@Lash,
Scientists don't have the standing that our elected leaders have. Scientists have a duty to report their findings to the scientific community but it's our
leaders who must show us how and why to implement changes in social behavior.
If we actually listened to scientists we wouldn't be in this mess as the first reports about the effects of greenhouse gases was released forty years ago!
@hightor,
I didn’t finish the first sentence before laughing. People would have propagation orgies to spite ‘elected officials.’ But, you’re right—we have many more truly stupid people who may take the same tack against scientists.
Unfortunately, more intelligent people are already carefully considering whether or not they should bring children into this world while their less thoughtful counterparts probably never will.
Maybe the UN can lead a global charge for consideration of population concerns and the means needed to reduce population growth, but again—not governments. Actually, the UN might really have something useful to do now...
@Lash,
Quote:People would have propagation orgies to spite ‘elected officials.’
Heehee — I never thought of that!
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:The Israelis dispossesses Palestiians from Palestinian-settled land and forced them into a much smaller area, far more crowded.
That's what happens when indigenous people come back to settle their homeland.
MontereyJack wrote:That's why they're refugees, after all.
The Palestinians remain refugees primarily because they refuse to make peace and receive a state of their own.
MontereyJack wrote:Then the Israelis said, ,"Hey, we get the big area and you can have much less area for your own. Just agree to the unequal dispensation."
Israel said nothing of the sort. The distribution of the land was determined solely by the fortunes of the war that the Arabs insisted on starting.
MontereyJack wrote:It's kinda like the Israelis robbing a bank and then saying "we have a right to self-defense" when they shoot anyone who tries to get the money back.
As indigenous people, the Israelis have every right to live in their own homeland.
You have to overcome lots of ignorance to effectively control population. Ethnicities will be jealous of the numbers of other ethnicities, besides the other issues mentioned.
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
InfraBlue wrote:The mtDNA that the article refers to is from European admixture centuries before the Roman seizures.
All that shows is that European women married into Ashkenazim families. It does not undermine the claim that the Ashkenazim are descended from the Israelites.
No genealogical study supports the claim that the Ashkenazim are descended from the Israelites. That's the realm of religion and mythology, not science.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:The resettlement of Judahites, not Israelites, during the Neo-Babylonian deportations was to Babylon, not Europe. The deportation of Israelites by the Neo-Assyrians was to Mesopotamia, not Europe.
It still was forcing them to leave against their will.
The reference was to the European admixture, not the Middle Eastern.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:Yeah, a general Levantine and Middle Eastern connection.
The Y chromosome results were pretty specific. They show that the Ashkenazim diverged from the Palestinians during the Bronze Age.
No it doesn't. It shows a general Jewish cluster interspersed with the Palestinian and Syrian populations sampled. Of the Ashkenazim, specifically, they were closer to Southern Europeans—namely Greeks—and Turks.
oralloy wrote:Given that there was a unified Canaanite culture in the area during the Bronze Age, which then diverged into separate Iron Age cultures, it is pretty obvious how the pieces fit together.
No, it is not.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:The Y chromosome DNA is a very small part of the total genealogy of an individual.
It's still good enough to tie the Ashkenazim to the Palestinians during the Bronze Age.
It ties them to Middle Eastern gene pools in gereral to a limited extent, seeing as how Y chromosome DNA is a small part of a person's genealogy.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:They are Middle Eastern genes only in the sense that all non-African genes are Middle Eastern (as the ancestors of all non-Africans passed through the Middle East on their way out of Africa).
Incorrect.
What other significance is there to the fact that this group broke away from the Middle East 12 to 25 thousand years ago?
InfraBlue wrote:The Middle Eastern admixture in Europe happened around 12,000 to 25,000 years ago, according to the study, long after the initial population of Europe which occurred between 50,000 and 43,000 years ago. These Middle Eastern populations were archaic farmers.
What you said is true as far as I can see, but how is it relevant to the question of whether the Ashkenazim are descended from the ancient Israelites?
The significance is that the Middle Eastern portions of Ashkenazi genetics are largely prehistoric, like other Europeans, long before any kind of mythological disporas.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:Nothing genealogical refers to a supposed Israelite heritage.
The fact that the Ashkenazim diverged from the Palestinians during the Bronze Age is a pretty good match to the history of Bronze Age Canaanites diverging into separate Iron Age cultures.
This is merley a supposition of yours, hardly a fact.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:Genealogy deals in science, not mythology.
