no persecution, then Tawana Brawley-like persecution must be manufactured. If Hamas and Hezbollah did not exist, Israel's government would have to create it, or Israel's politicians would not get paid. Other nations, like the US, are fine with this set-up, because every money transfer is an opportunity for graft. As long as someone is getting "aid" from another country, that country's politicians get paid. War in the Middle East is a win-win for everyone involved. The Tree of Israel must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of dead Jews. In his heart, every Zionist knows this is true. And this isn't the first time this has happened. As Solzhenitzyn noted, this is a constant in Jewish history:

Solzhenitsyn, awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1970, spent much of his life in Soviet prison camps, enduring persecution when he wrote about his experiences. He is currently in frail health, but in an interview given last month he said that Russia must come to terms with the Stalinist and revolutionary genocides - and that its Jewish population should be as offended at their own role in the purges as they are at the Soviet power that also persecuted them. "My book was directed to empathise with the thoughts, feelings and the psychology of the Jews - their spiritual component," he said. "I have never made general conclusions about a people. I will always differentiate between layers of Jews. One layer rushed headfirst to the revolution. Another, to the contrary, was trying to stand back. The Jewish subject for a long time was considered prohibited. Zhabotinsky [a Jewish writer] once said that the best service our Russian friends give to us is never to speak aloud about us."

Solzhenitsyn also noted:

“We cannot state that all Jews are Bolsheviks. But – without Jews there would never have been Bolshevism. For a Jew nothing is more insulting than the truth. The blood-maddened Jewish terrorists had murdered 66,000,000 in Russia from 1918 – 1957.” 

This is why Netanyahu deliberately funded Hamas

The accusations aimed at Netanyahu go beyond merely failing to foresee or prevent the Hamas attack of October 7, however. Many accuse him of deliberately empowering the group for decades as part of a strategy to sabotage a two-state solution based on the principle of land for peace. "There's been a lot of criticism of Netanyahu in Israel for instating a policy for many years of strengthening Hamas and keeping Gaza on the brink while weakening the Palestinian Authority," said Mairav Zonszein of the International Crisis Group. "And we've seen that happening very clearly on the ground."

This is why Israel's response to the Hamas attack was non-existent for several hours:

According to US intelligence, Hamas was surprised by the slowness of the Israeli security forces's response to the offensive by its armed commandos.

Just as the demand for racists far exceeds the supply, the demand for anti-Semites is insatiable. It may be worthwhile to note that for years, Netanyahu actually funded Hamas. And after all of that funding, isn't it amazing that Egyptian, US and Israeli intelligence all warned the Netanyahu government about an impending Hamas attack, yet not only was nothing done, the Israeli military didn't respond for several hours? Israel needs persecution, conflict, and most of all, dead Jews. It cannot long survive without them.

Every politician in the world wants his cut of the graft that this principle creates. There's a reason Kamala Harris' daughter raises money for Hamas while Kamala herself campaigns to send US taxpayer money to Israel.

That's why Trump's "no war" policies were literally considered criminal in international circles. By not encouraging war, by not participating in military action, Trump stole income from thousands of politicians world-wide and from the corporations that profit from conflict. Trump MUST go to jail for this unconscionable crime against humanity, humanity being defined as "those who profit from international money transfers."

Israel needs dead Jews. The world's politicians and corporations need war.

Who can deny them what they need?

Palestine or Israel?

 We know from Herodotus the term "Palestine" first appeared in the 5th century BC in his history. 

In the early 2nd century AD, the term "Syria Palaestina" (literally, "Palestinian Syria") was given to the Roman province of Judaea around the time the Romans crushed the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135 AD. By 390 AD, during the Byzantine period, the imperial province of Syria Palaestina was then reorganized into Palaestina Prima, Palaestina Secunda and Palaestina Salutaris. The Muslims continued to use those names for the regions through the Ottoman Empire and its demise. 

