The Khazar Con
The Khazar theory argues that Ashkenazi Jews are the descendants of the Khazars a multi-ethnic collection of peoples who allegedly ‘converted’ to Judaism in the 8th-9th century AD. It is then claimed that it was these ‘Jewish converts’ that migrated into what is now Russia, Eastern Europe and later Northern and Western Europe. It is critical to highlight however, that the primary exponents of this theory are Jewish from the earliest alleged reference to a connection between Khazars and Ashkenazic Jews to Benjamin Freedman in a speech given before an audience in 1961 at the Willard Hotel, Washington, D.C and Jewish Communist Arthur Koestler in The Thirteenth Tribe first published in Britain in 1976.
Initially the Khazars were believed to be a semi-nomadic people of mostly Turkic decent dominating the Asian steppe and the North Caucasus between the 5th and 10th centuries. In the 7th century, they founded an independent Khaganate in the Northern Caucasus called Khazaria. This occupied the land locked between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea now predominantly occupied by Georgia. The general theme of Koestler’s book is this trading empire that existed between the expanding power blocs of Christianity and Islam. He suggests that speculation exists about the origin of the word ‘Khazar’ and indicates that the Khazar was never ethnically homogenous but made up of tribes from various racial backgrounds, as steppe peoples traditionally absorbed those they conquered. Koestler also highlights modern ‘deviations’ for example the German Ketzer –heretic referring to the Jew thus inserting ‘reasonable’ doubt perhaps to add weight to his theory. Nevertheless, the term is most likely tied to the Turkic verb form meaning “wandering” and likely derived from the Turkic gaz-, meaning ‘to wander’ or ‘flee.’ Initially Tengri shamanists, between the 8th or 9th century under the instruction of the Khazarian King, Koestler asserts that the Khaganate adopted Judaism as the state religion. However, Koestler’s source for the ‘conversion’ are to be found in a work by the Hungarian Marxist historian, Dr Antal Bartha, supported by an article in the 1973 variant of Encyclopaedia Judaica and the curious choice of a comment from a Muslim envoy a staunch enemy of the Jew. Indeed a 2013 critique argued that “A careful examination of the sources shows that some of them are pseudepigraphic, and the rest are of questionable reliability.
The majority of the book is padded with an attempt at historical context but when the flimsiness of Koestler’s sources are revealed it is hard to judge fact from whimsical fantasy. In particular on matters of ethnicity it is clear that he desires to undermine European racial homogeneity thus providing the mixed race Jew with a greater status. Indeed in places Koestler’s writing seems to applaud the Khazars for their apparent ‘services’ to Europe remembering that his thesis makes them Jewish if only ‘converts’ and in keeping with Jewish chutzpah he cannot help infusing some self-congratulation. Nevertheless, producing a ‘pseudo-Jew’ does provide a suitable scapegoat onto which one can deflect ones crimes. In fact the so called ‘good Jew’ Benjamin Freedman laid the groundwork for this defence (33 mins) during his 1961 speech at the Willard Hotel in Washington D.C. However, the concept falls apart when one considers the extraordinary amount of evidence proving that the Jew has been a problem throughout gentile specifically European history well before the so-called ‘Khazar conversion’.
The vulgar Talmud written in 70 AD is a testament to the contempt that the Jew holds for the gentile and in its own words “To communicate to a Goy anything about our religious relations would be equal to killing all Jews, for if the Goyim knew what we teach about them, they would kill us openly.” Libbre David 37 This only confirms that the despicable religion originates from a despicable tribe and that the Jew is not a product of converting to a loathsome religion. The Roman historian Tacitus reinforces this notion of the Jewish religion in his most famous work Histories written 109 AD –
“…Moses prescribed for them a novel religion quite different from those of the rest of mankind. Among the Jews all things are profane that we hold sacred; on the other hand they regard as permissible what seems to us immoral…The other practices of the Jews are sinister and revolting, and have entrenched themselves by their very wickedness. Wretches of the most abandoned kind who had no use for the religion of their fathers took to contributing dues and free-will offerings to swell the Jewish exchequer; and other reasons for their increasing wealth may be found in their stubborn loyalty and ready benevolence towards brother Jews. But the rest of the world they confront with the hatred reserved for enemies. They will not feed or intermarry with gentiles… They have introduced the practice of circumcision to show that they are different from others.” (Tacitus, Histories, 5.2–5).
Indeed it was not long before the wicked activities of the Jews roused Roman public opinion against them following the establishment of the very first Jewish community outside the Middle East in Rome in 139 BC. During sittings of the Roman senate the famous orator Cicero, among others, frequently spoke against the Jewish presence in Rome. Equally there is historical evidence relating to their negative impact on Romans during the first century AD. The world’s first anti-Jewish riots broke out in the city of Alexandria in 38 AD, and re-occurred in 66 AD, 115 AD, 118 AD, and 411 AD. In that year Cyril, the archbishop of Alexandria ordered the expulsion of all Jews from the city. The Roman Emperor Tiberius formally expelled Jews from Rome in 19 AD. They returned shortly after, only to be expelled again in 49 AD. In 116 AD, Emperor Trajan ordered that all Jews in Mesopotamia should be killed on the grounds that they were the cause of continual uprisings in that region. One of the most famous emperors of the Eastern Roman Empire, Justinian (527–565 AD), adopted a comprehensive anti-Jewish policy which barred Jews from the civil service, military posts, and any other positions of influence in his government. All of these events that pre-date the supposed ‘Khazar conversion’ serve to highlight the devastating impact the Jew had on Roman life and provide substantial proof that the Jew displayed identical behavioural patterns centuries prior to the alleged ‘conversion’. Patently the Khazar theory has been produced to suggest an “Ashkenazi” problem rather than a “Jewish problem” yet it was the Middle Eastern Mizrahi bloodline that interfered with Roman life 900 years prior to the Khazars and the Sephardi are currently notoriously anti-Gentile easily proving that all Jews have been and remain a problem throughout history.
Logic would also dictate that if a massive conversion of substantially different racial stock took place after the 7th century the racial make-up of Jews in that area would alter dramatically compared to that of their Sephardi and Mizrahi (Middle Eastern) brethren. However, to date twelve DNA studies prove otherwise. Beginning in 1999 the studies all reached very similar conclusions that Jewish community’s whether Ashkenazi, Sephardi, or Mizrahi formed a clearly distinct cluster sharing a common lineage consistent with origins in the region of the Middle East. While the most recent involving Harry Ostrer, a professor of Pathology and Genetics at Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University and the Jewish HapMap Project are a double edged sword in that they tend to compound the notion that the Jew is a race alone and not a tribal facet of a larger Semitic race that has long existed and continues to live in the Middle East. Nevertheless, there is conclusive DNA evidence against the reality of the so called ‘Khazar theory’ thus substantiating the notion that it is a mechanism to distract from the “Jewish problem”. Indeed by associating Zionism with only the Ashkenazi strain the Jew attempts to disassociate from his crimes against Europe and the globe.
So it remains only to explain why so called reasoned Nationalists would entertain this obviously weak hypothesis meant to distract. What is transparent from the substantial evidence presented is that those claiming that only the ‘Khazar/Ashkenazi’ pose a problem are verifiably wrong. The concept of only “some Jews” or “false Jews” has been addressed and exposed as black propaganda. Consequently those pushing the Khazar theory are shills participating in a Jewish construct designed to distract from the Jew regardless of what historical documentation records.
Follow us on twitter – http://twitter.com/TheAZL