This Linda Chavez?





Linda's mother, Velma Lucy (née McKenna,) is described as an "anglo-American." Her mother was of English and Irish ancestry. Of course the Irish side was the father. (her grandfather) The English side had to be the one that carried the Euro Jewish gene marker.

In other words, that is her "Jewish mother." Yep, she is very likely related to the European Jews. Her father was Mexican.

As you know, in order to be accepted as "Jewish" you need to have the Jewish gene that is passed down only through the mother. She could probably move to Israel and be accepted with open arms.

MYTH

“Israeli settlements are illegal.” top

FACT

Jews have lived in Judea and Samaria—the West Bank—since ancient times. The only time Jews have been prohibited from living in the territories in recent decades was during Jordan’s rule from 1948 to 1967.

Numerous legal authorities dispute the charge that settlements are “illegal.” Stephen Schwebel, formerly President of the International Court of Justice, notes that a country acting in self-defense may seize and occupy territory when necessary to protect itself. Schwebel also observes that a state may require, as a condition for its withdrawal, security measures designed to ensure its citizens are not menaced again from that territory. 1

According to Eugene Rostow, a former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs in the Johnson Administration, Resolution 242 gives Israel a legal right to be in the West Bank. The resolution, Rostow noted, “Israel is entitled to administer the territories” it won in 1967 until ‘‘a just and lasting peace in the Middle East’’ is achieved. 2 Though critical of Israeli policy, the United States does not consider settlements illegal.


MYTH

“Settlements are an obstacle to peace.” top

FACT

Settlements have never been an obstacle to peace.

From 1949–67, when Jews were forbidden to live on the West Bank, the Arabs refused to make peace with Israel.
From 1967–77, the Labor Party established only a few strategic settlements in the territories, yet the Arabs were unwilling to negotiate peace with Israel.
In 1977, months after a Likud government committed to greater settlement activity took power, Egyptian President Sadat went to Jerusalem and later signed a peace treaty with Israel. Incidentally, Israeli settlements existed in the Sinai and those were removed as part of the agreement with Egypt.
One year later, Israel froze settlement building for three months, hoping the gesture would entice other Arabs to join the Camp David peace process, but none would.
In 1994, Jordan signed a peace agreement with Israel and settlements were not an issue; if anything, the number of Jews living in the territories was growing.
Between June 1992 and June 1996, under Labor-led governments, the Jewish population in the territories grew by approximately 50 percent. This rapid growth did not prevent the Palestinians from signing the Oslo accords in September 1993 or the Oslo 2 agreement in September 1995.
In 2000, Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered to dismantle dozens of settlements, but the Palestinians still would not agree to end the conflict.
In August 2005, Israel evacuated all of the settlements in the Gaza Strip and four in Northern Samaria, but terror attacks continued.
In 2008, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered to withdraw from approximately 94 percent of the West Bank, but the deal was rejected.
In 2010, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu froze settlement construction for 10 months and the Palestinians refused to engage in negotiations until the period was nearly over. After agreeing to talk, they walked out when Netanyahu refused to prolong the freeze.

Settlement activity may be a stimulus to peace because it forced the Palestinians and other Arabs to reconsider the view that time is on their side. References are frequently made in Arabic writings to how long it took to expel the Crusaders and how it might take a similar length of time to do the same to the Zionists. The growth in the Jewish population in the territories forced the Arabs to question this tenet. “The Palestinians now realize,” said Bethlehem Mayor Elias Freij, “that time is now on the side of Israel, which can build settlements and create facts, and that the only way out of this dilemma is face-to-face negotiations.” 3

Even though settlements are not an obstacle to peace, many Israelis still have concerns about the expansion of settlements. Some consider them provocative, others worry that the settlers are particularly vulnerable, and note they have been targets of repeated Palestinian terrorist attacks. To defend them, large numbers of soldiers are deployed who would otherwise be training and preparing for a possible future conflict with an Arab army. Some Israelis also object to the amount of money that goes to communities beyond the Green Line, and special subsidies that have been provided to make housing there more affordable. Still others feel the settlers are providing a first line of defense and developing land that rightfully belongs to Israel.

The disposition of settlements is a matter for the final status negotiations. The question of where the final border will be between Israel and a Palestinian entity will likely be influenced by the distribution of these Jewish towns in Judea and Samaria (the border with Gaza was unofficially defined following Israel’s withdrawal). Israel wants to incorporate as many settlers as possible within its borders while the Palestinians want to expel all Jews from the territory they control.