The idea that this area should be called "Israel" is a post-WW II conceit. It has not been called that for over 2000 years, as this graphic from a 1947 issue of National Geographic shows:

So, the idea that the area should be called "Israel" instead of "Palestine" is very much like the Protestant idea that Protestant theology can be traced all the way back to Christ's time - it's absurd on its face, but that doesn't keep people from trying to defend it and promote it.

As for Judaism somehow being unique, there is no evidence of that. Hinduism is older than Judaism and can lay claim to being BETTER and more obviously chosen by God precisely because they prospered.  Zoroastrianism is older than Judaism and much more deeply persecuted than the Jews ever were, so if persecution is the standard, then Zoroastrianism wins. Parsis can also be viewed as a distinct tribe.

Judaism isn't unique, it's prosaic. In fact, it isn't even properly Judaism anymore. Temple sacrifice was wiped out two millennia ago. The rabbi-synagogue system is essentially a new religion pasted into history under the old name, but with no real connection to any of the original faith system. There is no way to look at Reform, Conservative, Orthodox or even Haredi or Karaite and claim that they are practicing a theology anything like Isaac's sons practiced.

As for "tribe", there is literally no way to differentiate a Jew from a non-Jew. There are no distinct genetic markers, no real indications of a tribe, no physical test that differentiates a non-Jew from a Jew. One could make the tribal claim for Hindus as easily as one can for Jews. In terms of belief, the claims for what constitutes Judaism are so wide and varied that there is essentially no common ground left. It's all a chimera, a fantasy.

It's like saying a visit to the Germany pavilion at Epcot Center, Disneyland is identical to being a German living in Munich. At this point, Judaism is nothing but absurd play-acting. Judaism is just a bunch of modern leftists LARPing as ancient monotheists, and doing a piss-poor job of it.

Update:
We should also keep in mind that our idea of what constitutes Israel is not the same as the Jewish idea of what constitutes Israel. 

Similarly, we should remember that just as the Koran requires the Muslims to commit genocide against the Jews, the Torah requires the Jews to commit genocide as well:

"...listen to this lecture by Rabbi Eliyahu Kin, delivered in 2009, on the question: “Why must Jews destroy Amalek?” Let me summarize it for you. The Amalekites deserved their fate because they opposed the will of God. The will of God is good, and opposing the will of God is evil. So exterminating Amalek is good, while saving just one Amalekite, as Saul did, is evil. In fact, since God is good, exterminating Amalek is the expression of his goodness. And since “the best way to love what Hashem (God) loves is to hate what Hashem hates,” hating Amalek is loving God. The reason why the Amalekites hate the Jews is not because the Jews want to exterminate them. “What bothers Amalek is that the Jew believes in mussar, morality, ethics, being good, being nice.” The Amalekites are also evil because they oppose the Torah — in which God orders them to be exterminated. Ultimately, Rabbi Kin summarizes, “we are cruel to Amalek because we need to be. Because that is exactly what they would do to us if they had the chance.” Why? Because Amalek “is a concentration of hatred.” And Jews must hate hatred — except the hatred of God for Amalek, which they must love as an expression of God’s love. "

How Zionists Collaborated With Nazis

 Even the Jews know it is true.

Haaretz reports:

"The Zionist Activists Who Collaborated With Nazis, and Were Executed by Jewish Partisans

The Betar movement has ignored a melancholy chapter of its history that occurred in the Vilna ghetto during the Holocaust: the execution by Jews of other Jews who collaborated with the Nazis"

A JStor paper

The Secret Contacts: Zionism and Nazi Germany, 1933-1941 (Klaus Polkehn)

Middle East Monitor

Israel’s state archive exposes Zionist efforts to enlist Nazis against Britain (June 22, 2023)

Efforts by Zionist militias to recruit Nazi Germany in the fight against the British Mandate authorities in Palestine have been revealed in newly-released transcripts in the Israel State Archive. The documents, which were released to the public last month, include information on what Haaretz has called the “dark chapter” of Zionist militias’ ties with Nazi Germany. Reporting on the revelations, the Israeli newspaper uncovered shocking details which not only debunk the Zionist propaganda that Palestinians had cooperated with Nazi Germany, but also confirm that some of the founders of Israel believed that it was essential for Zionists to do so.

