Permanent Link
A news article mentioned that “some Jews are anti-Zionist.” Yes, a few are. But why are they anti-Zionist? Are they concerned about Palestinian suffering? Or do they believe that Israel makes all of the Jews in the world look bad?
Send letters, packages, review copies and donations to:
(c) 2010
Send letters, packages, review copies and donations to:
A. Linder, POB 101, Kirksville MO 63501
The views of the writers and readers of VanguardNewsNetwork.com are the sole responsibility of the author or authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the owner, editor, webmaster, transmitter, or any of the other writers or respondents whose work appears at Vanguard News Network. VNN does not advocate any unlawful or criminal acts, nor should any statement made by anyone at VNN be taken as incitement, threat, or conspiracy to commit any unlawful or criminal acts. The views expressed at VNN do constitute free speech as protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
19 January, 2009 at 2:19 pm
Definitions are in order:
Zionist: Jew who believes that all of Mankind should be subjugated and ruled by the Jews from Jerusalem.
Anti-Zionist: Jew who believes that all of Mankind should be subjugated and ruled by the Jews from New York City.
19 January, 2009 at 2:40 pm
So much for the (Jew-generated) myth that Jews are commited to human rights and freedom for oppressed people everywhere.
19 January, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Hey Patrick, either you are mentally ill or you must have thought you were on little green footballs. Nobody here gives a shit about the “safety of the Jews” other than that we want them safely out of our country and every other White country. Go support the slaughter of women and children on some other site, asshole!
19 January, 2009 at 7:25 pm
Good job on the definitions, Zipzap.
19 January, 2009 at 8:05 pm
Anti-Zionist: Jew who believes that all of Mankind should be subjugated and ruled by the Jews from New York City.
Good definition, McGee. Thanks.
Here’s an alternate one: “A rather nervous Jew who believes that Israel is too risky a gamble (right now) and thus is hedging his bets.”
PS. I think GetLost completely misunderstood Patrick’s message.
Patrick said “anyone”, referring to THEM, not himself. And I agree with him that “Anti-Zionist Jews are among the Leftist equivocators who are responsible for wrecking the West. ” They are often more extravagantly Left than ordinary Jews — real hard-core commie radicals, the worst.
19 January, 2009 at 8:16 pm
Unless Patrick posted the wrong link under his name, his blog clearly indicates that he is a pro-Israel Jew. Here’s a sample:
“Just as it is illegal for Jews to live in Jordan, it should be illegal for Arabs to live in Israel.
May Israel relieve herself of the Arab excrement that is within her borders, and within her sights, until she is clean of it.
Amen”
So, I repeat, get lost Zionist troll.
19 January, 2009 at 8:30 pm
“Who said anything about the readers of this blog caring about the safety of the Jews?”
A valid question. As for myself, I have very mixed feelings on that. If anything “happened” to Israel and it ceased to exist, where do you think all those Jews would go? Right here, that’s where!
We would open our doors, and our hearts, and our treasury to them. Especially the latter, and we would never hear the end of their pathetic woes, for at least the next century. The media would guarantee it. Think of the movies, novels, and TV documentaries it would generate! And all the teary-eyed Sunday sermons — and collections. And museums. And school indoctrinations courses. Holocaust Two! No, one is enough.
Sorry, we have too many of them here already. We can’t even cope with those. And Israeli Sabra Jews are the most abrasive, brazen, and pushy kind. Uh, uh! Don’t want ‘em.
While I feel sorry for the Palestinians and their plight, I am more concerned for our own wellbeing. Dumping several million angry, defeated Jews on us is not what we need. It would be a disaster (for us). And of course, they would blame it all on the West (for our lack of support). It would be our fault, naturally. It would be a second Holocaust that they would demand compensation for. They would never stop complaining, and we would never stop paying. What is the answer?
19 January, 2009 at 8:39 pm
At least Patrick didn’t deny that he’s a pro-Israel Jew. But just like a jew, he parses over the word Zionist. So get lost pro-Israel Jew.
gw, our treasury has already been opened to the Israeli parasite for 60 years. Technically, our treasury has been open to the jews since 1913 with the Federal Reserve Act.
