The Non-Semitic Origins of
Contemporary Jews

Palestinian and Jewish men are “so closely related as to be genetically indistinguishable”

The Semitic claim is essentially used to justify the dispossession, displacement, and impersonation of the Palestinians by Jewish settlers in one of the most complex forms of cultural identity theft. 

The entire Zionist enterprise of Jewish genealogy by genetics and the brouhaha and cacophony it has created among geneticists, biologists, activists, and the media represent a global-scale political mobilization to rescue the Semitic claim from the specter of an increasingly deconstructed Jewish identity and a declining world Jewry amidst a growing condemnation of Zionist separatism and persecution of the Palestinians.

The conclusion can be summed up in the following points.  

First, the Jewish Semitic claim made by the Zionists in the name of contemporary Jews remains unsubstantiated according to scholarly findings in history, archaeology, linguistics, and genetics.

Second, the Semitic claim is essentially used to justify the dispossession, displacement, and impersonation of the Palestinians by Jewish settlers in one of the most complex form of cultural identity theft.

Third, even if contemporary Jews were actually “Semitic,” this will not justify their dispossession of the Palestinians who have nothing to do with any past or present, actual or alleged persecution of Jews in Europe or anywhere else in the world.

Fourth, the Semitic claim did not solve the Jewish identity problem created by Zionism as the current genetic turn to a new racial science indicates. 

Fifth, the growing disillusionment with the Jewish Semitic claim could nurture cynicism or guilt among current and future Jewish generations. Hebrew University Professor of History Yehoshua Porath was quoted: “You can’t build a cultural heritage on a lie. Because when young people discover the truth, they can become cynical” (Fletcher 1995, 16). In light of the failure to prove the Semitic claim, researchers of the origins of contemporary Jews are now forced to think outside the old geographic box of Palestine and the older ethnic buzzword of the Israelites.

*Note

In this article, the term “Zionism” refers to the international colonial movement designed to make Palestine an extraterritorial nation-state for world Jewry. The term “Zionists” refers to the Jewish and non-Jewish supporters of this movement. It should be noted that critical studies of Zionism have often been tabooed, polemicized and/or considered anti-Semitic in
mainstream U.S. media, politics, and culture.

For example, the unabridged version of the Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language (1986 Edition) has gone as far as defining anti-Semitism as any “opposition to Zionism” and/or “sympathy with opponents of the State of Israel.” This definition and the relentless harassment of Western conscience about Jewish persecution and the Holocaust seem to keep Israel and Zionism above and beyond any serious criticism within the Western world (see Finkelstein 2000 and Novick 1999). The Global Anti-Semitism Review Act of 2004 (signed by President Bush two weeks before the 2004 presidential elections), the [HR 3077] International Studies in Higher Education Act of 2003 (passed by the U.S. House and referred to the U.S. Senate), and the Middle East Forum Campus Watch (which blacklists American university professors who criticize Israel) are likely to make it even more difficult and more intimidating for scholars to criticize the State of Israel or Zionism without being labeled anti-Semitic.

https://www.indstate.edu/cas/sites/arts.indstate.edu/files/Faculty/melyassini/NSOCJ_1_0.PDF