Posted on 10/01/2012 1:15:14 PM PDT by Eleutheria5
“Call me Ishmael”, is the opening sentence that opens the novel “Moby Dick” authored by Herman Melville. Ishmael, who is telling the story of Moby Dick, recounts that he is sailing to sea out of a sense of alienation and cultural inadequacy.
.....
Ever since the days of Napoleon's landing upon the shores of Egypt at the very end of the 18th Century and bringing with him the modern era to the Middle East, Islam has been unable to free itself from the shackles of inferiority and self-destructive primal rage that typifies the hatred of modern day Islamic radicalism against Western civilization.
In recent years, despite Israel being at the foci of much of what has been termed the "war of civilizations" between the Western world and Islam, Europe is undergoing a rapid demographic transition that will lead to a large Muslim population harboring an unchanging, hostile attitude toward their national communities.
Nicolai Sennels, a Danish psychologist who has had extensive experience with treating Muslim youths has identified four main differences that are important in order to understand the behavior of Muslims and how they interact with Western influences. Without dismissing the intrinsic value of multiculturalism or the need to identify with ones cultural roots Sennels has identified four main differences that are important in order to understand the behavior of Muslims. They concern anger, self-confidence, the so-called "locus of control" and identity.
Westerners are brought up to think of anger as a sign of weakness, powerlessness and lack of self-control.
In Muslim culture, anger is seen as a sign of strength. ....
.....
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
and made the Castilian/Catalonian alliance of Ferdinand and Izabella a Spain-wide phenomenon,
Oops. Meant Castilian/Aragonian.
Well,Napoleon wanted to gain control of Suez and cut the British off from India. Oil did not begin to come into the picture until after 1912, and that in a limited way. American was the world’s great oil producer until after WWII. In thr 19th Century the Euopean powers,, simply overwhelmed the old Turkish empire as they did the antique power of China.
Well,Napoleon wanted to gain control of Suez and cut the British off from India. Oil did not begin to come into the picture until after 1912, and that in a limited way. American was the world’s great oil producer until after WWII. In thr 19th Century the Euopean powers,, simply overwhelmed the old Turkish empire as they did the antique power of China.
“Well,Napoleon wanted to gain control of Suez and cut the British off from India. “
??But the Suez Canal wasn’t dug yet, and the Brits could still get to India by sailing around the Cape.??
If you think Jewish anti-Christian bigotry is bad, you should hear what they say about Jews!
could be about archetypes — I specifically wanted to point out the ethnic descents. Ethnically the Syrians, Jordanians, Lebanese are ethnic cousins of Jewish people -— and Jewish people from Yemen and north Africa have more semitic inheritance than Sephardic or Ashkenazi jews — there was some mixing of european blood with european jews.
it wasn’t about the canal. Suez has been for millenia (right since old Dynasty times in Pharaonic times) used to carry goods from Europe to Asia — by ship to Suez, then overland to the red sea, then by ship again
Spices and cotton were the big items from india, as indeed they have been since the time of Cyrus in 500 BC
The European powers from the 1700s overwhelmed the Turks as the Turks were too closed, too millet-organized, not able to run efficiently and moving back further and further
The Turks realized this and in the 1800s led a revolution to kick out the Janissaries. They were modernizing in 1914, thanks to ships from the Brits, which is why the Russians wanted to quickly launch WWI, knock out Austria-Hungary and then take over constantinople
That’s sort of like what we do with Ashdod and Eilat.
“More Semitic inheritance” is a claim not significantly borne out. DNA indicates less than one-half of one percent intermarriage between Europeans and Jews in Europe over 50 generations! I suppose that’s more than .005% of European intermarriage with Jews not living in Europe, but really?
Even before the canal, moving goods via Suez was more efficEsoient than around cape horn.Especially since the English had fleets in the Indina Ocean and in the med.The French were now just renewing their wolrd war with the English. Napoleon had the broader objective of establishing a new capital by displscing the sultan as suzerain in the Near East. The Russians of course had the same goal.
The British were terribly wounded financially and militarily by the outcome of the Great Theirs “blunders” were the result of their weaknened position. Ghandi et al, depened on that weakness.
Yes to an extent, but also they failed to give India dominion status at the same time as Canada and Australia got it.
You may be correct — I have no statistics at all on this, just based on the looks — most Yemeni Jews look like Arabs or Kuwaitis. Many American or European Jews even have blonde hair. That’s why I would guess that they’d have more European blood — but of course, this is not a scientific look, so I may be wrong
I didn’t know that, thank you
Honestly, I’ve been many times to Hebron. There are among Arabs more than a few blonde-haired kids that I’ve seen. A big glass factory there is owned by a family that 200 years ago came from Germany, opened up shop, and converted to Islam. Islam is a religion that aggressively proselytizes, and has for centuries. The notion that all “Arabs” are of pure Middle-Eastern stock is nonsense.
Jews have accepted converts when they come to us, once we know they are sincere, but we do not go looking for them, much less coercing their conversion. An entire nation, the Khazars, converted to Judaism in the Middle Ages, and that engendered the myth that the Jews of Europe are all descended from the Khazars, which became very popular after Arthur Koestler’s The 13th Tribe was published. But seriously, the fact that Khazars joined the Jewish community does not mean that the Jewish community became subsumed within the Khazars. Their empire faded, many backslided to heathenism, but some stayed and married within the larger Jewish community. Koestler is a great novelist, but not a historian or geneologist.
I've defined Arabs above as being purely "Nejd Arabs", not Syriacs or Egyptians or Sudanese
Khazars were Turkics, not Indo-European so I don't see a heavy indose of "blood" in that sense
however, Yemeni Jews to my eyes (and note I repeat, this is not a scientic observation, just an observation of mine which could be wrong) look more Semitic
World War One made New York rather than London the financial capital of the world. During the next twenty years, the Britain failed to recover the position they held in 1914. Fighting Germany from 1939-41 broke them. Without Lendlease, they would have had to come to terms with Hitler. Canada and Australia were truly colonies of Great Britain, with smallish, largely British populations. India was something altogether different. Who would have ruled this “dominion”? We know what happened after independence.
The Indians would have ruled this dominion. in 1914 the only party in town was the Indian National Congress. The Muslim League had next to no members and the radicalisation of Moslems hadn’t begun
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.