If Israel withdraws toward the 1949 armistice line unilaterally, or as part of a political settlement, many settlers will face one or more options: remain in the territories (the disengagement from Gaza suggests this may not be possible), expulsion from their homes, or voluntary resettlement in Israel (with financial compensation).

The impediment to peace is not the existence of Jewish communities in the disputed territories, it is the Palestinians’ unwillingness to accept a state next to Israel instead of one replacing Israel.


http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths3/MFsettlements.html

Perhaps, but they probably were not white Anglo European/Khazarian Jews.

Your Neo-Nazi Khazarian Jew theory was debunked in the genetic
studies mentioned above. They are all equally Jewish and share
a common middle eastern ancestry.

The Khazarian history is not a theory. It is a fact. And that history has nothing to do with neo-nazi anything.

Your genetic studies were debunked by the very fact that they were created by the same Khazarian European Jews who are desperate to hide their ancestry. They will stop at nothing to do so. Kinda makes a person wonder what they are hiding and why.

The proof that it was misinformation put out by them is their use of the term "disporia" which is only used by European Jewry. They have exposed themselves by using their propaganda buzz words.

Also as I pointed out, it was unscientific because they insist on perpetrating the myth that they are descended from the mythical characters Abraham and King David. MYTHS.

And the fact that Linda Chavez was "the first Latina" ever nominated to the United States Cabinet, when President George W. Bush nominated her Secretary of Labor is laughable.

She is, by the blood of her mother and grandmother, Jewish. And since "Jewish" is not defined by your religion by Euro Jews, her "Latino" blood line from her fathers side is recessive. It is immaterial. It becomes a tool for her to use as an alleged "minority."

And since Jews don't form loyalties to any country other than to their manufactured "homeland" In Israel she would be considered a Jew living in "disporia."

So much for her being "Latino, (or even "American.") She is another Jew living in "disporia" whose ancestors were forced to "convert" to Catholic.

A true Latino would never be found in that political position.

The same goes for President Obama, who most assuredly is of Euro Jewish decent coming from his mother's side.

How about we go back to before 635 when Muslims attacked them and took control of Jerusalem?

By "them" who exactly do you mean?

The Arab Jews, The Yemeni Jew, the African Jew, the India Jew, or the European Jew?

I am saying that religion has very little to do with it. These are basically tribal and ethnic wars.

I don't think the European Jews were even living in Jerusalem in 635.

All of them. Genetic and DNA research shows Jews from all these
different geographic areas have a closely related ancestry and
history from the middle east.



Even if there were no Indian Jews or European Jews yet.



The Byzantine–Arab Wars were a series of wars between the mostly Arab Muslims and the East Roman or Byzantine Empire between the 7th and 11th centuries AD. These started during the initial Muslim conquests under the expansionist Rashidun and Umayyad caliphs in the 7th century and continued by their successors until the mid-11th century.

But it had nothing to do with religion of course. That was a
coincidence - but if it wasn't it was a plot by the Mossad and CIA.



Here is a link about the fabricated history of the wars in that
notorious work of fiction the Wikipedia. Just to show the lengths
to which others will go to create false flag operations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine%E2%80%93Arab_Wars

I'd be interested to find out how you know these figures never existed. Facts please, not opinions.

Amnesty International says Israel is guilty of torture and human rights violations.

The nongovernmental organization's report, "Starved of justice: Palestinians detained without trial by Israel," states that Israel must end its policy of detaining Palestinian prisoners without charge or trial.

The report said that the Israeli Prison Services punished Palestinian hunger strikers by placing them in solitary confinement, claiming that holding the action was against prison regulations, Haaretz reported.

Israel denied the charges and said torture is forbidden in Israel. Spokeman Mark Regev also said administrative detention is used only to hold those who present an immediate security threat. "If we get information from someone whose neighbor is making explosives for suicide bombers and that evidence is presented in court, then terror groups will take violent action against him and his family," Regev said, according to The Associated Press.






Torture is a common tactic against Palestinians, and Palestinian prisoners in particular, Regev's rebuttals notwithstanding.

It's just when Israeli IDF or police forces get caught doing it that the world has a window on just how thoroughly institutionalized this practice has become, both in Israel and the Occupied Territories.
http://www.jta.org/news/article/2012/06/08/3097666/amnesty-israel-guilty-of-torture-unfairly-detains-palestinians

Spot The White Supremacist

Eenie Beeby Meenie Miney Moe

I love puzzles!
Is it the white guy with white hair and glasses?