I say a well-placed nuke on Tel Aviv and a pox on all their houses. F*ck ‘em. Every Jew Hamas or Hezbollah takes out is a victory for us.
19 January, 2009 at 8:39 pm
“May Israel relieve herself of the Arab excrement that is within her borders, and within her sights, until she is clean of it.”
That is an appalling quote, written by an obvious fanatic , and if Patrick truly wrote it, I retract my support.
19 January, 2009 at 8:58 pm
From pat-trick’s blogroll:
http://catholicfriendsofisrael.blogspot.com/
19 January, 2009 at 9:55 pm
Patrick,
Yes, Leftists are disintegrating the West at a horrendous rate, there is no question about that. But there is also no question that these Leftists are aided, abetted and enabled by Jews. And that is how it was from the very beginning of Leftist movements. There is a constancy to the Jewish meddling in Western Nations and culture.
I attack both the (Gentile) Leftist and the Jew, for I know they are both to blame.
Next thing is that the Jews have absolutely no right to Israel, so why should we care about the safety of Jewish Israel? It’s a fraudulent entity.
My own conclusion is if you want to be a credible anti-Zionist you better be willing to relinquish your claim as a “Jew”. Cast it off. Case in point Nathanael Kapner of RealJewNews.com.
19 January, 2009 at 10:00 pm
“Dumping several million angry, defeated Jews on us is not what we need.”
True but the existence of the State of Israel in Palestine is testament to the power of World Jewry. It is something which can be leveraged at any time by the Jew.
As such, even though one might say you’ve an extra several million Jewish immigrants to worry about, the total disbandment of the Jewish State would be preferable.
19 January, 2009 at 10:29 pm
Some years ago, I had a friend and co-worker who was very interested in religion. He had converted to Catholicism (was raised Lutheran). He was so deeply into the study of religion and biblical history, that he went to live for a time in Israel, where he actually lived on a kibbutz. The whole thing proved a bad experience for him. He found the Israelis to be frosty, rude, even hostile. On the other hand, he said he found the Arabs to be very friendly.
Of course, this was years ago, before the USA came to be seen as collaborating with their oppressor. (I wonder how they would see us now.) And too, he was not given the fawning VIP treatment that our politicians and celebrities get when they go over there on the standard all-expense-paid tour (sponsored by the ADL or AJC). He was just there as an ordinary person on his own money, with limited means. He came away with a bad taste in the mouth. I still remember him saying that, “The only good thing in Israel is the Arab population.” Those were his very words.
20 January, 2009 at 1:03 am
Okay well not only does Jewish Israel not have a right to exist, it [i]should[/i] not exist.
Jews have no right to Israel because well, they’re Jews… And they will use their state to the detriment of the rest of humanity. Which is exactly what is happening today. In addition to that their Biblical claims are invalid.
If might makes right, then Western nations should stand up and use their collective force to disassemble the Jewish State of Israel – as something which is in their interest and that of humanity.
Libertarianism is a dubious philosophy from a right-wing, conservative point of view. Consider how far away libertarianism is from Nazism, which was based on a authoritarian dictatorship – but was extremely successful in building up a White culture.
Personally I’d be very wary of calling myself a libertarian as someone who has a lot of the same objectives as you do.
After all, what is a leftist but a moral libertarian? A racial libertarian? But that’s possibly another topic for another day.
Regarding your Jewish lineage, yes, nothing can be done about it. I am no one to tell you what to think but my policy would be to not make it a defining part of who I am. Which is the approach credible anti-JWO Jews such as Fisher and Kapner have taken. If it was me I’d say it’s a historical fact but means nothing to me.
You’ve some very worthwhile commentary on the decline of Western Civilisation on your blog. But your support of Zionism and Jewish Israel is a point of ideological conflict.
20 January, 2009 at 1:16 am
So what am I saying here; erasure of Jewish racial consciousness? Yup.
20 January, 2009 at 3:17 am
When anyone says he “worships god”, that almost always means he worships the Jewish God of the Bible. But they seldom like to admit that. They will say “Oh, King David was an Israelite, not a Jew. That word didn’t exist till Roman times,” or, more improbably, “Jesus came for the Lost Ten Tribes of the House of Israel, who are the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic-Germanic-Scandinavian and kindred peoples.” Such people should be forcibly re-settled on the Moon.
