JEWS- DO THEY EXIST? ________________________ Note bene: This essay is not a diatribe against 'Jews'. It is an honest appraisal of what I consider an important aspect of our lives, given that 'Jews' have built up such a self-important/'chosen' image that excludes everybody else on the planet who is not 'Jewish'. There is, in my view,  a 'victim mentality' that I personally find offensive. It would be the same for any person/group that wanted to impose their will upon my person. [All statements may and should be verified or corrected by your own investigations, hence a dearth of  references. This is an essay, not a thesis.] 'It is important not to stereotype anyone or anything according to their proclivities but sometimes it is very difficult not to.' Peter K Sharpen 'Of any given religion or persuasion, not all are good.' Peter K. Sharpen 'There is no such thing as 'Jew' as a race or a people. There is no such thing as a 'Christian' as a race or a people. There is not such thing as a 'Muslim' as a race or a people.' Peter K. Sharpen Confusions of race and religious leanings. A 'race' or a 'people' are words for describing various groups according to their traits or characteristics. One might consider other animals who are defined as a species because of their characteristics. For example, cats, dogs, dolphins and so forth. These are terms of convenience. Religions are belief systems based on the non-understanding of the universe in which people live by the anthropomorphism of events by the creation of a 'god' or 'gods'. Other animals do not (so far as we know) have religious propensities, thus they are not confused as Man seems to be. Religion is a means of explaining the apparently unexplainable in a form that (apparently) needs to make some sense from this. From humble beginnings religions have developed to a high degree (assuming one believes it is 'high') but still retain the myths and legends from which they were born in ignorance (as lack of data). Originally this was achieved by word of mouth until a form of written language developed. Religions devolved from astrology and cataclysmic electrical events at a particular time in the past. These are less rarely seen today. We seem also confused by the notions of people (as individuals) and  a people , which is a different thing altogether. A people is the same as a race of people. A religion  is not a race or a people. Any individual or race may take any religion, including a multiplicity of religions or conversely, no religion. A religion may bind a group of like believers but does not make them a race or a people, it merely may become one of the traits. Therefore: Christians are not a race of people. Muslims are not a race of people. Hebrews are not a race of people, and so forth. I do not believe that any race or a people have an inherent 'right' to any territory. I do believe  that people should be able to travel where they will, providing they do not interfere with those who have already set up camp. Original peoples started out as groups, clans, whatever. They were nomadic hunters and gatherers. There will always be nomads and those who wish to stay in one place and make it their home. There is no 'right'; this is just the way it should be. To claim otherwise, is the mark of a bandit. Group Identification and confusion Religious groups tend to take on some form of identification, usually in the form of outward appearance, such as a dress code and even an undress code. This is especially so with the 'leaders' of religious groups. This also establishes the 'pecking order' of the group. I believe this also creates part of the confusion between a race or a people and a religion. People begin to identify the outward appearance of the group as separate entity and 'lump them altogether' so to speak with a particular race, hence stereotyping. I believe that some groups deliberately set this (dressing up) to confuse/control others. The 'language' confusion As I will probably repeat, the word 'Semite/Semitic' refers to a language, not a group of people. The term was invented to encompass languages of the 'old world'. Thus, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Yiddish and so forth are Semitic languages. The use of the capital 'S' refers to a noun, a name of something. In this case, a language, not a people. People speak languages and dialects of those languages. Because people move about, as is their wont, these languages change to suit the circumstances of their existence. If I move from England to France, I need to learn (some, at least!) of the language and certainly would learn a dialect of the region I am living in. This is proper and normal. It's a question of survival, nothing else. No peoples moving about are exempt or they don't survive. No problem with that. It is hard to identify exactly what language those who call themselves 'Jews' actually used. The original language of those who call themselves 'Jews' was Aramaic. This presumably developed into Hebrew (but who knows) and then a certain type of person used Yiddish, which was a Germanic language because these people were living in Germanic countries! Hebrew has become the 'language' of later 'Jews' for the sake of 'Israel'. It is not their original language unless they prove (with evidence from philologists not affiliated to anyone) otherwise. The 'Jewish' Question Why a 'Jewish' question? 'Jewish' is an identity. This is the same as me calling myself 'Peter Kenneth Sharpen'. It is my identity. However, I am referring to myself only, not a 'race' or a 'people' or even a religion. These terms have no relevance whatsoever. We are all 'Heinz 57'. For younger readers. that was the slogan for Heinz products since I was born. It meant a great number of, you guessed it (!) varieties of their products. The reason is that people who call themselves 'Jews' (or 'Jewish') is because they are confusing their religion and their origins and this is creating a serious problem in the world as we know it today. It is not a 'good' problem and therein lies the 'problem' and the question. When a group of people (whoever they are) claim 'special' rights I am cynical and want to ask questions. The answers (when I come upon them) do not often make sense to a sensitive and logical mind. The word 'Jew' was not in the historic literature until the 18th Century. The word was never meant to indicate a race or a people. The word 'Jew' never appeared before it's use by Sherridan in 'The Rivals' (18th Century).     