I am not sure any of them are white supremacists even if some of
them sometimes refer to the white supremacist antisemitic websites
and are consistently anti-Israel.



regarding the torture in Israel it is pretty clear that almost all the
torture of Palestinians (and there is a lot of it) is being done by
Hamas, Fatah, Al-Aqsa, Hezbollah and other terrorist groups and not
by the Israelis. See the video:

http://youtu.be/roC2dHJiVyo

Take a trip to the USS Liberty Thread and analyse the video.

Sure - Here is what I have found about the USS Liberty....It was
not much of a puzzle though since it all appears in a Wiki article.
Tons of research and testimony though. A tragic incident.

I reposted it in the other thread - from the Wiki article:

The USS Liberty incident was an attack on a United States Navy technical research ship, USS Liberty, by Israeli Air Force jet fighter aircraft and Israeli Navy torpedo boats, on June 8, 1967, during the Six-Day War.[2] The combined air and sea attack killed 34 crew members (naval officers, seamen, two Marines, and one civilian), wounded 170 crew members, and severely damaged the ship.[3] At the time, the ship was in international waters north of the Sinai Peninsula, about 25.5 nmi (29.3 mi; 47.2 km) northwest from the Egyptian city of Arish.[1][4]

Both the Israeli and U.S. governments conducted inquiries and issued reports that concluded the attack was a mistake due to Israeli confusion about the identity of the USS Liberty,[5] though others have rejected these conclusions and maintain that the attack was deliberate.[6]

Events leading to the attack

During the Six-Day War between Israel and several Arab nations, the United States of America maintained a neutral country status.[8] Several days before the war began, the USS Liberty was ordered to proceed to the eastern Mediterranean area to perform a signal intelligence collection mission in international waters near the north coast of Sinai, Egypt.[9] After the war erupted, due to concerns about her safety as she approached her patrol area, several messages were sent to Liberty to increase her allowable closest point of approach (CPA) to Egypt's and Israel's coasts from 12.5 nmi (14.4 mi; 23.2 km) and 6.5 nmi (7.5 mi; 12.0 km), respectively, to 20 nmi (23 mi; 37 km) and 15 nmi (17 mi; 28 km), and then later to 100 nmi (120 mi; 190 km) for both countries.[10] Unfortunately, due to ineffective message handling and routing, the CPA change messages were not received until after the attack.[10]

According to Israeli sources, at the start of the war on June 5, General Yitzhak Rabin (then IDF Chief of Staff) informed Commander Ernest Carl Castle, the American Naval Attaché in Tel Aviv, that Israel would defend its coast with every means at its disposal, including sinking unidentified ships. Also, he asked the U.S. to keep its ships away from Israel's shore or at least inform Israel of their exact position.[11][12] The United States did not provide Israel any information about Liberty's mission or location.

American sources said that no inquiry about ships in the area was made until after the Liberty attack ended. In a message sent from U.S. Secretary of State Dean Rusk to U.S. Ambassador Walworth Barbour, in Tel Aviv, Israel, Rusk asked for "urgent confirmation" of Israel's claim. Barbour responded: "No request for info on U.S. ships operating off Sinai was made until after Liberty incident." Further, Barbour stated: "Had Israelis made such an inquiry it would have been forwarded immediately to the chief of naval operations and other high naval commands and repeated to dept [Department of State]."[13]

With the outbreak of war, Captain William L. McGonagle of the Liberty immediately asked Vice Admiral William I. Martin at the U.S. 6th Fleet headquarters to send a destroyer to accompany the Liberty and serve as its armed escort and as an auxiliary communications center. The following day, June 6, Admiral Martin replied: “Liberty is a clearly marked United States ship in international waters, not a participant in the conflict and not a reasonable subject for attack by any nation. Request denied.”[14] He promised, however, that in the unlikely event of an inadvertent attack, jet fighters from the Sixth Fleet could be overhead in ten minutes.

Meanwhile, at the United Nations, and in response to Arab complaints that the U.S. and British were supporting Israel in the conflict, United States Ambassador Arthur Goldberg announced that the U.S. forces were hundreds of miles from the conflict.[10] At the time the statement was made, this was the case, since the Liberty was just entering the Mediterranean Sea[15] but would ultimately steam to within a few miles of the Sinai Peninsula.

