(as this post appears to have been edited to make it align with arab historical revisionism around the geographical entity that they call palestine, and which everybody else calls israel, by changing the language of a "return" to a language of an "occupation" (something i have changed back, and which is an idea i do not support - i do not agree with the idea that "palestine" is being "occupied" by israel. the label of palestine was created by the romans to remove israel from the map, in a conscious act of genocide. i strongly support israel's continued existence in it's historical homeland and have no sympathy whatsoever for arabs complaining about losing control of an area they conquered with the use of violence in the 8th or probably actually 9th century. this is not their land, and they have no grounds to be angry about losing it. i do agree that israel should be criticzed for mistreating other ethnic groups on land that is rightfully israel's, but i am not on your side if you want to "end the occupation of palestine". rather, i would like to end the occupation of constantinople and potentially liberate alexandria.), i feel the need to clarify that "the return" here refers to a biblical event that occurred during the reign of cyrus II of persia, and not to a process that began after world war two (or earlier than that, if you want to reference zionism, which i think is a half-truth, historically). for what it is worth, there were no arabs in the region until about the year 800 CE, after the roman collapse depopulated the area, and it was repopulated by migratory arab sheep herders moving in from the south. there is no history of arabs in the levant before they invaded after the collapse of roman control over the region. the ethnonym palestinian derives from a roman attempt to rename the region in the process of a purposeful jewish genocide, and refers to the philistines, which were a greek tribe that settled in the region during the bronze age collapse (as one of the "sea peoples" that attacked egypt, c. 1500 bce). when rome inherited the east, it was greek due to the conquests of alexander, and not semitic, which was a substratum in both language and culture. the gospels and pauline letters, which were jewish documents, were written in greek. the earliest buddhist texts were also in greek. so, it is most accurate to label the syrians and levantines of this period as greeks, which at least makes the roman elimination of judea from the maps in favour of the name of an even then ancient greek colony in the region somewhat reasonable. it is true that ancestral semites invaded the region from northeast africa, where they displaced the indigenous caucasian groups, around the year 3500 bce. they first appear in the historical record around 3000 bce, outside of the gates of sumeria, where they slowly take over the sumerian society. by the time of the assyrian conquest of the eastern mediterrannean coast, the people that lived in the region - the ancestors of today's lebanese, jews, syrians and jordanians - were west semitic speakers that had mixed with the indigenous caucasian populations, and not arabs, which had probably only begun to migrate north from yemen.
i have long been concerned about the writing here being edited, and have been struggling to understand who is doing it and why. the aggression and zeal underlying this does not make sense to me; i don't understand why this is seen as so important to whomever is responsible for it. please be aware that i will need to rewrite essentially all of this site (and that i already have rewritten large amounts of it, repeatedly) and that any particular, individual posts on the site are likely to be entirely rewritten in the near future for that reason. do not assume that i will support posts written here - i may very well argue that the post was edited by an unknown party that is hostile to my viewpoints and does not reflect my intent, at the time. should i be challenged in that manner, i will need to rewrite the post in question on the spot in a way that reflects my intent at the time in as best a way as i can reconstruct what my thoughts were. i cannot make general statements about 30,000+ posts when i know that some government entity is altering these posts, with apparent collusion by google.