And science says that the Ashkenazim diverged from the Palestinians during the Bronze Age.
No it doesn't.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:The ancestral population that diverged from the Middle East 12-25 thousand years ago is "Middle Eastern" only in the sense that all non-African ancestral populations have Middle Eastern heritage.
Incorrect. See my response above to this assertion of yours.
In what other sense is this ancestral population Middle Eastern?
See my response above in regard to these populations.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:The other ancestral population is Middle Eastern because they were the ancient Israelites.
No. The genealogical studies do not refer to ancient Israelite ancestors.
They show that the Ashkenazim diverged from the Palestinians during the Bronze Age. That's a pretty close match to the history of Bronze Age Canaan diverging into differing Iron Age cultures.
No they don't, and no it is not.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:Religiously and mythologically speaking, it is their homeland.
It is also their homeland in reality. DNA shows that they diverged from the Palestinians during the Bronze Age.
No it doesn't.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:That does not justify their oppression of the Palestinian people, the indigenous people of Palestine.
DNA shows that the Ashkenazim are equally the indigenous people of Palestine.
No it doesn't, not by a long shot.
oralloy wrote:I do not share your opinion that the Palestinians are being oppressed. I see the two state solution as being entirely fair.
Duly noted.
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
InfraBlue wrote:Incorrect. We know from the Y chromosome studies that Ashkenazim have some Middle Eastern genetic admixture. No genealogical studies have established Israelite descent of the Ashkenazim.
Genealogical studies show that the Ashkenazim diverged from the Palestinians during the Bronze Age. That is a pretty good match to the history of Bronze Age Canaan diverging into separate Iron Age cultures.
Wrong. See my earlier replies.
oralloy wrote:
Do you have any evidence of the world asking Israel to do anything more than return to 1967 borders as part of a land-for-peace arrangement?
Trump has said that he'd be ok with a single state. Netanyahu is against two states. The world has diverse opinions about the matter.
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
InfraBlue wrote:This does not speak to their Right of Return that Israel harmfully denies them.
So what? The Palestinians need to learn to share.
Sharing Palestine would involve a single, democratic, egalitarian and pluralistic state for all the peoples of Palestine.
@InfraBlue,
That is not the only way to share Palestine. A two-state solution can also share Palestine.
And since the Israelis have no intention of welcoming any more Palestinians into their country, the two state solution is the best that the Palestinians are going to get.
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:Genealogical studies show that the Ashkenazim diverged from the Palestinians during the Bronze Age. That is a pretty good match to the history of Bronze Age Canaan diverging into separate Iron Age cultures.
Wrong. See my earlier replies.
The common DNA cluster that the Jews share with the Palestinians means that they share Bronze Age ancestry.
InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:Do you have any evidence of the world asking Israel to do anything more than return to 1967 borders as part of a land-for-peace arrangement?
Trump has said that he'd be ok with a single state.
He was not asking Israel to do anything.
InfraBlue wrote:Netanyahu is against two states.
Has he said this? At any rate, his views can hardly count as the world asking Israel to do something.
InfraBlue wrote:The world has diverse opinions about the matter.
Have these diverse opinions resulted in anyone asking Israel to do anything more than pursue land-for-peace?
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:No genealogical study supports the claim that the Ashkenazim are descended from the Israelites. That's the realm of religion and mythology, not science.
Showing that the Jews and the Palestinians share a common Bronze Age ancestry supports the claim that the Ashkenazim are descended from the Israelites.
InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:The Y chromosome results were pretty specific. They show that the Ashkenazim diverged from the Palestinians during the Bronze Age.
No it doesn't. It shows a general Jewish cluster interspersed with the Palestinian and Syrian populations sampled.
That interspersed cluster means common ancestry in the Bronze Age.
InfraBlue wrote:Of the Ashkenazim, specifically, they were closer to Southern Europeans—namely Greeks—and Turks.
They are closer to the Greeks and Turks than they are to any other
non Jewish/Palestinian/Syrian population.
Within that cluster, the Ashkenazim are pretty close to the Syrians, the Roman Jews, and the Kurdish Jews.
InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:They are Middle Eastern genes only in the sense that all non-African genes are Middle Eastern (as the ancestors of all non-Africans passed through the Middle East on their way out of Africa).
Incorrect.
What other significance is there to the fact that this group broke away from the Middle East 12 to 25 thousand years ago?