On the night of June 7 Washington time, early morning on June 8, 01:10Z or 3:10 AM local time, the Pentagon issued an order to 6th Fleet headquarters to tell the Liberty to come no closer than 100 nmi (120 mi; 190 km) to Israel, Syria, or the Sinai coast (Oren, p. 263).[16] (pages 5 and Exhibit N, page 58).

According to the Naval Court of Inquiry[17] (p. 23 ff, p. 111 ff) and National Security Agency official history,[18] the order to withdraw was not sent on the radio frequency that USS Liberty monitored for her orders until 15:25 Zulu, several hours after the attack, due to a long series of administrative and message routing problems. The Navy said a large volume of unrelated high-precedence traffic, including intelligence intercepts related to the conflict, were being handled at the time and it also faulted a shortage of qualified radio men as a contributing factor to the failure to send the withdrawal message to Liberty in time.[17] (p. 111 ff)

I'm sure all this will end in dust as soon as Iran has nuclear bombs.
No more Israel, no more Palestine probably no more middle east.

I asked you to analyse the video on The Uss Liberty Thread not consult Wikileaks.

Some really serious American Military Men on That Video.

Are you American?


To save you the effort here is the link

http://www.brasschecktv.com/videos/war-crimes-1/loss-of-liberty.html

There is no evidence that they ever existed.

Proving they did exist is the true Challenge. That they were actually real historical figures is just an opinion or a belief.

Why don't you see if you can prove that Big Foot does not exist? Or Santa Clause? Or Unicorns?

There are some historical figures in the Bible where there is sufficient evidence to believe that they really did exist. Abraham and King David, Joshua, Moses, and all their descendants are not included. Without evidence, they should be regarded (scientifically) as fiction and myth.

If you believe they were real people, you must put your faith in who ever wrote the scriptures and stories because their is no historical or geological evidence that they ever existed.

no matter what you say,the Research I have posted proves you wrong!
Unless you are a better Geneticist than any of those who did the latest Genome-Research!
Go read it again!

And here is a link to the American Journal of Human Genetics article.

http://www.cell.com/AJHG/abstract/S0002-9297%2810%2900246-6

And in case you cannot get that link to work - Here is the abstract:

=-=-=-=

Abstract

For more than a century, Jews and non-Jews alike have tried to define the relatedness of contemporary Jewish people. Previous genetic studies of blood group and serum markers suggested that Jewish groups had Middle Eastern origin with greater genetic similarity between paired Jewish populations. However, these and successor studies of monoallelic Y chromosomal and mitochondrial genetic markers did not resolve the issues of within and between-group Jewish genetic identity. Here, genome-wide analysis of seven Jewish groups (Iranian, Iraqi, Syrian, Italian, Turkish, Greek, and Ashkenazi) and comparison with non-Jewish groups demonstrated distinctive Jewish population clusters, each with shared Middle Eastern ancestry, proximity to contemporary Middle Eastern populations, and variable degrees of European and North African admixture. Two major groups were identified by principal component, phylogenetic, and identity by descent (IBD) analysis: Middle Eastern Jews and European/Syrian Jews. The IBD segment sharing and the proximity of European Jews to each other and to southern European populations suggested similar origins for European Jewry and refuted large-scale genetic contributions of Central and Eastern European and Slavic populations to the formation of Ashkenazi Jewry. Rapid decay of IBD in Ashkenazi Jewish genomes was consistent with a severe bottleneck followed by large expansion, such as occurred with the so-called demographic miracle of population expansion from 50,000 people at the beginning of the 15th century to 5,000,000 people at the beginning of the 19th century. Thus, this study demonstrates that European/Syrian and Middle Eastern Jews represent a series of geographical isolates or clusters woven together by shared IBD genetic threads.

=-=-=-=

Yes, amazingly enough there is common ancestry for all groups from
all over the world and it is traced back to the Middle East. Using
the latest and best DNA techniques! You may not like it but it is
a fact.

Full Article here:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929710002466


Doesn't really matter what the Revisionists claim,Genetics have proved different!

It does nothing of the sort.

The evidence proves that the very people who are desperate to hide and deny their ancestry, the European Jews, are the same people who manufactured and published said "evidence."

Proof is always a matter of belief. You have not convinced me or proven anything.

As for genome-research I heard they also traced back all races and all humans to Africa. I don't believe that either.

Its a pack of lies and propaganda.