20 January, 2009 at 3:33 am
“I hate what’s happened to this country, and I suggest that we take up arms, and fly the Confederate flag. No more stars and stripes. From now on: stars and bars.”
I agree. Secession is the only reasonable option at this stage.
20 January, 2009 at 1:03 pm
The Maritimes and New England should unite and form a single new country. The Confederacy ought to secede again, too. Oregon, Washington State, Idaho and British Columbia should form a Pacific Northwest Aryan Union and Manitoba, Saskatchewan and the Great Plains States could all be one, agriculturally independent country. Alaska goes back to the Russians or the Eskimoes and the jungle natives can have Hawaii back. The upper Midwest and Ontario could form a powerful new industrial country and the Frogs can have Quebec. California, the desert Southwest and Baja California should all unite under one Hakenkreuz flag with sunbeams coming out of it.
All these new countries would have enough resources to make it on their own, as long as no non-Whites were permitted to live in any of them. Just think, no more tyrannical, centralized bureacracy calling the shots from faraway Washington, DC or Ottawa.
20 January, 2009 at 2:11 pm
All this idealising about “A Republic, if you can keep it”, “Give me liberty or give me death”. What hat a load of BS.
The Founding Fathers were a bunch of Freemasons with a bunch of Jews pulling the strings behind the scenes. Get. Over. It.
And these pointless discussions about whether the Founding Fathers wanted a Republic or a Democracy, and which do we have today. Get this, okay. This is the end point of Republican Constitutionalism. Dispense with this nonsense.
My disgust at looking at an inept Barack Obama being inaugurated today was doubled by the fact that I’m supposed to look at this product of Freemasonry and see it as legitimate. I’m supposed to get emotionally involved in their System and see these events – whether the President is good or not – as “historic”.
Enough, enough I say.
20 January, 2009 at 2:39 pm
“The Founding Fathers were a bunch of Freemasons with a bunch of Jews pulling the strings behind the scenes. Get. Over. It.”
Bullshit. My ancestors founded this fukkking country and the Yiddos had nothing to do with it. Nothing. Zero. Zip. Zilch.
The Founders were all Whites of quality. They were racially aware, judicious and intellectual. There was no influence of Kikenskum anywhere. The main tension stemmed from the northern merchants vs. the southern farmers. That set the stage for the first event that let the Yiddos into power: the Civil War.
20 January, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Freemasonry exists to serve Jewish interests. As JewTracer said: Get.Over.It.
20 January, 2009 at 3:08 pm
Get Lost Says: “Freemasonry exists to serve Jewish interests. As JewTracer said: Get.Over.It.”
That’s funny, I’ve been planning on addressing that topic (Freemasonry), since 1) there were lots of Jews in it; 2) it played an important role in both the French Revolution and in spreading egalitarianism. But, I have been unable to find many “big” Jewish names in it from that era (i.e., mid-to-late 1700s, in France). Stephen Etienne Morin was apparently a mulatto, not a Jew. Anyone with good sources of Jewish names re: that topic, please submit them.
20 January, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Why did Jefferson issue his warning about central banks?
Why did Jackson break up the Bank of the United States?
20 January, 2009 at 4:04 pm
The best place to start understanding the origin and role of Freemasonry that I have found is here (see part II):
http://www.catholicvoice.co.uk/pinay/
20 January, 2009 at 4:14 pm
The Founding Fathers were in debt up to their eyeballs to Jew creditors, especially Jefferson, whose Monticello estate was seized by Jews after his death. When will all this deification of heavily flawed historical figures ever stop???
20 January, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Why did he issue the warning?
20 January, 2009 at 4:50 pm
The involvement of Freemasonary in the founding of this country is the main reason why we have to start our future Aryan Republic on a totally different basis. Look at the “Star of David” above the eagle on the reverse side of the dollar bill. Amerikwa was a masonic entity from the beginning. If the Founding Fathers had really understood the reality of the jewish menace they never would have allowed a single kike to become a citizen. Unfortunately, they were heavily influenced by the egalitarian absurdities of the times, that resulted in the insanity of the French Revolution.