England's Labour Party Leader

Livingstone said: “I simply said, back in 1933 Hitler’s government signed a deal with the Zionist movement, which would mean that Germany’s Jewish community were moved to what is now Israel.

Livingstone is referring to the Haavarah Agreement. Everything Livingstone claims is verifiable fact. Every bit of it happened. Read Hannah Arendt. 

“When the Zionist movement asked the Nazi Government, would they stop the rabbis doing their sermons in Yiddish and make them do it in Hebrew, he [Hitler] agreed to that. He also passed a law that said only the Zionist flag and the Swastika were the only flags that could be flown in Germany. The SS set up training camps so that German Jews who were going to go there could be trained to cope with a very different sort of country when they got there,” Livingstone claimed.

Testimony of Holocaust Survivors

Here we publish  extracts from Holocaust survivors who oppose historical and recent Israeli policies, in some cases connecting them with those of the Nazis. In one case, the author – again a Holocaust survivor (Rudolf Vrba, pictured above) – compares key policies of the wartime Zionist movement to those of the Nazis.

The Times of Israel

On quest to clear Kasztner, historian ‘shocked’ to prove Nazi collaboration. By JENNI FRAZER (15 November 2016)

Paul Bogdanor has set out the case against the Hungarian Jew who negotiated with Eichmann, an affair that sparked a deadly scandal in Israel, though that wasn’t his original plan. But for British Jewish historian Paul Bogdanor, his ambition to find material defending the controversial wartime Zionist leader, Rudolf Kasztner, was cruelly thwarted.

Bogdanor was “extremely shocked” to find that everything pointed towards Kasztner’s having been “a collaborator” with the Nazis, and a “betrayer of the Zionist movement and the Jewish people.”

Zionism and anti-Semitism in Nazi Germany (Cambridge University Press, 2008)

In his latest book, Francis R. Nicosia returns to and explores in greater detail one of the major topics of his important earlier book, The Third Reich and the Palestine Question (1985): the complex and sometimes symbiotic relationship between German Zionists and the National Socialists...Both Zionists and antisemites rejected the liberal Enlightenment ideal of full Jewish assimilation in their host societies as free and equal citizens, but they did so for very different reasons. However, their differing motives and mutual hostility to each other did not prevent Nazis and Zionists from temporarily collaborating to achieve their respective ends.

Most of Nicosia's thoroughly researched book is devoted to examining how German Zionists tried to gain Nazi cooperation in the Zionist project and how the Nazis tried to use the Zionist movement to achieve their primary aim of creating a judenrein German Reich

...On the basis of copious research in more than two dozen German, Israeli, British, and North American archives, Nicosia confirms the current historical consensus that the Nazis had no plan for systematic genocide before 1941... a scrupulous work of history, not politics, and Nicosia makes no references to the present, except to point out the irony that while anti-Zionism or criticism of the state of Israel in Europe or the United States today is often equated with antisemitism (or viewed as motivated by antisemitism), before 1933 antisemites were more likely to support Zionist aims than to oppose them. 

 Zionism in the Age of the Dictators, Lenni Brenner (Westport, CT: Lawrence Hill, 1983)

...It takes only a small step to move from this kind of thinking to Haganah agent Feivel Polkes’ spying in 1937 for Adolf Eichmann, in the hope of getting the Nazis to further “the realisation of Zionism.”

