Charlie Hebdo fired cartoonist for anti-Semitism in 2009

Yeah you see now Charlie Hebdo which loves to provoke all religions, according to them and “oy vey it’s just satire” certainly doesn’t tolerate criticism or satire of the jews.

Maurice Sinet, 86, who works under the pen name Sine in the satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo, faced charges of “inciting racial hatred” for a column he wrote in 2009. The piece sparked a slanging match among the Parisian intelligentsia and ended in his dismissal from the magazine.

“L’affaire Sine” followed the engagement of Mr Sarkozy, 22, to Jessica Sebaoun-Darty, the Jewish heiress of an electronic goods chain. Commenting on an unfounded rumour that the president’s son planned to convert to Judaism, Sine quipped: “He’ll go a long way in life, that little lad.”

A high-profile political commentator slammed the column as linking prejudice about Jews and social success. Charlie Hebdo’s editor, Philippe Val, asked Sinet to apologise but he refused in a very strictly manner.

Mr Val’s decision to fire Sine was backed by a group of eminent intellectuals, including the philosopher Bernard-Henry Lévy, but parts of the libertarian Left defended him, citing the right to free speech.

As mocking young Mr Sarkozy converted to Judaism for money, Sine was accused of being Anti-Semitic and faced many preassures leading him to be fired from the weekly magazine. The same magazine published cartoons even insulting the Islam Prophet Muhammad and Muslims yet explained them as “freedom of speech.”

Charlie Hebdo published cartoons about Prophet Jesus and Chiristianity, too, causing the magazine being sued 12 times by Catholic Chuch.

Do You Hate The Government Or Do You Hate This Government

As anyone who has followed this blog over the years will know I’ve had quite a transformation in political beliefs.  This isn’t uncommon given my age and I don’t necessarily think it’s uncommon to go through the steps in the order I went through them.  Without minute details of these beliefs I went from conservative (brainwashed neo conservative) to paleo conservative to libertarian to anarcho capitalist to national socialist.  Wait what?  The last step was certainly the most extreme.

Mind you that I’m putting names on these so that you’ll be familiar with them, it doesn’t mean at any point I was all one or all the other but rather that my thoughts were most closely aligned with that label at that time.  If you follow the blog posts from 07 to now I think you can see a lot of that playing out (at least I can in hindsight).  This is not to say that once my beliefs changed I suddenly realized how foolish I had been and now hate well intentioned people in any of those groups because I don’t but I also do not claim to be a part of them and obviously have enough issues with some of their core beliefs to preclude me from being in their ranks.

Most conservatives myself included at the time were not big on the government, at least in its current form, although they’re quite a fan when they’re steering the boat, this disingenuous attitude was one of the main things which pushed me towards paleo conservative and libertarian (the other being the overwhelming neo conservative power within the republican party).  Libertarians dislike all government all the time and that appealed to me as it was uniform and at least on paper they wouldn’t pick up the hammer and beat you to death with it given the opportunity.  However libertarians as a whole are so out of touch with many apparent Truths that I could no longer stand it.  They loathe “collectivism” yet collectively and naively agree that everybody is equal and should be treated as such.  This is very detrimental.  It wasn’t this particular thread but rather a thread at a now defunct forum which really got me to analyze what libertarians are all about.  While this isn’t the thread it was started by the same poster and the same topics were discussed.

During this entire process I was understanding more and more of the jewish role in the world, so when I really began to analyze libertarianism and the jewish hand therein it became apparent very quickly.  Anarchy and anarcho capitalism are all lumped into that role as well, when you study history even recent history and look at jewish infiltration tactics you realize that they need a non nationalistic society.  One comment I read somewhere online in particular stays with me to this day and this is a paraphrase but “why do we need libertarianism?  We already have a society which puts no bounds on morality” I’ll never forget that and the profound effect it had on me.

As I morphed out of this libertarian anarchist period in my life I was met with the question “do you hate THE government, or do you hate THIS government” and the longer I thought about it the more I realized that in fact I do not hate laws or rules in and off themselves or people in authority.  However having grown up in a quasi communist country where I can’t literally point to 5 laws which benefit me personally I think I was turned off to the entire ideas of laws and authority.  Every law that is passed today is passed to benefit some group, and that group isn’t me and it probably isn’t you.  These are passed to benefit various small groups usually financially or to protect them from you.  I think in modern society it’s hard to imagine a law that’s truly to the benefit of everyone and only the detriment to those who would harm the country.  It’s hard to envision a decent law because we just take it as commonly accepted facts that “well politicians lie” and so we have grown accustomed to groveling at the scraps of whatever they pass.