20 January, 2009 at 9:13 pm
“The Founding Fathers were in debt up to their eyeballs to Jew creditors, especially Jefferson, whose Monticello estate was seized by Jews after his death. When will all this deification of heavily flawed historical figures ever stop???”
There was a little event called the Revolutionary War around their time. That might explain the indebtedness. In any case, I get a bit steamed when people suggest that my Mayflower ancestors were a bunch of shabbos goyim. I know that they were not.
20 January, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Jefferson’s home Monticello was bought by a jew long after Jefferson’s death.
To the founders jews might as well have been space aliens. Even my own grandfather—I doubt that he ever even saw a jew until he was an adult.
20 January, 2009 at 9:36 pm
I once met a lovely young woman in college named Sarah Wilmot, who was a direct descendent of the Wilmots who came over on the Mayflower. But I’ll wager there were no Kowalczyks on that boat.
George Washington made a famous visit to the Turo Synagogue in Newport, RI, Amercia’s first temple of Satan, so he was obviously quite well acquainted with Jews.
21 January, 2009 at 2:20 am
“But I’ll wager there were no Kowalczyks on that boat.”
But I doubt there were any Goldbergs on that boat either.
People can have a lot of ancestors — especially when you go back several centuries. But still no Goldbergs.
I’ll go with Krystian and Dutch on this. Their aurgment sounds more reasonable. I know that Jefferson had a strong distaste for grasping, avacicious “Amsterdam bankers” — though I’m not sure if he fully realized who they were. (At least, none of the books I’ve read made that clear. But that’s not surprising.)
As for that “famous” Washington visit… well, who has MADE it famous? Could it be the same self-promoters who have a strong vested interest in doing so? The same people who could turn a calling card into a state visit?
JewTracer makes vague alegations about Freemasons, without further explanation, as if we know what he means. Unfortunately, I don’t know much about them, so I can’t comment. And I don’t get the point. His insinuations leave me in the dark. Would like to see that gestating work from Socrates telling us more.
As for “Morin”, it could be equally Spanish or French. (And many of those islands were changing ownership constantly.) As for being Jewish, I simply don’t know. I see no reason to think so. Not likely. Never saw it before; it must be rare. Could be Marrano, though.
21 January, 2009 at 2:35 am
But I’ll add here that what I HAVE read about freemasons, in the past, strikes me as largely paranoid suspicion — the sort of thing from people who have their homes lined with tinfoil because the Gestapo is beaming rays at them to read their minds.
Yes, I HAVE known such people! … including, years ago, an old Jewish lady in the apartment upstairs who was convinced they were crawling up through her toilet to get her when she sat down. I’d hear her screaming regularly. I learned to ignore it.
So much for for that mentality! Can you blame me for being a skeptic?
21 January, 2009 at 3:20 am
Great posts GW! Your grim scenario on what would happen if we resettled Sabra Jews here is unpleasant to think about but would largely happen the way you describe. It seems nobody much likes most Jews and particularly Israeli Jews.
My mother had a Jewess friend in college. The friend and her husband – naturally another “member of the tribe” – opted to go plumb their ‘roots’ and take advantage of their “right of return” to that nasty little sandbox they call with a straight face their “promised land.” Just after getting off the plane at Ben Gurion airport, the wife was manhandled by customs, the husband forced to pay a bullshit entry fee, and their baggage lost. Later during the trip they found Isreali Jews arrogant, cold, rude, and obscene. They came back to the States and vowed never to go to Israel again. Interestingly enough they found the Arabs much more friendly as well as, of course, Gentile pilgrims, but never their own people. This experience was related to my Mom. I wonder if the couple ever extended their revelation on the character of the Sabra to the whole of their own people? Hope it gave them pause for thought. Unlikely given the Jewish mindset of self-aggrandizement and pity but one never knows.
21 January, 2009 at 5:34 am
“the sort of thing from people who have their homes lined with tinfoil because the Gestapo is beaming rays at them to read their minds.”
I’m sure that – even if it could read their minds – the Gestapo wouldn’t find anything there of interest.
“the old Jewish lady in the apartment upstairs was convinced [the Gestapo] were crawling up through her toilet to get her when she sat down. I’d hear her screaming regularly…”
And these are the people who furnish testimony about the Holocaust!
21 January, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Freemasonry is based on the Kaballa. It’s basically the same thing.