For the major Zionist organization, the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine overwhelmed all other considerations, including the rescue of Europe’s Jews. After Kristallnacht (November 1938), when the British government proposed that thousands of Jewish children be brought to Great Britain from the continent, David Ben- Gurion told a meeting of Labor Zionists:

If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England, and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Yisrael, then I would opt for the second alternative, (p. 149)

In 1943, while the Jews of Europe were being slaughtered, the US Congress finally got around to proposing a rescue commission. Rabbi Stephen Wise, one of American Zionism’s most important spokesmen, “came to Washington to testify against the rescue bill because it did not mention Palestine.” (p. 242) 

Brenner’s final chapter is about the Stern Gang, a terrorist group that splintered from Begin’s Irgun. In 1941, while still considering themselves part of the Irgun, the Sternists sent a proposal of alliance to the Nazis. “The establishment of the historical Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, and bound by a treaty with the German Reich,” the Stern document read, “offers to actively take part in the war on Germany’s side.” It adds that “the NMO [Irgun] is closely related to the totalitarian movements of Europe in its ideology and structure.” (pp. 267-268)

... Yitzhak Shamir, one of the Stern Gang’s leaders, recently served as Israel’s prime minister. Begin honored Stern by putting his portrait on a postage stamp.

Germany’s Never-Ending Guilt Trip

Nazi Germany and the Jewish Agency for Palestine, the future government of Israel and the official representative of the Zionist Organization (ZO), entered a contractual transactional relationship from 1933 to 1939. In 1952 the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) and the State of Israel, on behalf of all Jews, signed an agreement that paved the way for Germany’s unconditional support for Israel. No suggestion is being made here that Nazi Germany and the FRG are the same; the FRG assumed responsibilities for the crimes of the Holocaust.

However, both contractual transactional relationships between both countries from 1933 to the present have initiated policies and programs that contributed significantly to the deterioration of German Jewish living conditions in Germany, the transfer of thousands of German Jewish citizens and their assets out of Germany to colonize Palestine, the establishment of Israel in historic Palestine, the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people, the allocation of a significant portion of German reparation money for the benefit of Israel instead of the victims of the Holocaust, the strengthening of the Israeli economy and industrial base, and providing Israel with German military technology and equipment to wage wars in the region.

In this article, I will examine and analyze the special, often secret, relationship between Germany and the Zionist mechanization to colonize Palestine, the establishment of Israel in 1948, and the arming of the state with modern weapon platforms that can carry and deliver nuclear weapons. This secret relationship is in clear violation of German law, made possible by creating a universal guilt feeling among Germans for the crime of the Holocaust, and associated with a deliberate lack of public debate and accountability.

If Jews were willing to support FDR, even though they KNEW he was allowing Jews to be murdered, why would their attitude towards the Nazis have been any different?

This deliberate inattention was a stunning confirmation of the low value that the democracies placed on Jewish lives in Nazi-occupied Europe. Both newspapers, though owned by Jews, took their cues from the Roosevelt administration, which deliberately downplayed the announcement of Hitler’s Final Solution by handing it to Rabbi Wise rather than an administration official. For the duration of the war, the government, believing that “rescue through victory” was the only reasonable policy, tried to head off public agitation for special efforts to rescue European Jewry. And for the duration of the war, both newspapers cooperated by burying details of the Holocaust.

Wise, sometimes called the “King of the Jews” because of his leadership of an incredible array of Jewish organizations and umbrella groups, might have been expected to press for rescue efforts and for lifting immigration restrictions on Jewish refugees. But Wise had a close personal relationship with the president (whom he called “boss”) and never attained the independence of judgment to recognize that his hero, despite public expressions of friendship for Jews in general, was acquiescing in the murder of the European Jews. Only a popular grassroots campaign, bypassing the official Jewish leadership, might have overcome the administration’s hostility and the indifference of the mainstream media.

Improving Heart Health

For those of you who may have concerns about heart health, and may consequently be on statins, blood-thinners or similar medications, some research on diet supplements that you may find interesting:

