Brit-Am Ephraimite Forum no. 55
Brit-Am Ephraimite Discussion. News and Issues concerning the Lost Ten Tribes and Judah in the World Today.
For Previous issues see:
Ephraimite Forum Archives
The Brit-Am Rose
Official Symbol of Brit-Am
Date: 29/April/08 24th Nissan 5768
1. Archaeology: Brit-Am Version of
2. Prof. Paul Eidelberg:
Churchill, the Jews, and the Arabs
3. Archaeology: More Prehistoric Man Frauds Uncovered in Germany
1. Archaeology: Brit-Am Version of
From: David Meadows <email@example.com>
explorator 11.1 April 27, 2008
ANCIENT NEAR EAST AND EGYPT
The Egyptian 'concrete' theory is making the rounds again:
Interesting theory about product 'branding' in ancient Mesopotamia:
The annual 'they-still-speak-aramaic' article:
ANCIENT GREECE AND ROME (AND CLASSICS)
All about Alexander the Great:
Review of a couple of books on women in ancient Rome:
... and some recent books on Herodotus:
Review of Simon Armitage, *The Odyssey*:
EUROPE AND THE UK (+ Ireland)
An Anglo-Saxon mound in Sherwood Forest:
Rethinking the claim that the Saxons imposed 'apartheid' on
More coverage of the Druid burial:
Archaeology in Europe Blog:
On the significance of dog burials in the souther U.S.:
What a five-year-old dug up in grandma's garden:
An 18th century log road from Annapolis:
Archaeologists were unable to find the remains of one of the
early figures in the Mormon Church:
OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
An abstract/overviewish thing on the Odyssey Marine thing:
The world's oldest living tree is in Sweden:
... and what about that Indiana Jones guy?:
EXHIBITIONS, AUCTIONS, AND MUSEUM-RELATED
Recovered Nazi Art:
(nice slide show)
There is need of a museum at Troy:
Latest on the Lewis Chessmen:
A Turner is coming to auction:
A French Crown jewel returns to France:
PERFORMANCES AND THEATRE-RELATED
Israel in Egypt:
2. Prof. Paul
Churchill, the Jews, and the Arabs
Since anti-Semitism is sweeping cross England and Europe, I want to read some
passages from England's greatest statesman, Winston Churchill, who, more than
any other man, saved England Europe from Nazi tyranny.
I propose to read passages from Churchill's official biographer Sir Martin
Gilbert, whose recent book, Churchill & the Jews (2007) is fascinating.
Before I begin, I want to point out that Churchill was first and foremost a
British statesman, and his duties as a British statesmen must be taken into
account in any assessment one makes of his attitude toward Jews and Palestine.
Despite the anti-Zionist attitude of many of his Conservative Party colleagues,
Churchill was steadfast in his support of the Jews, as Gilbert thoroughly
documents. Churchill was a life-long friend of Chaim Weismann, who, with David
Ben-Gurion, regarded him as a champion of the Jewish cause. Of course,
Churchill could not ignore Arab claims and pressure if only because millions of
Muslims lived under British rule. Nevertheless, he opposed the 1939 White
Paper, which curtailed Jewish immigration to Palestine when Jews were trying to
escape Nazi Germany.
In March 1920, Churchill wrote an article saying:
"We owe to the Jews, a system of ethics
which, even if it were entirely separated from the supernatural, would be
incomparably the most precious possession of mankind, worth in fact the fruits
of all other wisdom and learning put together" (p. 38).
Elsewhere he said: "Some people like the
Jews, and some do not. But no thoughtful man can deny that they are, beyond any
question, the most formidable and the most remarkable race which has ever
appeared in the world."
