Wednesday, 3 June 2015

Recently I've been reading Benjamin Isaac's book "The invention of racism in classical antiquity" in which he purports to detect signs of "proto-racism" in the cultures of ancient Greece and Rome, but not in the culture of ancient Israel which he deems not worthy of consideration "because the Jews never became part of mainstream Greek and Roman society". This is clearly part of the ongoing Jewish effort to denigrate and pathologise European civilisation. Hitherto they have been content with the line that the roots of antisemitism lay in Christianity. Now they're trying to push it even further back to the pre-Christian era in Europe.

Partly in response to this, I intend to apply a similar critical regard to Jewish sources. To that end, I've started forcing myself to read the Talmud. What bizarre, pitiful nonsense it is. It does give interesting insights into the origins of the Jewish mentality, however. When I find something worthy of note in it, I will post it here as part of what will be a continuing Talmudic Explorations series.

It is clear that Jews attribute a kind of racial guilt to Europeans for Adolf Hitler and the supposed centuries of antisemitic persecution they suffered at our hands, even if the latter is largely a figment of the hostile Jewish imagination and the former was largely a response to the Judaic assault upon European civilisation in the form of Bolshevism. Even those of us whose ancestors fought against Hitler are attributed a share of his guilt. You see this, for example, in the ravings of Pam Geller about "Europeans". It is clear, from the passage in the Talmud quoted below, that the idea of time-transcending genetically inherited guilt originates in Jewish religious texts.

In civil cases one may repay the money damage and he is atoned; but in criminal cases the blood of the person executed, and of his descendants to the end of all generations, clings to the originator of his execution. So do we find in the case of Cain, who slew his brother. It reads [Gen. iv. 10]: "The voice of the 'bloods' of thy brother are crying unto me from the ground." It does not read "blood," but "bloods," which means his blood and the blood of his descendants. [According to others it reads "bloods" in the plural, because his blood was scattered all over the trees and stones.] Therefore the man was created singly, to teach that he who destroys one soul of a human being, the Scripture considers him as if he should destroy a whole world, and him who saves one soul of Israel, the Scripture considers him as if he should save a whole world.


 Note the final sentence too.
Therefore the man was created singly, to teach that he who destroys one soul of a human being, the Scripture considers him as if he should destroy a whole world, and him who saves one soul of Israel, the Scripture considers him as if he should save a whole world. 

Sound familiar?
If any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people.

Immediately above is a passage from the Koran that Muslims and their apologists love to quote. It illustrates two things: one, the Koran is a joke, basically a hodge-podge of previously existing texts and ideas, not some original inspired work; two, the closeness between Jews and Muslims.

Also note the explicit rejection of the Golden Rule (Do as you would be done by) in the Talmudic text. It is not any life that matters, but a "soul of Israel", in other words a Jew. All human beings are not equal.  I suspect that the word translated above as "people" in the quote from the Koranic text imposes a similar in-group limitation, i.e. Muslims only rather than the human race as a whole, and that this has been artfully obscured in a deliberately distorted translation.


Here is another translation of the Koran that makes it even more clear that this passage has been lifted from the Talmud:

Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. 

It's amazing that even Muslims have the chutzpah to quote a verse referring the "Children of Israel" in defence of their claim that Islam is a religion of peace.


  1. In some editions of the Talmud it is translated as "him who saves one soul of an Israelite"; this is because in Talmudic Judaism the non-Jew is not considered fully human, either not possessing the fullness of the Jewish persona or, rather significantly, because only the Jew has this tie to his 'nation' (Israel). This later view is significant when one considers the Jewish animosity towards European nationalism, patriotism and ethnic loyalties. So, returning to that Talmudic quote, since the Jews are those who are fully human, then killing one is as if one is killing 'all' humanity (the Jews). Also, one of the ways in which Jews attempt to judaicse Western peoples is by this emphasis upon 'guilt' as something constant and enduring forever; there is no notion of repentance and eventual salvation. Judaism is a social ethic for Jews, it is not a theology in the way Christianity is, nor does it concern itself with the concept of repentance of sins and thus a rebirth of the individual. It is very much a group ideology.

    Also, Islam derives from Judaism of both Torah and Talmud (by Mohamed's time, the Talmud and thus rabbinical Judaism, was the dominant feature of the ideology). As Robert Spencer mentioned (in one of his few allusions to it), when Mohamed challenges Jews as to what the correct punishment is, in Judaism, for adultery, and the Jews say it is to name and whip the adulterers (by hiding with their hands the passage in the Torah which calls for stoning them), one of Mohamed's followers (a former Rabbi) steps forward to read the correct Torah passage, whereupon Mohamed says, "I am the first to revive the order of God and His Book and to practice it" and gives the order to stone the adulterers. (This is in Hadith al-Bukari,Volume 4, Book 61, No 3635 and in Ibn Ishaq's biography of Mohamed). The earliest Hadiths were termed of the Israelites.

  2. Islam clearly rejects the Golden Rule in Qur’an 48:29, ‘Mohammed is Allah’s apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers [non-Muslims] but merciful to one another.’

    I suspect that the word translated above as ‘people’ in the quote from the Koranic text imposes a similar in-group limitation

    In the Arabic, the word is nafs, meaning ‘soul’; the verse in question, 5:32, is parsed here. As the Qur’an describes non-Muslims as ‘the vilest of all creatures’ (98:1-6), verse 5:32 could only encompass non-Muslims if it were possible for ‘the vilest of all creatures’, the most disgusting things in Creation, to have souls. To my mind, there’s no doubt that non-Muslims are excluded from the grand-sounding sentiments of verse 5:32.

  3. That's a really interesting site, giving a word-by-word breakdown of the Koran. It makes it even more clear that the text has been lifted from the Talmud since the Arabic text says "From the time that we ordained upon the Children of Israel...".

    1. Islam lifts so much from Judaism. In Separation and Its Discontents (page 270), Kevin MacDonald quotes the Jewish historian SD Goitein: ‘Modern Western civilization, like the ancient civilization of the Greeks, is essentially at variance with the religious culture of the Jewish people. Islam, however, is from the very flesh and bone of Judaism.’ Creepy.

    2. No, not "creepy". Factual and honest. Let us leave all the emotional terms to others; our strength, as heirs to the Western tradition of philosophic discourse, is that of dispassionate reasoning, and upon that strength, the true will eventually emerge and win, for us and for our posterity.

  4. Judaism=Jews pretending to be part of European culture, yet in this false and fake 'religion' they feigned a controversy over the nature and belief in certain questions (eg the significance of Jesus) in order to maintain their distinctness and (secret) hostility toward European civilization. Judaism and Jewish infiltration of Europe go hand in hand, the umbrella of Judaism offered a cover for secret organization and plots while in the the cultural sphere true religion was being attacked by the 'Judeo-Christian' lobby in Europe which falsified the origin of our religion and history by basing it on this detestable 'Judeo-Christian' heresy. The notion that our history and culture owes anything to the Jewish people would have horrified the true old Roman or Greek who fought long and ferocious wars against these people with their hordes of hired mercenaries from among the savage nations. Today the Jews are ready to spring their trap and quite frankly go in for the kill against the sleeping European peoples, again using numberless hordes of vicious mercenaries going under the banner of 'ISIS' and the like, while our pathetic and criminal politicians have through decades flooded our towns and cities with the very vermin who will rise up and assist these efforts to overthrow and destroy Europe, a prime example being the influx of hundreds of thousands of fighting men coming ashore in Italy as 'refugees'.