National Socialism as I describe it for myself anyway, is a nation (homogenous) whose government exists to protect and to serve the people.  To realize that a rising tide does float all boats and we’re all in this together.  Helping your neighbor does benefit you.   The closest example of this that I’m aware of is of course Hitlers Germany.  Looking back now especially it’s just a mere blip on the worlds timeline but it was long enough to get a glimpse if it was viable.  I think of it like a body, whereas your immune system must band together to fight a disease.  If your immune system was libertarian the virus would have to show aggression towards every individual white blood cell lest the other blood cells say “well that virus hasn’t done anything to me, spew your collectivist propaganda elsewhere”.  Thankfully your immune system does act as a collective and when one part senses danger the rest of the body is enlisted to fight off the attack.

So maybe you’re some point on this road that I’ve traveled and I hope this post gives you some food for thought.

Now It’s Front Page News

I’ve heard quite a bit in the news recently about “happy slapping” or niggers ambushing victims from behind knocking them out. I’ve covered this since at least 2010 so I was sort of perplexed why literally these past few weeks I started to hear regular stories about “knockout games”. Then I read this article and it all made perfect sense, now I see why it’s news.

Johns Hopkins Geneticist Proves Jews Are Not Israelites

This comes at no surprise to anyone who knows Biblical history and prophecy, for several years now I’ve had this front and center on the website.  It is entitled “50 Bible Reasons Why The Jews Are Not Israel” and as I titled it here “the most important thing I’ve ever read”.

This knowledge is of the highest importance for two reasons.  The first is that if the people known as jews today are not the descendants of Jacob than who is?  And the second is if the people known as jews are not the descendants of Jacob than who are they?  Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 explain the latter question (among various other places) and the article mentioned above explains the first question.

I cannot stress the importance of knowing and understanding this,  everything hinges on understanding this history.


I came across the following story today and found it to be enlightening although far from surprising for me.  It is just scientific evidence to prove what myself and others have claimed for years in my case and decades in others.  The author of the study certainly doesn’t understand Biblical history but he does understand that the people known as jews are imposters.


Scientists usually don’t call each other “liars” and “frauds.”

But that’s how Johns Hopkins University post-doctoral researcher Eran Elhaik describes a group of widely respected geneticists, including Harry Ostrer, professor of pathology and genetics at Yeshiva University’s Albert Einstein College of Medicine and author of the 2012 book “Legacy: A Genetic History of the Jewish People.”

For years now, the findings of Ostrer and several other scientists have stood virtually unchallenged on the genetics of Jews and the story they tell of the common Middle East origins shared by many Jewish populations worldwide. Jews — and Ashkenazim in particular — are indeed one people, Ostrer’s research finds.

It’s a theory that more or less affirms the understanding that many Jews themselves hold of who they are in the world: a people who, though scattered, share an ethnic-racial bond rooted in their common ancestral descent from the indigenous Jews of ancient Judea or Palestine, as the Romans called it after they conquered the Jewish homeland.

But now, Elhaik, an Israeli molecular geneticist, has published research that he says debunks this claim. And that has set off a predictable clash.

“He’s just wrong,” said Marcus Feldman of Stanford University, a leading researcher in Jewish genetics, referring to Elhaik.

The sometimes strong emotions generated by this scientific dispute stem from a politically loaded question that scientists and others have pondered for decades: Where in the world did Ashkenazi Jews come from?

The debate touches upon such sensitive issues as whether the Jewish people is a race or a religion, and whether Jews or Palestinians are descended from the original inhabitants of what is now the State of Israel.

Ostrer’s theory is sometimes marshaled to lend the authority of science to the Zionist narrative, which views the migration of modern-day Jews to what is now Israel, and their rule over that land, as a simple act of repossession by the descendants of the land’s original residents. Ostrer declined to be interviewed for this story. But in his writings, Ostrer points out the dangers of such reductionism; some of the same genetic markers common among Jews, he finds, can be found in Palestinians, as well.