regardless of my views on current geopolitics in the levant, there is no possibility that i would have referred to the return of jews from babylon to jerusalem during the reign of cyrus II of persia as an occupation of jerusalem; that wouldn't make any sense. that is not coherent language. yet, that was the language found in this post in august, 2022. that replacement of language (occupation for return) was inserted by the hostile actor and is clearly based on a misreading by the group responsible for the edit, which thought i was talking about the migration of jews to their homeland after world war two rather than the quasi-historical event described in the bible, and helps me understand who they are and what they are trying to accomplish. this is a category of mistake i've noticed a few times - the entity responsible for editing this without my consent frequently misunderstands the historical context being presented, particularly when the issue relates to the levant, which helps me identify edits by their lack of coherency on first read after however long. another example of edits of this sort is a post where language about the iron age collapse (which was c. 1500 bce) was replaced with muslim revisionism about the collapse of the byzantine empire, due to the fact that i didn't specify bce when i said 1500, which confused them into thinking i meant 1500 ce. i did not specify because it was obvious to anybody that understood the post, but that wasn't enough to prevent the confusion. realizing that language intended for the context of the levant in 1500 bce was replaced with muslim revisionism relating to events in the levant around 1500 ce (which was blatantly incoherent, in the context of the post) helped me understand what was edited, by whom and why. reading through the text as it existed, i incoherently shifted from a discussion of the bronze age collapse to a discussion of the fall of rome in a way that just did not make any sense. it was more than the language, it was the shift in context, by somebody that was clearly confused about the dating. i simply can't assign that to an error by myself; there is no way i would have shifted the topic of discussion like that, in a way that makes it clear the author had merely become confused. it couldn't be explained or salvaged in any other manner: the editor read the post, saw the date 1500, misunderstood it as 1500 ce rather than 1500 bce and proceeded to edit in information about the fall of constantinoople in a way that did not make sense in the context of the post, which was about the bronze age collapse. most alarmingly, a reference to the end of the greek dark ages after the bronze age collapse got corrupted because the editor thought i was referring to the european dark ages that occurred after the fall of rome.
the posts that get edited here almost exclusively have to do with justin trudeau and islam; it's these two very specific topics that get targeted, so my best guess is that this is being done in the context of some kind of modern analogue to the historical translation event, which refers to a period where arab religious fundamentalists succeeded in rewriting history by altering the greek sources as they translated them to arabic, and then deleted the original greek. the result was that all that was left in the libraries was altered arab versions of greek classics, as they destroyed the originals, which are now almost entirely lost. then, they have the nerve to take credit for saving the knowledge, after they took control of the libraries by force and changed the content of the books.
i can only guess at what the link between trudeau and islam is, and i have done so elsewhere in this site, while realizing that parts of it have probably been edited. i clearly have no control over this, and the entity responsible is clearly extremely aggressive about it - clearly absolutely obsessed with it. i realize i need to understand this before i can react to it, but i don't even know how to start trying to understand it.
my tactic here is resiliency. i tried editing offline and uploading, but it doesn't seem to help. i actually think people have been in here when i'm showering or sleeping, to update files kept offline. i will outlast justin trudeau's political career, and i'll have to re-evaluate the situation when he's gone. i simply don't know what happens next, but i'd imagine that the next prime minister will have to be less neurotic regarding trivial concerns. i'm going to have to assume this is a consequence of his individual personality defects and that this will therefore lift in time.
this might seem irrelevant to the content of this post, but it isn't - i can only try to figure this out by collecting pieces of evidence like this, where the evidence of editing is clear due to somebody misunderstanding what they're editing. i caught them here. that's not unique, but it's rare.
i don't have any other real choice but to just waiting them out for now, under the expectation that this can't continue, that they will eventually get bored with this and move on.)
judaism gets credit for inventing monotheism, for example, but that relies on the myth that judaism in the region extends back to before the return from babylon (during the reign of cyrus). the archaeological record is clear that the caananites in the region before the captivity were garden variety west semitic pagans, like the phoenicians or carthaginians were. they were really the same people; the sparsely populated settlement around jerusalem was really a phoenecian colony. the people that then entered the region during the reign of cyrus in this quasi-historical event called the return worshipped an iranian sky god, and brought that religion into the region with them, which was a very different type of religion without any previous archaeological record in the area. so, when you understand the history, it's a lot easier to just deduce that the jews adopted monotheism from the zoroastrianism of the persians, and that is probably the actual truth of it, even if it remains hard to disentangle, due to so much corruption in the source, and the fact that the persians didn't leave us any historical record at all - or at least have left us without a single source that survived the islamic conquest. it is said that the persians wrote no history, but i've never been convinced of that.
worse, this whole space of pre-captivity jewish identity falls right into the black hole of carthaginian genocide that the romans carried out after the punic wars.
if there were texts that explained the history, the romans would have burned those texts. and, they would have burned any texts that referenced those texts, or any texts that reference those texts. and, then they would have killed anybody that had read the texts.
carthage, after all, had to be destroyed.
