Not all Christians stand with modern Israel. But all Christians stand with ancient Israel. Not all Christians believe that Israel has “the right to defend itself” by committing a genocide in Palestine and invading other countries. But all Christians have been taught that ancient Israel had the right — and even the sacred duty — to exterminate the Amalekites, “man and woman, babe and suckling” because they stood in the way of Israel’s conquest of Canaan (1Samuel 15:3).
All Christians are expected to stand with Moses when, in Numbers 31, he ordered his men to slaughter all the Midianites, as a punishment for having encouraged the Israelites to intermarry with the Moabites. Moses was enraged with the army commanders for sparing the women and the children, but finally allowed them to keep for themselves “the young girls who have never slept with a man.” The booty amounted to thirty-two thousand girls, of which Yahweh required 0.1 percent as his own “portion”, offered to him presumably as holocausts, together with Yahweh’s portion of oxen, cattle, donkeys and sheep.
Where does this kind of story fit on the scale of civilization? It belongs, at best, to “prehistoric warfare” as described by Lawrence Keeley in War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage, when the extermination of enemy tribes was not uncommon, and “[t]he capture of women was one of the spoils of victory — and occasionally one of the primary aims of warfare — for many tribal warriors. … The social position of captive women varied widely among cultures, from abject slaves to concubines to secondary wives to full spouses.”[1] In ancient Israel, “abject slaves” seems to have been the case. “Full spouses” was out of the question, since the whole justification for the massacre was to prevent intermarriage. Sex with non-Israelites is fine, as long as “no bastard shall enter the assembly of Yahweh, nor any descendant of his even to the tenth generation” (Deuteronomy 23:3). This, rather than any special respect for women, explains the rule that a Jewish mother is required for being a Jew.
Besides this history of repeated expulsions, another way to understand the ‘Jewish question’ is just look at their culture. It is fundamentally parasitic, not just in behavior but also in religious and moral beliefs, values and teachings. This is very obvious and not at all ‘best for the Jews’ (spiritually or in the long-run) and horrible for host countries. Western civilization itself is now in danger. Jews have ethnic and cultural cohesion which transcends national borders. This is their strength (ironically not diversity, funny thing about that). Rather than use their cohesion to do good in the world, they cause infinitely more harm than good. It is a major historical tragedy and only they can fix it. ABN
…In 2019, two major studies were published which gave some of the strongest evidence yet to the theory.
…So while Proto-Indo-Europeans expanded out of the Pontic-Caspian Steppe in all directions, it was their later Northern European branch which mixed with native European farmers that then expanded back eastward and became the founders of Vedic civilisation.
…Written between 1,500-1,000 BC, the Rigveda is one of the foundational Hindu texts — one of the four Vedas, and the oldest Vedic Sanskrit text. It records the story of the Aryan incursion into India and their encounter with the local populations.
The Indo-Iranian peoples apparently referred to themselves as “Aryans”, meaning “noble” or “civilised”. An inscription on the tomb of Darius the Great uses the term “Ariya” to describe the Iranian people, apparently describing Darius as an “Aryan of Aryan descent.” In Avestan, the liturgical language of Zoroastrianism, “Airyanem Vaejah” is used to describe an ancient “Aryan expanse” which was the homeland of the Iranian people. Similarly, the Sanskrit term ārya, meaning noble, is used throughout the Rigveda to describe the conquerors who subdued the native Indians, who are referred to as Dasa/Dasyu.
I am a bit disappointed in this essay because it misses so much of what really happened in the ancient world, but it is worth reading due to the genetic information presented and its discussion of the Rigveda.
‘Aryan’ is the root source of the name Chinese use for themselves to this day — ‘huaren‘ (華人). It is also the source for the name of the earliest Chinese dynasty, the Xia Dynasty (夏朝). This shows that the expanse of ancient Aryan peoples included also Tocharians in Northeast Asia, where they had a very significant influence on the development of Chinese, Korean, Mongolian and Japanese civilizations.
Aryan peoples are largely synonymous with Scythians, who ruled Central Asia for many centuries, dating back to their invention of the chariot, circa 2,000 BCE, which is why horses were so important in their spread and dominance. It is entirely ridiculous to feel proud today that you have Aryan ancestry (many people do) or that Indian civilization owes nothing to the Aryans.
Incidentally, the Buddha himself was Aryan or Scythian. When he is called Shakyamuni, the name literally means ‘sage of the Scythians’. The Buddha is often referred to as an Aryan in traditional Buddhist texts. The only physical description we have of Shakyamuni Buddha says his eyes were blue. It is ridiculous to be either proud of ancestry from Aryans or ashamed of not being Aryan or having been conquered by them. All peoples everywhere have been conquered and enslaved, and conquered and enslaved others.