By using sophisticated molecular tools, Feldman, Ostrer and most other scientists in the field have found that Jews are genetically homogeneous. No matter where they live, these scientists say, Jews are genetically more similar to each other than to their non-Jewish neighbors, and they have a shared Middle Eastern ancestry.

The geneticists’ research backs up what is known as the Rhineland Hypothesis. According to the hypothesis, Ashkenazi Jews descended from Jews who fled Palestine after the Muslim conquest in the seventh century and settled in Southern Europe. In the late Middle Ages they moved into eastern Europe from Germany, or the Rhineland.

“Nonsense,” said Elhaik, a 33-year-old Israeli Jew from Beersheba who earned a doctorate in molecular evolution from the University of Houston. The son of an Italian man and Iranian woman who met in Israel, Elhaik, a dark-haired, compact man, sat down recently for an interview in his bare, narrow cubicle of an office at Hopkins, where he’s worked for four years.

In “The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses,” published in December in the online journal Genome Biology and Evolution, Elhaik says he has proved that Ashkenazi Jews’ roots lie in the Caucasus — a region at the border of Europe and Asia that lies between the Black and Caspian seas — not in the Middle East. They are descendants, he argues, of the Khazars, a Turkic people who lived in one of the largest medieval states in Eurasia and then migrated to Eastern Europe in the 12th and 13th centuries. Ashkenazi genes, Elhaik added, are far more heterogeneous than Ostrer and other proponents of the Rhineland Hypothesis believe. Elhaik did find a Middle Eastern genetic marker in DNA from Jews, but, he says, it could be from Iran, not ancient Judea.

Elhaik writes that the Khazars converted to Judaism in the eighth century, although many historians believe that only royalty and some members of the aristocracy converted. But widespread conversion by the Khazars is the only way to explain the ballooning of the European Jewish population to 8 million at the beginning of the 20th century from its tiny base in the Middle Ages, Elhaik says.

Elhaik bases his conclusion on an analysis of genetic data published by a team of researchers led by Doron Behar, a population geneticist and senior physician at Israel’s Rambam Medical Center, in Haifa. Using the same data, Behar’s team published in 2010 a paper concluding that most contemporary Jews around the world and some non-Jewish populations from the Levant, or Eastern Mediterranean, are closely related.

Elhaik used some of the same statistical tests as Behar and others, but he chose different comparisons. Elhaik compared “genetic signatures” found in Jewish populations with those of modern-day Armenians and Georgians, which he uses as a stand-in for the long-extinct Khazarians because they live in the same area as the medieval state.

“It’s an unrealistic premise,” said University of Arizona geneticist Michael Hammer, one of Behar’s co-authors, of Elhaik’s paper. Hammer notes that Armenians have Middle Eastern roots, which, he says, is why they appeared to be genetically related to Ashkenazi Jews in Elhaik’s study.

Hammer, who also co-wrote the first paper that showed modern-day Kohanim are descended from a single male ancestor, calls Elhaik and other Khazarian Hypothesis proponents “outlier folks… who have a minority view that’s not supported scientifically. I think the arguments they make are pretty weak and stretching what we know.”

Feldman, director of Stanford’s Morrison Institute for Population and Resource Studies, echoes Hammer. “If you take all of the careful genetic population analysis that has been done over the last 15 years… there’s no doubt about the common Middle Eastern origin,” he said. He added that Elhaik’s paper “is sort of a one-off.”

Elhaik’s statistical analysis would not pass muster with most contemporary scholars, Feldman said: “He appears to be applying the statistics in a way that gives him different results from what everybody else has obtained from essentially similar data.”

Elhaik, who doesn’t believe that Moses, Aaron or the 12 Tribes of Israel ever existed, shrugs off such criticism.

“That’s a circular argument,” he said of the notion that Jews’ and Armenians’ genetic similarities stem from common ancestors in the Middle East and not from Khazaria, the area where the Armenians live. If you believe that, he says, then other non-Jewish populations, such as Georgian, that are genetically similar to Armenians should be considered genetically related to Jews, too, “and so on and so forth.”