InfraBlue wrote:The Middle Eastern admixture in Europe happened around 12,000 to 25,000 years ago, according to the study, long after the initial population of Europe which occurred between 50,000 and 43,000 years ago. These Middle Eastern populations were archaic farmers.
What you said is true as far as I can see, but how is it relevant to the question of whether the Ashkenazim are descended from the ancient Israelites?
The significance is that the Middle Eastern portions of Ashkenazi genetics are largely prehistoric, like other Europeans, long before any kind of mythological disporas.
The fact that the
European portion of Ashkenazi genetics broke away from the Middle East 12 to 25 thousand years ago does not mean that the Middle Eastern portions of Askenazi genetics broke away from the Middle East at the same time.
In fact, that same study clearly states that the Middle Eastern portions of Ashkenzi genetics only started mixing with European DNA 600 to 800 years ago.
InfraBlue wrote:long before any kind of mythological disporas.
History and archaeology show that the diasporas were anything but mythological.
InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:The ancestral population that diverged from the Middle East 12-25 thousand years ago is "Middle Eastern" only in the sense that all non-African ancestral populations have Middle Eastern heritage.
Incorrect. See my response above to this assertion of yours.
In what other sense is this ancestral population Middle Eastern?
See my response above in regard to these populations.
I didn't see any explanation of how the European ancestral population was Middle Eastern in any sense other than the fact that their ancestors passed through the Middle East on their way out of Africa.
InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:They show that the Ashkenazim diverged from the Palestinians during the Bronze Age. That's a pretty close match to the history of Bronze Age Canaan diverging into differing Iron Age cultures.
No they don't, and no it is not.
"A common Bronze Age population diverging into separate populations after the Bronze Age" is very similar to "a common Bronze Age population diverging into separate populations after the Bronze Age."
InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:DNA shows that the Ashkenazim are equally the indigenous people of Palestine.
No it doesn't, not by a long shot.
Common Bronze Age ancestry with the original founding population makes them equally as indigenous.
Eowyn, One of the Squad
@WestCoastGadfly
The fight for Bernie is not some latte liberal "preference." It's literally a matter of life and death for millions of people!
- Referring to people with medical emergencies.
The House Democrats' Campaign Operation Is a Total Shambles Right Now
Paul Blest
Illinois Rep. Cheri Bustos was elected the chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in November. Her tenure so far has been highly tumultuous, to say the least—and now, she’s embroiled in a major internal controversy.
Bustos almost immediately went to war with progressive House Democrats after trying to kill off primaries by blacklisting consultants that did work for challengers to House incumbents. Later, Bustos caused another fracas by announcing that she’d host a fundraiser for anti-abortion Democrat Dan Lipinski—who voted against Obamacare back in 2010, represents a safe seat he inherited from his father, and is being challenged by pro-choice candidate Marie Newman for the second time. Bustos then canceled that fundraiser after several states began openly trying to ban abortion.
But things have somehow gotten even worse.
Politico reported last week that black and Latinx Democratic lawmakers were incensed at Bustos and the committee over the lack of diversity in the upper ranks of the House Democrats’ campaign operation, as well as what they view as a lack of outreach to Latinx voters. Now, the site is reporting that Bustos is rushing back to D.C. on Monday to deal with what two Texas congressmen described as “complete chaos”:
In the most dramatic move so far, Texas Reps. Vicente Gonzalez and Filemon Vela told POLITICO Sunday that Bustos should fire her top aide, DCCC executive director Allison Jaslow.
“The DCCC is now in complete chaos,” the pair said in a statement to POLITICO. “The single most immediate action that Cheri Bustos can take to restore confidence in the organization and to promote diversity is to appoint a qualified person of color, of which there are many, as executive director at once. We find the silence of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus on this issue to be deafening.”
Per Jaslow’s LinkedIn, her relationship with Bustos goes back to 2012 when she served as Bustos’ campaign manager to her first run for Congress. [See update.]
Complicating matters is a blow-up last month after the conservative Washington Free Beacon published a series of homophobic and racist tweets that DCCC staffer Tayhlor Coleman made in 2009 and 2010, just days after Bustos tapped Coleman to lead an initiative doing outreach to people of color and young voters. Coleman has since apologized (and locked her Twitter account), but while multiple Democratic lawmakers told Politico they didn’t want Coleman fired, they did want her moved to different projects, a request which the DCCC reportedly has not obliged.
Bustos has responded to the outrage in an appropriately Michael Scott-like fashion. Per Politico, emphasis mine:
In response to the outcry, Bustos has agreed to participate in diversity and inclusion training for DCCC employees. An August training had previously been scheduled for just staff.