21 January, 2009 at 5:11 pm
“I once met a lovely young woman in college named Sarah Wilmot, who was a direct descendent of the Wilmots who came over on the Mayflower. But I’ll wager there were no Kowalczyks on that boat.”
Very clever, Zarathustra. You’re assuming that I’m “just a Pollack.” In fact, the majority of my heritage is WASP. We Americans have not secluded ourselves in racial enclaves and most Whites here are “mutts.” But you’re right: no Pollacks on the Mayflower that I know of.
I’m not saying that there was no Jewish influence on the United States from the beginning. But I can tell you that Jefferson and Washington were men of quality, judgment and learning, categorically superior to the money-grubbing swine that now pass as “politicians.”
There is no deification, just an admission that I would take any of the Founding Fathers over what we have today (well, maybe not Hamilton).
21 January, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Yes, Hamilton had a very interesting life and was an extrordinary man in many ways, but his belief that America should be a cosmopolitan urban society ruled by a centralized Federal bureacracy and by the Jew money-bags on Wall Street was dead wrong. Jefferson had a more intellectual, pastoral and Patrician idea about what America should be. Unfortunately, Hamilton’s view won out.
I did not mean to insult your ancestral heritage, KK, but I frequently hear people claim that they are descendants of Pilgrims or of Crazy Horse, you know what I mean?
21 January, 2009 at 8:25 pm
“Yes, Hamilton had a very interesting life and was an extrordinary man in many ways, but his belief that America should be a cosmopolitan urban society ruled by a centralized Federal bureacracy and by the Jew money-bags on Wall Street was dead wrong.”
Perhaps he was unduly influenced by the strains running through England at the time. I do recall that he was the most pro-Britain of the Founders.
“Jefferson had a more intellectual, pastoral and Patrician idea about what America should be.”
And more ancestral: the agrarian ideal is in our Euro DNA.
“Unfortunately, Hamilton’s view won out.”
Funny how that works. Was it inevitable given modernity – or was it foisted upon us by a subversive element? Or a bit of both?
“I did not mean to insult your ancestral heritage, KK, but I frequently hear people claim that they are descendants of Pilgrims or of Crazy Horse, you know what I mean?”
And of course there is no way for me to verify it, but on my honor as a White I would not make such a statement unless it were true. I could even tell you who I am descended from, but anonymity suits me for now (and you as well).
22 January, 2009 at 12:21 am
Have you noticed how Whites will brag about having some Red Indian blood in their ancestry (like Burt Reynolds?), but would probably drop dead from shame and embarassment if they found out they had some Negro blood in them? Look at the actress Loni Anderson. She is clearly a QUADROON, but you could probably hang her upside down from her ankles on top of the Sears Tower and she still wouldn’t admit it.
22 January, 2009 at 5:15 am
“But I’ll wager there were no Kowalczyks on that boat.”
Don’t bet on it. You’ll lose. I have cousins in Connecticul, and also in Ohio, who are named Kowalchick. But they are WASPS, just like me. (Btw, I hate that term, but I’ll use it anyway.) And yes, they had relatives on that boat. When you go back a few hundred years, you have a lot of ancestors.
22 January, 2009 at 5:34 am
Zara: I never even thought of Loni Anderson as a quatroon. It never crossed my mind. I just saw her as an over-tanned, over-bleached Hollywood personality who had baked too long on the beach. Well, I went and checked her photos (since sh’es an oldtimer by now and memories do fade).
Frankly, I do NOT see any Negro blood present in her at all. It’s funny how people can see things differently. I ust don’t see it! However, I’ll grant that with the wigs, the plastic surgery, the make-up and the lighting, it’s almost impossible to tell with Hollywood celebrities. Expecially women. But I did find, though, that she was bon in Minnesota to Karl Anderson (very Scandinavian) and Maxine Kallin (possibly Jewish?).
So no, I don’t think she’s one thing; but she could be the other, which would explain the need for the bleach and the plastic surgery. As well as explaining the Hollywood career.
Oh, btw, you mentioned that they would never admit it. I wonder if now with a mulatto First Family setting the fashion for the next four years, that will all change. It may get trendy.