• Statins often deplete the body of Co-Q10. Ubiquinol is the most active form of Co-Q10. Studies show it helps heart health and decreases the muscle pain associated with statin use. 
• Vitamin C and D are both good for general immune system support. It is possible high doses of Vitamin C may reduce arterial plaque and slow down progression of atherosclerosis. 
• Low levels of Vitamin D are correlated to higher rates of congestive heart failure. 
• Vitamin K2 is reported to prevent arterial calcification. It has different forms. The serum half-life of MK-4 variant of K2 is a few hours while the MK-7 variant can last up to 3+ days. Click here, here and here for more information.
• Lumbrokinase is a blood thinner that reduces fibrin clots and may also reduce arterial plaque
• Nattokinase dissolves clots and arterial plaque, while lowering blood pressure. It operates via a different mode than lumbrokinase. In addition to taking nattokinase pill supplements, you may also consider eating natto (fermented soybeans) for breakfast. It is available through Asian grocery stores like 99 Ranch, in the frozen food section. 
• Pantethine (this is NOT B5, it is a derivative) lowers cholesterol effectively
• Bromelain prevents or minimizes the severity of angina pectoris and transient ischemic attack (TIA). It is useful in the prevention and treatment of thrombophlebitis. It may also break down cholesterol plaques and exerts a potent fibrinolytic activity.
• Find fish oil with the highest concentration of EPA you can identify.
• Taurine may help reduce the risk of heart disease, thanks to its ability to decrease blood pressure and inflammation. In a review published in Amino Acids, animal models suggest that a higher intake could help protect against heart disease and prevent fatty plaque build-up in the arteries. Click here, here and here for more information.
• Berberine alone and in combination with other supplements provided an average LDL percent reduction of 20–30%. Oral dose from 150 mg to 1000 mg/day (also see here)
• Citrus Bergamot Extract studies showed a significant decrease in total cholesterol, triglycerides and LDLc. The decrease in total cholesterol varied from 12.3% to 31.3%, from 7.6% to 40.8% in LDLc and from 11.5% to 39.5% in triglycerides.
• Lysine, according to Linus Pauling's research, provides essential cellular building blocks for repair of arteries. 

Men's Heart Health: best cholesterol tests

What the results should look like: "Our meta-analysis suggests that not only should LDL be reduced to a target level of < 80 mg/dL, but HDL should be increased to a target level of > 45 mg/dL to regress coronary plaques."

Socialism and the Jews

The Jews have been voting majority Democrat since 1916, when Woodrow Wilson got 55% of the Jewish vote. The 1920 election was the first and only time the Jewish vote went plurality Republican to Harding at 43%, but that was largely because 38% went to Eugene V. Debs, the Socialist candidate for president, while 19% of the Jewish vote went to Cox, the Democrat candidate. In 1920, the Socialist and Democrat tickets split the Jewish ticket. Once that is taken into account, the 1920 aberration is explained: the majority of Jews still voted for the semi-socialist and socialist candidates. 

Why does this matter?

Because once is bad luck.
Twice is coincidence.
Three times is enemy action.

Woodrow Wilson was notorious for growing the socialist tendencies of the US government, that is, the Democrats have been strongly socialist since at least 1916. But the Jews have been strongly socialist since socialism was invented in the early 1800s. That's why the Democrats have been capturing the Jewish vote for well over a century. Jews have always been socialists. When we see them vote for Democrats today, we aren't seeing an aberration, we are seeing bedrock cultural principles in action. Jews vote their principles. They are pro-baby-murder (abortion), pro-alphabet nonsense, pro-socialism. They always have been.

David Ben-Gurion, the founder of Israel, explicitly styled himself as a Zionist Lenin. Israel was founded on socialist principles, the kibbutz was seen as a necessary instrument in a socialist paradise. Joseph Stalin helped create the modern state of Israel. The reasons are easy to understand. As the Jewish Virtual Library points out:

The forerunners of modern socialism were two Frenchmen, Count Henry Claude de Rouvroy de Saint-Simon (1760–1825; see Saint-Simonism) and Charles Fourier (1772–1837). Saint-Simon was impressed by Jewish messianic ideals and, referring to the persecution of the Jews, wrote that he looked forward to the time when all men would be brothers. Two of his followers, Barthélemy Prosper Enfantin (1796–1864) and Armand Bazard (1791–1832), considered the emancipation of the Jews as being one of the preconditions for the liberation of humanity....

In Germany, many of the pioneers of socialism were Jewish. Among them was Moses Hess, whose study Die Philosophic der Tat (“The Philosophy of Action”), linked the ideas of the German philosophical school with the concept of historical materialism on which communism was based.  