[...]
Democratic sources said an all-staff phone call with Bustos on Saturday didn’t go much better. The Illinois Democrat only “briefly” apologized for comments about her family’s racial background that had inflamed some lawmakers and DCCC employees. In response to complaints about the DCCC’s diversity, she has noted that her husband is of Mexican descent, that her children are half-Mexican and that her son is marrying an African-American woman.
Very cool, Cheri.
“Chairwoman Bustos is coming back because she understands how important it is for her to hear from staff directly and to reassure them that we have a strong commitment to diversity and inclusion at every level,” DCCC spokesman Jared Smith told Politico, adding that Bustos “plans to approve changes to the structure before she leaves town and wants to get staff input as we work to build a stronger DCCC and make sure our team, from senior leadership on down, reflects the full range of diversity that gives the Democratic Party its strength.”
Reminder: it’s only July 2019. Stay tuned to find out which pile of dog **** the DCCC chair manages to step in next.
Update, 2:11 p.m. ET: Politico reports that Jaslow announced that she was resigning, effective immediately, at an all-staff meeting on Monday. Following the story, Jaslow released a statement on Twitter:
SHARE THIS STORY
https://splinternews.com/the-house-democrats-campaign-operation-is-a-total-shamb-1836785955
Ramón Benítez
@ScottWFaya
·
22m
Fidel had the answer, now #Cuba, a poor island country under a 60 year embargo kicks our ass in healthcare. they have even come up with life saving AIDS & Cancer meds and because they are good Socialist they didnt need a "Profit Motive", just thier humanity.
I’m trying not to geek out on Twitter, so I’ll do it here.
Ro Khanna is following me.
🤪
@Lash,
I like what I know of him.
@oralloy,
The Israelis are harming the Palestinians.
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:Genealogical studies show that the Ashkenazim diverged from the Palestinians during the Bronze Age. That is a pretty good match to the history of Bronze Age Canaan diverging into separate Iron Age cultures.
Wrong. See my earlier replies.
The common DNA cluster that the Jews share with the Palestinians means that they share Bronze Age ancestry.
You're finally getting it somewhat right.
oralloy wrote:
InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:Do you have any evidence of the world asking Israel to do anything more than return to 1967 borders as part of a land-for-peace arrangement?
Trump has said that he'd be ok with a single state.
He was not asking Israel to do anything.
He's not asking for a two state solution, either.
Quote:InfraBlue wrote:Netanyahu is against two states.
Has he said this? At any rate, his views can hardly count as the world asking Israel to do something.
Yes, he has.
Netanahu, being the leader of Israel which is a part of the world, and Israel being one of the two sides of the Israel/Palestine conflict, counts as a part of the world that doesn't ask Israel for a two state solution.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:The world has diverse opinions about the matter.
Have these diverse opinions resulted in anyone asking Israel to do anything more than pursue land-for-peace?
Yes.
Letter from Marx to Lincoln
Address of the International Working Men's Association to Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States of America
Presented to U.S. Ambassador Charles Francis Adams
January 28, 1865 [A]
Written: by Marx between November 22 & 29, 1864
First Published: The Bee-Hive Newspaper, No. 169, November 7, 1865;
Transcription/Markup: Zodiac/Brian Baggins;
Online Version: Marx & Engels Internet Archive (marxists.org) 2000.
Sir:
We congratulate the American people upon your re-election by a large majority. If resistance to the Slave Power was the reserved watchword of your first election, the triumphant war cry of your re-election is Death to Slavery.
From the commencement of the titanic American strife the workingmen of Europe felt instinctively that the star-spangled banner carried the destiny of their class. The contest for the territories which opened the dire epopee, was it not to decide whether the virgin soil of immense tracts should be wedded to the labor of the emigrant or prostituted by the tramp of the slave driver?
When an oligarchy of 300,000 slaveholders dared to inscribe, for the first time in the annals of the world, "slavery" on the banner of Armed Revolt, when on the very spots where hardly a century ago the idea of one great Democratic Republic had first sprung up, whence the first Declaration of the Rights of Man was issued, and the first impulse given to the European revolution of the eighteenth century; when on those very spots counterrevolution, with systematic thoroughness, gloried in rescinding "the ideas entertained at the time of the formation of the old constitution", and maintained slavery to be "a beneficent institution", indeed, the old solution of the great problem of "the relation of capital to labor", and cynically proclaimed property in man "the cornerstone of the new edifice" — then the working classes of Europe understood at once, even before the fanatic partisanship of the upper classes for the Confederate gentry had given its dismal warning, that the slaveholders' rebellion was to sound the tocsin for a general holy crusade of property against labor, and that for the men of labor, with their hopes for the future, even their past conquests were at stake in that tremendous conflict on the other side of the Atlantic. Everywhere they bore therefore patiently the hardships imposed upon them by the cotton crisis, opposed enthusiastically the proslavery intervention of their betters — and, from most parts of Europe, contributed their quota of blood to the good cause.