22 January, 2009 at 2:26 pm
http://www.jsrpages.co.uk/scans2/andersonl/n.jpg
22 January, 2009 at 2:28 pm
I think she looks like one of the Supremes in this HS yearbook photo. What do you think?
22 January, 2009 at 3:01 pm
““But I’ll wager there were no Kowalczyks on that boat.”
Don’t bet on it. You’ll lose. ”
Would I? There were Bradfords, Wilmots and Standishes on the Mayflower, but no Pollacks, I’m sure of that. Maybe there are some non-WASPS who can claim descent from the Pilgrims now, but they were all WASPS on that friggin’ little boat back in 1620.
I’ll take my winnings now and leave while I’m still ahead, thank you.
22 January, 2009 at 4:52 pm
gw (re: your Kowalchick ancestors)
I always wondered if some Polish genes had drifted into Teutonic countries. Poles were historically isolationist, especially as the pressure ramped up from Russia and the German states, so it seemed unlikely.
This from the Jew York Times (What? Real science? I was surprised too):
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/13/science/13visual.html
It looks like the Pollacks are very genetically distinct, they have significant commonality only with the Czech people. I guess my hypothesis was correct.
So, how’d they get the name? I know not.
22 January, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Woops! I see my comment on the Mayflower has been misunderstood. Let me explain. I guess I wasn’t clear enough. My fault. I meant that someone named Kowalczyk could have ANCESTORS on that boat, although those ancestors didn’t necessarily have to be named Kowalczyk. Surely, not all of his ancestors were named Kowalczyk! As I said, when you go back a ways, you get into A LOT of ancestors. You can be named Krupinsky or Gonzalez and still have an ancestor on the Mayflower. If Miss Wilmot married Mr. Kowalczyk, their chidren – Mayflower descendents all – would be Kowalczycks. That’s what I meant.
(Now gimme my damn money back!!!)
A name isn’t always reliable. I have an aquaintance named McManus. He says everyone assumes he’s Irish. His family is (originally) from Charleston, SC. He says he is of French descent (Huguenots did settle around there) and he has no idea where the Irish name came from.
On the other hand, I have a friend with the name of Durrette (a VERY French name) who comes from North Carolina. But he’s unaware of any French background whatsoever in his family. They’re Scotch-Irish!
22 January, 2009 at 5:59 pm
gw (re: your Kowalchick ancestors)
They’re not my ancestors. They’re my fathers cousins.
I always wondered if some Polish genes had drifted into Teutonic countries. Poles were historically isolationist, especially as the pressure ramped up from Russia and the German states, so it seemed unlikely.
Not always isolationist! Poland was a great power – and possibly the largest state in Europe – during the 1500s. Even Queen Elizabeth learned enough Polish to speak to the Polish ambassador in his own tongue. Remember that it was a Polish king who drove back the Turks and saved Europe in the 1600s. There was also intermarriage between French and Polish royalty. I’m sure they brought hundreds of courtiers and servants along in their retinue. Even the French novelist, George Sand, was descended from a Polish king, I think; can’t remember which. [Augustus II] It was common for Polish noblemen (as with the English), after completing their education, to make a Grand Tour of Europe, and they often brought back a wife. No, the Poles didn’t stay at home, they got around.
22 January, 2009 at 8:01 pm
If you have read to this point you probably need to get a life. In any case, the only reason jews hold what seem to be anti-Jewish views is because they are afraid of the backlash. The jews have inculcated the fear of poisecution in their people to the point that many jews are deathly afraid of what they will face if they remain behind when their elitist brethren pack their tuches with diamonds and leave town. Yahweh knows how often they have done this in times past. As the old joke about being chased by a bear goes: “I don’t need to run all that fast, I only have to run faster than you.” One thing about the elite jews of the priesthood, when it comes to getting what they want they have no, zero, zip, nada, problem sacrificing their own. The only reason they receive continuing support is because . . . . Well, read Dr. MacDonald’s books for that insight.
22 January, 2009 at 10:09 pm
“Not always isolationist! Poland was a great power – and possibly the largest state in Europe – during the 1500s.”
It was the largest state in Eastern Europe by the 1400s. They halted the expansion of the Teutonic Knights. They jointly ruled a state alongside the Lithuanian military elite, and conquered much of the territory that would later become part of the Muscovite Russian Empire. Eventually the Lithuanian-Pollacks were demographically swamped by the Ruthenians (proto-Ukrainians) that they had conquered!