And therein lies the problem. Socialists have a strong tendency to kill each other. In the years leading up to the Soviet Revolution, Menshevik socialists and Bolshevik socialists fought each other in the streets of Moscow. In the decade following, Germany's National Socialists fought the International Socialists in the streets of Berlin. At the time of Hitler's Barbarossa invasion of the USSR, Stalin was still feeding Germany huge amounts of resources, such as oil. Once the invasion started, Stalin privately confessed to a colleague that it was not truly unexpected: if Hitler hadn't broken their secret peace agreement, Stalin had intended to break his peace treaty with Hitler and invade Germany at the first opportunity. Stalin had Trotsky assassinated with an ice-pick to the forehead. This is the history of socialism. It has always involved violent, deadly in-fighting. And Jews don't mind that level of violence, as long as they are handing it out, and not on the receiving end. 

For the last century, many Muslims have seen Islam as being completely consistent with socialism. Given that both Jews and Muslims have always found socialism attractive, it is no surprise to see the traditional socialist infighting and back-stabbing continue. Today, instead of Mensheviks vs. Bolsheviks or Nazis vs. communists, we have Jewish socialists versus Islamic socialists. 

America's Jewish socialists vote for and fund the socialist Democrat Party, which in turn funds socialist Hamas and socialist Hezbollah, who in turn, kill Israeli Jewish socialists. Socialist Hamas invades and kills socialist Jews. This should be no surprise. Socialists kill each other. It is what they do.

So watching Jews vote for Democrats, who then fund the terrorists that slaughter Jews, isn't some kind of "mistake" on anyone's part. It is socialists acting as socialists have always acted. When America's Jewish community calls for support against Hamas, it is no different than the Mensheviks calling for support against the Bolsheviks. This is a socialist civil war, a war between cousins, a war between ideological brothers, a war between two groups of monotheists who both deny the Trinity. 

The black sub-culture in America has a 70% illegitimacy rate. It makes up 13% of the population, but causes, and is the victim of, over 50% of the murders. It votes in excess of 80% Democrat.

 

Any sub-culture that produces 70% socialists and Democrats is just as jacked up. I'm glad that Milton Friedman lived. He was a Jew, a conservative, a capitalist and a genius. I'm glad my sons all read Thomas Sowell and Walter E. Williams - these men are both geniuses, and I hope my sons emulate these men and any man like them. 

But Thomas Sowell understands the culture he came from is very screwed up. He quotes James Flynn, who noted that the post-WW II children of both black and white GIs grew up with exactly the same IQ. Flynn's conclusion was that America's black sub-culture is what destroys the black community. Following on that example, we can make the same argument about the world's Jewish sub-culture. It creates toxic socialists; world-wide Jewish sub-culture produces socialists. We can conclude that the Jewish sub-culture is at least as toxic as America's black sub-culture. 

Thomas admits the problem is America's black culture. Why don't America's conservative, capitalist Jews understand or admit that Jewish theology is absurd, that Jewish culture is toxic? Why don't we have a Jewish voice that is as clear, consistent, logical and brilliant as Thomas Sowell or Walter E. Williams speaking out about the failures of Jewish culture? We need these men to step forward. 

Maurice Samuel and You Gentiles

 A Jewish intellectual and writer, Maurice Samuel was known for his role as a polemicist and campaigner against anti-Semitism. Most of his work concerns itself with Judaism or the Jew's role in history and modern society, but he also wrote more conventional fiction, such as The Web of Lucifer, which takes place during the Borgias' rule of Renaissance Italy, and the fantasy science-fiction novel The Devil that Failed. Samuel also wrote the nonfiction King Mob under the pseudonym "Frank K. Notch". 

He and his work received acclaim within the Jewish community during his lifetime, including the 1944 Anisfield-Wolf Book Award for his non-fiction work, The World of Sholom Aleichem. He received the Itzik Manger Prize for Yiddish literature posthumously in 1972. Samuel died in New York City in 1972 at the age of 77.