While the workingmen, the true political powers of the North, allowed slavery to defile their own republic, while before the Negro, mastered and sold without his concurrence, they boasted it the highest prerogative of the white-skinned laborer to sell himself and choose his own master, they were unable to attain the true freedom of labor, or to support their European brethren in their struggle for emancipation; but this barrier to progress has been swept off by the red sea of civil war.
The workingmen of Europe feel sure that, as the American War of Independence initiated a new era of ascendancy for the middle class, so the American Antislavery War will do for the working classes. They consider it an earnest of the epoch to come that it fell to the lot of Abraham Lincoln, the single-minded son of the working class, to lead his country through the matchless struggle for the rescue of an enchained race and the reconstruction of a social world.
Signed on behalf of the International Workingmen's Association, the Central Council:
Longmaid, Worley, Whitlock, Fox, Blackmore, Hartwell, Pidgeon, Lucraft, Weston, Dell, Nieass, Shaw, Lake, Buckley, Osbourne, Howell, Carter, Wheeler, Stainsby, Morgan, Grossmith, Dick, Denoual, Jourdain, Morrissot, Leroux, Bordage, Bocquet, Talandier, Dupont, L.Wolff, Aldovrandi, Lama, Solustri, Nusperli, Eccarius, Wolff, Lessner, Pfander, Lochner, Kaub, Bolleter, Rybczinski, Hansen, Schantzenbach, Smales, Cornelius, Petersen, Otto, Bagnagatti, Setacci;
George Odger, President of the Council; P.V. Lubez, Corresponding Secretary for France; Karl Marx, Corresponding Secretary for Germany; G.P. Fontana, Corresponding Secretary for Italy; J.E. Holtorp, Corresponding Secretary for Poland; H.F. Jung, Corresponding Secretary for Switzerland; William R. Cremer, Honorary General Secretary.
18 Greek Street, Soho.
[A] From the minutes of the Central (General) Council of the International — November 19, 1864:
"Dr. Marx then brought up the report of the subcommittee, also a draft of the address which had been drawn up for presentation to the people of America congratulating them on their having re-elected Abraham Lincoln as President. The address is as follows and was unanimously agreed to."
The minutes of the meeting continue:
"A long discussion then took place as to the mode of presenting the address and the propriety of having a M.P. with the deputation; this was strongly opposed by many members, who said workingmen should rely on themselves and not seek for extraneous aid.... It was then proposed... and carried unanimously. The secretary correspond with the United States Minister asking to appoint a time for receiving the deputation, such deputation to consist of the members of the Central Council."
Ambassador Adams Replies
Legation of the United States
London, 28th January, 1865
Sir:
I am directed to inform you that the address of the Central Council of your Association, which was duly transmitted through this Legation to the President of the United [States], has been received by him.
So far as the sentiments expressed by it are personal, they are accepted by him with a sincere and anxious desire that he may be able to prove himself not unworthy of the confidence which has been recently extended to him by his fellow citizens and by so many of the friends of humanity and progress throughout the world.
The Government of the United States has a clear consciousness that its policy neither is nor could be reactionary, but at the same time it adheres to the course which it adopted at the beginning, of abstaining everywhere from propagandism and unlawful intervention. It strives to do equal and exact justice to all states and to all men and it relies upon the beneficial results of that effort for support at home and for respect and good will throughout the world.
Nations do not exist for themselves alone, but to promote the welfare and happiness of mankind by benevolent intercourse and example. It is in this relation that the United States regard their cause in the present conflict with slavery, maintaining insurgence as the cause of human nature, and they derive new encouragements to persevere from the testimony of the workingmen of Europe that the national attitude is favored with their enlightened approval and earnest sympathies.
I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,
Charles Francis Adams
@InfraBlue,
Damn infra. That's the most lies I've seen ollie called on since I've been on this site. Good work. I don't have the fortitude to read his crap as you do.