“It was common for Polish noblemen (as with the English), after completing their education, to make a Grand Tour of Europe, and they often brought back a wife. No, the Poles didn’t stay at home, they got around.”
One thing to keep in mind is that the Euro nobility was the “internationalist” class of society. The peasants of Poland, my ancestors among them, lived isolated rural/agrarian lives and did not intermingle with foreigners (although my Polish great-grandmother apparently had some Bavarian ancestry).
23 January, 2009 at 8:52 am
Eventually the Lithuanian-Pollacks were demographically swamped by the Ruthenians (proto-Ukrainians) that they had conquered!”
How very interesting! I hadn’t known of that. It’s one more warning example that history gives us of nations being “demographically swamped” by the more prolific. I did know that the Hungarians (who for some reason had a lower birthrate than those around them) were gradually outnumbered by their vassal Romanians (and others too) in a similar way; and now Romania owns a good part of what once was a much larger Hungary. Breed or perish!
Regarding that term: Pollack. I would have said Polack (in the sense that you’re using it) but would much prefer Pole. Checking the dictionary, I see that Polack goes back to the 1500s and was once simply “a native of Poland”, but is now obsolete. Now, unfortunately, it’s considered disparaging and slangy. Oh well, it sounded better to me; pollack is a fish. However, used as a surname, Pollack is not an uncommon name in England. Presumably, the Pollack’s were Poles who settled there long ago. Not surprising. In the heyday of the Hanseatic League, Danzig was a great northern port and would have been closely linked to England by commerce.
although my Polish great-grandmother apparently had some Bavarian ancestry
Maybe a sick or wounded soldier in Napoleon’s Grand Army of Europe, returning from the Russian disaster, who dropped out of the ranks and settled down there(?) The timing would seem about right. Napoleon’s Grande Armée was recruited from ALL OVER Europe and ncluded 90,000 Germans (including 24,000 Bavarians.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleon's_invasion_of_Russia
If you have read to this point you probably need to get a life.
We’d better stop, Krys. I think some people are getting annoyed!
23 January, 2009 at 12:24 pm
How was copper wire invented?
24 January, 2009 at 8:16 am
Well, how? Tell us.
24 January, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Gladly. Two jews fighting over a penny.
And that’s my two cents worth.
25 January, 2009 at 8:32 am
Looks like only one cent to me!
25 January, 2009 at 4:27 pm
I used fractional reserve.
26 January, 2009 at 12:27 pm
Ooooo. Clever!!!
26 January, 2009 at 8:13 pm
Two clever by half. . .
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/be+too+clever+by+half
27 January, 2009 at 3:05 pm
But not “annoying”– just smart and witty.
Du bist witzig!
27 January, 2009 at 10:14 pm
Thank you. “Witz” means wise and witty, as Arthur Koestler pointed out in Humour and Wit chapter, in either the Act of Creation, or The Ghost in the Machine.
28 January, 2009 at 4:48 pm
I’ll take your word on it.
Anyone who can lecture us on Fibonacci numbers is worth listening to.
28 January, 2009 at 6:28 pm
1,2,3.5,8,13,21,34,55,89,144
Thanks.
28 January, 2009 at 8:49 pm
“Anyone who can lecture us on Fibonacci numbers is worth listening to.” – gw
Heh:
Black, then, white are, all I see, in my infancy, red and yellow then came to be, reaching out to me, lets me see. There is, so, much, more and, beckons me, to look through to these, infinite possibilities. As below so above and beyond i imagine, drawn outside the lines of reason, push the envelope, watch it bend.
Hint: it’s the syllables!
28 January, 2009 at 10:53 pm
KKK was watching this the whole time
Let’s get everyone down here and have some hot-dogs
with relish
11 March, 2009 at 12:13 pm
gw
Can you provide more info?
I have been trying to figure out, for some time, exactly who Jefferson was complaining about…
“I know that Jefferson had a strong distaste for grasping, avacicious “Amsterdam bankers” — though I’m not sure if he fully realized who they were. (At least, none of the books I’ve read made that clear. But that’s not surprising.)”