Samuel's awards:

• the 1943 Anisfield-Wolf Award for The World of Sholom Aleichem;
• the 1944 Saturday Review of Literature Award; 
• the 1956 Stephen S. Wise Award; 
• the 1967 B'nai B'rith Jewish Heritage Award. 
• In 1964 Brandeis University awarded Samuel an honorary degree, Doctor of Humane Letters. 
• On the day of his death, in 1972, Samuel was to have been in Israel to receive the Manger Prize for Yiddish Literature, for which he had been nominated by Israeli President Zalman Shazar. The prize was awarded posthumously in June, 1972.

Here are some excerpts from his book, "You Gentiles"  (1924):

There are two life-forces in the world I know: Jewish and gentile, ours and yours...I do not believe that this primal difference between gentile and Jew is reconcilable. You and we may come to an understanding, never to a reconciliation. There will be irritation between us as long as we are in intimate contact. For nature and constitution and vision divide us from all of you forever.

A century of partial tolerance gave us Jews access to your world. In that period the great attempt was made, by advance guards of reconciliation, to bring our two worlds together. It was a century of failure. We Jews, we, the destroyers, will remain the destroyers forever. Nothing that you will do will meet our needs and demands. We will forever destroy because we need a world of our own, a God-world, which it is not in your nature to build.... The wretched fate which scattered us through your midst has thrust this unwelcome role upon us.

We Jews are accused of being destroyers: whatever you put up, we tear down. It is true only in a relative sense. We are not iconoclasts deliberately: we are not enemies of your institutions simply because of the dislike between us. We are a homeless mass seeking satisfaction for our constructive instincts. And in your institutions we cannot find satisfaction.

When Germany and England and America will long have lost their present identity or purpose, we shall still be strong in ours.

Jew and Gentile are two worlds, between you Gentiles and us Jews there lies an unbridgeable gulf...There are two life forces in the world Jewish and Gentile...I do not believe that this primal difference between Gentile and Jew is reconcilable...The difference between us is abysmal...You might say: 'Well, let us exist side by side and tolerate each other. We will not attack your morality, nor you ours.' But the misfortune is that the two are not merely different; they are opposed in mortal enmity. No man can accept both, or, accepting either, do otherwise than despise the other.

Our Jewishness is not a creed, it is ourself, our totality. Indeed, it may be fairly said that the surest evidence of your lack of seriousness in religion is the fact that your religions are not national, that you are not compromised and dedicated, en masse, to the faith.

Years of observation and thought have given increasing strength to the belief that we Jews stand apart from you gentiles, that a primal duality breaks the humanity I know into two distinct parts; that this duality is a fundamental, and that all differences among you gentiles are trivialities compared with that which divided all of you from us.

In the heart of any pious Jew, God is a Jew. Is your God an Englishman or an American?

We belong to the One mastering God: you belong to the republic of playful gods.

You have your way of life, we ours. In your system of life we are essentially without 'honor.' In our system of life you are essentially without morality. In your system of life we must forever appear graceless; to us you must forever appear godless.

To say that a schlemiel is a luckless person is to touch only the negative side. It is the schlemiel's avocation and profession to miss out on things, to muff opportunities, to be persistently, organically, preposterously and ingeniously out of place. A hungry schlemiel dreams of a plate of hot soup, and hasn't a spoon.

If this sounds obscene, it isn't. You must remember that Jewish moral theology is NOT Christian moral theology. Despite what Christians assert, the two moral systems actually share very little in common.

 The Talmud discusses the dilemma of two men stranded in the desert, one with just enough water to survive and the other with none.  What should they do?  If one drinks, the other dies.  If both drink, both certainly die.  The conclusion, taught by the pre-eminent rabbi of all time, Akiva, is that the person with the water must drink and survive.  Tragic though it may seem, he may not forfeit his life for another, and he may not forfeit both lives for the sake of principle.  His claim on life in a time of scarce resources is non-transferable.