The letter 'J' was never used in ancient writing by anyone because it did not exist in         any language. The letter was 'I', pronounced as ya, as in the German sound for 'j'. The         invention of the printing press and translation account for the change, so far as I am         aware. For convenience only, we will continue to use the word 'Jew'. A tribe is not a race, it is a group of people. What are called today's 'Jews', derive from a tribe of nomads. They originally came from East Asia (Georgia). This is an historical fact and may be verified. Nomads are wanderers, they have no fixed abode. Nomads may or may not integrate into an established group who have a fixed abode. This tribe (of pre-'jews') did not originate in what is today called Palestine but in Georgia, as I said. Israel is a 1948 invention. The religion that this tribe converted to was Judaism. Any form of worship that deviates from this is another religion. Anyone can become a 'Jew' or a 'Christian' and so forth. So, 'Jews' are not a race or a people. They believe in a religion called Judaism. They are therefore Judaists. Anyone who converts to Judaism must therefore be a Judaist, as anyone who converts (whether they want to on not) to Christianity becomes a 'Christian' and so forth. Over the centuries, these people have constructed Judaism for their own purposes, so we now have an 'orthodox' Judaism, a Talmudic Judaism and a Zionist Judaism (the political Judaism). Possibly there are others. It seems that all Jews are desperate for an identity. Groups All groups, if they want to remain groups have a common identity. This may be transient or perpetual. Groups types are variously called by different names: Tribes, Gangs, Conclaves, Crowds, Throngs, Clans, Clusters, Cabals, brotherhoods, Flocks, Herds, Armies, Forces, Schools, Political parties...and so on... These are called collective nouns. There are literally tens of them, describing all animals as groups of one kind or another. Convenient for discussion but not tangible. Groups work in at least two ways:     There are 'top down' views: the masses, the Goyim, the 'unwashed' and so on.     There are the 'bottom up' views: the elite, the proletariat, the leaders, the 'Them' and         so on. These groups all have similarities and peculiarities relevant to why they were formed in the first place, even to the extent of the human race as a whole. Some groups joined together to become farmers or bandits. Some animals (Man included, of course) do not wish to be part of a group even by proxy. On the basis of historical evidence one must make up one's own mind as to the efficacy of a particular group and  your relationship with them, should you so wish. What one believes about anything should be one's own. Maybe shared but not forced upon anyone by any means. When we relinquish those beliefs to others, that is the end of it if you value your beliefs. No person or group of persons, real or imagined, living or dead, has any 'right' over your own personal being or beliefs. We do not 'belong' to anyone, at all, ever. You are the only person inside your head, no matter what. Your choice, your responsibility. So be it. Religions in general Religions in general are based on astrological myths (they still are). What other data did Man have to go on? He observed the heavens, the seasons, his ability to survive the earth's conditions and apparent overall hostility to his existence. Myths, legends and fables are perhaps a normal consequence of human behaviour. Religions developed from myths, legends and fables. Their development became a way of life and a way of organising life. Now, organisation requires a particular mind-set (as they say). Not all human animals have this ability, any more than all humans have the ability to construct a boat, to go fishing, or whatever. Each person may in some way depend on others for their survival and that is how it must be if we are all different. There are at least two types of organisers:     Those that organise for positive ends, they are the co-ordinators.     Those that organise for negative ends, they are the controllers, the propagandists. Co-ordinators are rarely a problem. They themselves will be monitored by those whom they co-ordinate. Controllers are the only problem in any society, no mater how small or large. These people have no respect for themselves or others. They are a different species. They might rightly be called humanoids. But they are clever enough to control because that is what they do.  There is not an inevitability to all this because Man should have developed his own survival skills to be able to counter the negative effects of controllers, as they often do, but certainly not enough. This is one of the downfalls of specialisation. Specialisation is a double-edged sword. It can lead to higher productivity (for example) but it also leads to a disentanglement with the rest of the society of which it is part and may become so esoteric that others cannot understand. In the latter case, it is used to manipulate others by controllers with personal vested interests. It is this situation that needs to be rectified if we are to survive as a Human race. We seem to have lost our footing for survival. In the present age there really is no excuse not to have data made available or to be able to get it. Our only answer to our present predicament, control of the many by a few (bandits), can only be realised by working locally. No global system would ever work for long unless some psychopath presses a red button. Jews as parasites Much as I would like to say otherwise, there are certain human animals that act as parasites. A parasite is a creature that feeds from others. Let's face it, bandits and pirates need to steal. That is their game. That's what they do. We lend our lawn-mower to a neighbour for nothing because that is what we do. However, as my father would have said: It's always worth a packet of fags (cigarettes). Find a bandit that (a deliberate 'that', they are not a 'who') will say the same thing. My father was a gentle-man. He was a local man, helping where he could. I am the same, thank goodness. But who will hear? Who will notice? Who will give way to that lady crossing the road? Conclusion I submit that 'Jews' do not exist. Certainly not as a race or a people. There are certain people who claim Judaism as their religion (good for them but don't inflict it upon the rest of us!). Judaism is a religion not a 'race' or a 'people'. Those who call themselves 'Jews' but are really Judaists do not have a 'homeland'. They infiltrated other cultures and live among them. They always stick together, whatever their Judaistic preferences. The propensities of those who claim to be 'Jewish' (that is, follow their religion) are those of bandits, schysters, raggamuffins, liars, pirates and anyone who claims 'right' (i.e. control) over others not of their 'faith'. They are, in a word parasites. That is not to say 'Jews' are all bad but don't count on it when push comes to shove. © 2008 Peter K. Sharpen The author has never been affiliated with any group whatsoever. The author has never purchased a newspaper except for masking his car for a re-spray. The author has never relied on a television for any 'news'. The author does not own a television set. The author has never had a need to be on medication. The author has never needed 'recreational' drugs. The author has worked hard all his life, mainly for the benefit of others but also owns everything he has. The author is sane and happy but sickened by what he sees.

Return to CONTENTS page