Read the works of Christopher Beckwith for a much more detailed and expansive take on this subject. For Buddhists, I highly recommend his book, Greek Buddha: Pyrrho’s Encounter with Early Buddhism in Central Asia. Beckwith claims Aryan dominance and deep influence in all of the cultures bordering Central Asia was not particularly violent but rather resulted from Aryan/ Scythian males settling in a region and mating with the local women. This led to the formation of many creole languages with prominent Indo-European words and features. ABN
A place of worship sealed up by the ancestors of Jesus has been discovered in the ancient heart of Jerusalem, frozen in time for nearly 3,000 years.
Carved into the rock near Temple Mount, the structure comprises eight rooms, containing an altar, a sacred standing stone, and presses for olive oil and wine.
And experts believe its destruction may have featured in the Bible, which describes how Hezekiah – one of Jesus’ ancestors – smashed idolatrous places of worship.
This was one such place, according to Eli Shukron, exacavation director for the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA), who dated it to Hezekiah’s reign.
He said: ‘The structure ceased to function during the 8th century BC, possibly as part of king Hezekiah’s religious reform.
‘According to the Bible, Hezekiah sought to centralise worship at the temple in Jerusalem, abolishing the ritual sites scattered across the kingdom.
‘The Bible describes how, during the First Temple period, additional ritual sites operated outside the temple.
‘It says two kings of Judah – Hezekiah and Josiah – implemented reforms to eliminate these sites and concentrate worship at the temple.’
This behavior is designed to harm the young. In this case, damage his ears and hearing, hurt his brain, cow his spirit, inflame his anger thus making the initial violence appear justified. What many people do not realize is this behavior is practiced throughout the Jewish diaspora against their host societies. In Israel, we can see the persecution on TV. But in the West it is not so obvious. In the West it can take ‘soft’ forms like educational misdirection, social harassment, denial of employment. Or it can take harsher forms like medical malpractice, poisoning, psychosurgery. Many decades of mind-control have caused Westerners to fear this topic, at our peril. ABN
The vast majority of anti-White literature is written and published by Jews. This thread is by no means exhaustive, so feel free to add more examples in the comments. — 1) 𝐁𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐖𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞, 𝐁𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐆𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐁𝐚𝐫𝐛𝐚𝐫𝐚 𝐀𝐩𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐛𝐚𝐮𝐦
This book is a perfect example of how Jews repackage anti-White narratives to target even those Whites who attempt to “do good.” Applebaum accuses Whites of weaponizing allyship to uphold “White supremacy” in a subtle, self-serving way. It’s a no-win situation—if you try to help, you’re labeled manipulative; if you don’t, you’re called complicit.
🔹𝐊𝐞𝐲 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐦𝐞: No matter what you do, if you’re White, you’re the problem.
𝐐𝐮𝐨𝐭𝐞: “White goodness is a performance that masks complicity in systemic racism.”
Hating and degrading your host society is an incontrovertible sign of a parasitic culture, one that lives on the wealth of another society while at the same time reviling and ruining it. If the parasite feels compassion for the host, it will not be a parasite anymore. Unfortunately, Jews have also taught other groups to form parasitic cultures or encouraged them to indulge parasitic elements of their cultures. We see that in Hindus who form tribal cliques inside USA, radical feminists who formed cliques that have debased many major institutions, particularly academia (and fire departments), woke ideology in general. Human parasitism is a nasty subject because human parasites form nasty cultures, but we have to deal with it. This topic must rise to global awareness throughout the West or we will be completely destroyed very soon. For Westerners who still have trouble grasping this topic, notice that your moral sensibilities have been commandeered to control your mind and emotions, thus allowing the parasites to digest you in vivo. ABN
Religions are words and signs that lead you in a direction. By respecting or revering the words and signs you move your mind toward something bigger than yourself. That’s really all there is to it for good religions that help you glimpse or even see something approaching actual reality.
Bad religions commandeer your innate sensibilities and desires to see reality; people do that to other people for bad reasons. Even someone following a bad religion can find their way out of it.
It’s very good to understand that words and signs are important only insofar as they help you or restrict your understanding. If they do not restrict your understanding, you are probably well on your way.
This is why good religions can deeply respect other good religions. This is why you can make up your own good religion or your own interpretation of any good religion. Do that with good care though.
American Buddhist Net 