Here's another discussion that quotes the same conclusion. In fact, doing your laundry takes precedence over other people's lives:

If they must choose between their own animals and the animals of others, their own animals come first, before the animals of others. 

If they must choose between their own laundering and the laundering of others, their own laundering comes first, before the laundering of others

If, however, they must choose between the lives of others and their own laundering, the lives of others come first, before their own laundering.  However, Rabbi Yosei says that their own laundering comes first, before the lives of others.

Keep in mind that "Judeo-Christian morality" is a nonsense phrase. Jews consider Christians to be heretics. From the Jewish point of view, that phrase sounds like "Judeo-Heretical morality". Consider, for instance, how easily a Jew can accept abortion:

While the Talmud gives the full status of humanness to a child at birth, the rabbinical writings have partially extended the acquisition of humanness to the 13th postnatal day of life for full-term infants. The Babylonian Talmud Yevamot 69b states that: “the embryo is considered to be mere water until the fortieth day.” Afterwards, it is considered subhuman until it is born. ...After the forehead has emerged from the birth canal, the fetus is regarded as a person....

While the Talmud gives the full status of humanness to a child at birth, the rabbinical writings have partially extended the acquisition of humanness to the thirteenth postnatal day of life for full-term infants. This designation is based on the viability of the infant, so the acquisition of humanness occurs later for premature infants, because the viability of premature infants is still questionable after thirteen days. Rashi, the great twelfth century commentator on the Bible and Talmud, states clearly of the fetus ‘lav nefesh hu—It is not a person.’

Even a born child is not considered viable until the 30th day of life:

Since an infant is not considered viable until after his thirtieth day of life, the redemption ceremony must take place thirty-one days after birth.

Comparing Hamas and the Nazis

The two philosophies share some similarities, but are actually quite, quite different.  Hamas has entirely different intention than the Waffen SS.

Prior to WW II, Hitler had actually planned on shipping all of Germany's Jews to Madagascar.

When the Jews came up with the Haavara agreement, in which all of Germany's Jews would instead be shipped to British Palestine, the Nazis enthusiastically signed on. From that point forward, the Zionist flag was permitted to fly alongside the Nazi swastika, and any Jew emigrating to British Palestine could take ALL of their possessions with no penalties.

In addition, any Jew who remained in Germany would NOT be shipped to the camps as long as he could prove he had been sterilized. Sterile Jews were not a blood threat to the regime's future.

Hamas, on the other hand, kills Jews because Allah commands it. Part of the Islamic end-times involves all the Jews either dying or converting, to the point that even the stones and trees will cry out "Come, there is a Jew hiding behind me. Come and kill him!" Nazis never said anything like that.

The two philosophies are entirely different, although the end result does share some similarities.

Meanwhile, we have ample evidence that Zionists worked hand in glove with the Nazis:

"Documents released by the Israel State Archive include transcripts from the interrogation of Efraim Zetler, a member of the Zionist paramilitary group, Lehi. Zetler was interrogated by Haganah fighters in 1942 about his activities in Lehi, which is regarded as being more extreme than the Haganah Zionist paramilitary group. Lehi was responsible for several atrocities, including the massacre at Deir Yassin. Haganah, however, was no moderate group, and is thought to have carried out the terrorist bombing of Jerusalem’s King David Hotel in 1946.

The transcript of Zetler’s interrogation revealed Lehi’s ties with the Nazis. “We will communicate with any military power ready to help with the establishment of the kingdom of Israel, even if it’s Germany,” Zetler is reported to have told the astonished interrogators. “The only condition is that we get weapons, so we can rebel against the English,” he added. “If Germany agrees to help us fight enemy number 1, the English, we’ll team up with it.” Zetler went on to say that Germany is “not an enemy of the Jews in Israel” and that Lehi would cooperate with the Nazis if it helped the underground “get this land,” meaning Palestine."

"The Zionist Activists Who Collaborated With Nazis"

"The Secret Contacts: Zionism and Nazi Germany, 1933-1941"

"Zionist-Nazi Collaboration"

George Galloway: Zionism and Nazism cooperated