Dan Graur, Elhaik’s doctoral supervisor at U.H. and a member of the editorial board of the journal that published his paper, calls his former student “very ambitious, very independent. That’s what I like.” Graur, a Romanian-born Jew who served on the faculty of Tel Aviv University for 22 years before moving 10 years ago to the Houston school, said Elhaik “writes more provocatively than may be needed, but it’s his style.” Graur calls Elhaik’s conclusion that Ashkenazi Jews originated to the east of Germany “a very honest estimate.”

In a news article that accompanied Elhaik’s journal paper, Shlomo Sand, history professor at Tel Aviv University and author of the controversial 2009 book “The Invention of the Jewish People,” said the study vindicated his long-held ideas.

”It’s so obvious for me,” Sand told the journal. “Some people, historians and even scientists, turn a blind eye to the truth. Once, to say Jews were a race was anti-Semitic, now to say they’re not a race is anti-Semitic. It’s crazy how history plays with us.”

The paper has received little coverage in mainstream American media, but it has attracted the attention of anti-Zionists and “anti-Semitic white supremacists,” Elhaik said.

Interestingly, while anti-Zionist bloggers have applauded Elhaik’s work, saying it proves that contemporary Jews have no legitimate claim to Israel, some white supremacists have attacked it.

David Duke, for example, is disturbed by the assertion that Jews are not a race. “The disruptive and conflict-ridden behavior which has marked out Jewish Supremacist activities through the millennia strongly suggests that Jews have remained more or less genetically uniform and have… developed a group evolutionary survival strategy based on a common biological unity — something which strongly militates against the Khazar theory,” wrote the former Ku Klux Klansman and former Louisiana state assemblyman on his blog in February.

“I’m not communicating with them,” Elhaik said of the white supremacists. He says it also bothers him, a veteran of seven years in the Israeli army, that anti-Zionists have capitalized on his research; not least because “they’re not going to be proven wrong anytime soon.”

But proponents of the Rhineland Hypothesis also have a political agenda, he said, claiming they “were motivated to justify the Zionist narrative.”

To illustrate his point, Elhaik swivels his chair around to face his computer and calls up a 2010 email exchange with Ostrer.

“It was a great pleasure reading your group’s recent paper, ‘Abraham’s Children in the Genome Era,’ that illuminate[s] the history of our people,” Elhaik wrote to Ostrer. “Is it possible to see the data used for the study?”

Ostrer replied that the data are not publicly available. “It is possible to collaborate with the team by writing a brief proposal that outlines what you plan to do,” he wrote. “Criteria for reviewing include novelty and strength of the proposal, non-overlap with current or planned activities, and non-defamatory nature toward the Jewish people.” That last requirement, Elhaik argues, reveals the bias of Ostrer and his collaborators.

Allowing scientists access to data only if their research will not defame Jews is “peculiar,” said Catherine DeAngelis, who edited the Journal of the American Medical Association for a decade. “What he does is set himself up for criticism: Wait a minute. What’s this guy trying to hide?”

Despite what his critics claim, Elhaik says, he was not out to prove that contemporary Jews have no connection to the Jewish people of the Bible. His primary research focus is the genetics of mental illness, which, he explains, led him to question the assumption that Ashkenazi Jews are a useful population to study because they’re so homogeneous.

Elhaik says he first read about the Khazarian Hypothesis a decade ago in a 1976 book by the late Hungarian-British author Arthur Koestler, “The Thirteenth Tribe,” written before scientists had the tools to compare genomes. Koestler, who was Jewish by birth, said his aim in writing the book was to eliminate the racist underpinnings of anti-Semitism in Europe. “Should this theory be confirmed, the term ‘anti-Semitism’ would become void of meaning,” the book jacket reads. Although Koestler’s book was generally well reviewed, some skeptics questioned the author’s grasp of the history of Khazaria.

Graur is not surprised that Elhaik has stood up against the “clique” of scientists who believe that Jews are genetically homogeneous. “He enjoys being combative,” Graur said. “That’s what science is.”


You’re Invited To A Bar Mitzvah!

No not really, but if you were the guest list would look very similar to the following list of Senators who voted to let the UN override the 2nd Amendment in the US. 46 Senators voted in favor of this treason not surprisingly every single jewish Senator voted for it. (except lautenberg who didn’t vote)

Baldwin (D-WI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)

Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Coons (D-DE)
Cowan (D-MA)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hirono (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)