Here is what he told the House of Commons about his visit to in Palestine, in
Anyone who has seen the work of the
Jewish colonies which have been established during the last twenty or thirty
years in Palestine will be struck by the enormous productive results which they
He described how he had driven from
the most inhospitable soil, surrounded
on every side by barrenness and the most miserable form of cultivation, into a
fertile and thriving country estate, where the scanty soil gave place to good
crops and good cultivation, and then to vineyards and finally to the most
beautiful, luxurious orange groves. All created in twenty or thirty years by the
exertions of the Jewish community who live there, (p. 65)
In 1929, armed Arabs attacked and murdered 133 unarmed Jews. In Jerusalem, four
thousand Jews were driven from their homes. Churchill, then visiting the United
States, was asked by reporters whether this killing of Jews and destruction of
Jewish property would affect Britain's pledge to allow continued Jewish
immigration. Churchill replied, the Arabs had no reason to be against the
"The Jews [he explained] have developed
the country, grown orchards and grain fields out of the desert, built schools
and great buildings, constructed irrigation projects and water power houses and
have made Palestine a much better place in which to live than it was before they
came a few years ago. The Arabs are much better off now. To Jewish enterprise
the Arab owes nearly everything he has. Fanaticism and a sort of envy have
driven the Arab to violence." (pp. 91-92)
On March 12, 1937, the year after the beginning of the Arab uprising in
Palestine, Churchill was called to give evidence to the Peel Commission. He was
asked more than 100 questions since he was the author of the 1922 White Paper
that enabled 300,000 Jews to enter Palestine.
Asked whether this influx of Jews constituted a harsh injustice to the
Palestinian Arabs, he replied: "Why is there harsh injustice done if people
come in and make a livelihood for more and make the desert into palm groves and
orange groves? Why is it injustice because there is more work and wealth for
everybody. There is no injustice. The injustice is when those who live in the
country leave it to be a desert for thousands of years" (p. 113).
He rejected the contention that the Jews in Palestine constituted a foreign
race. He pointed out it was the Arabs who had been the outsiders, the
conquerors. "The [Jewish] population of
Palestine," he said, "was much greater when it was a Roman province. When the
Mohammedan upset occurred in world history and the great hordes of Islam swept
over these places, they smashed it all up. You have seen the terraces on
the hills which used to be cultivated, [but] which under Arab rule have remained
a desert" (pp. 115-116).
Churchill was asked whether the Arabs were right in saying the entry of the
Jewish Home in Palestine prevented them from having self-governing
institutions. He replied that "the
Mandate limited the development of Arab self-governing institutions as long as
they do not accept the spirit of the Balfour Declaration. The moment they accept
that spirit, with all the pledges of their civil liberties, the question falls
to the ground. [But the Arabs] resist and they do not want it."
Churchill then added: "If I were an Arab
I should not like it, but it is for the good of the world that [Palestine]
should be cultivated, and it will never be cultivated by the Arabs" (pp,
117-118). (Consistent with the Balfour Declaration, Churchill said
civil liberties and made no mention of national rights.)
One Peel Commission member complained that the Jewish Agency, set up in 1930,
has its representative in London, whereas the Arabs feel they are left in the
cold. Churchill replied: "It is a
question of which civilization you prefer." (p. 119).
Peel said Britain "might have some compunction if she felt she was downing the
Arabs year after year when they wanted to remain in their own country." Gilbert
comments that Churchill rejected this line of reasoning, and allowed himself to
be drawn into a more contentious discussion. He quotes Churchill:
I do not admit that the dog in the
manger has the final right to the manger, even though he may have lain there for
a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit, for instance,
that that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the
black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to those
people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race, or, at any rate, a
more worldly-wise race, to put it that way, has come in and taken their place.
Churchill had no high opinion of Islam. In 1899, when he was in the British
Army fighting Sudanese Muslims, Churchill wrote:
How dreadful are the curses which Islam
lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a
man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The
effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of
agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist
wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded
deprives this life of its grace and refinement the next of its dignity and
The fact that in Islamic law every woman
must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or
a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam
has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid
qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of
those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from
being moribund, Islam is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already
spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and
were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the
science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe
might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome (pp. 53-54, emphasis
Allow me to conclude by saying, would that Israel had a mere fraction of a
Churchill at the helm
3. Archaeology: More Prehistoric Man
Frauds Uncovered in Germany
History of modern man unravels as German scholar is exposed as fraud
Flamboyant anthropologist falsified dating of key discoveries
Luke Harding in Berlin
Saturday February 19 2005
It appeared to be one of archaeology's most sensational finds. The skull
fragment discovered in a peat bog near Hamburg was more than 36,000 years old -
and was the vital missing link between modern humans and Neanderthals.
This, at least, is what Professor Reiner Protsch von Zieten - a distinguished,
cigar-smoking German anthropologist - told his scientific colleagues, to global
acclaim, after being invited to date the extremely rare skull.
However, the professor's 30-year-old academic career has now ended in disgrace
after the revelation that he systematically falsified the dates on this and
numerous other "stone age" relics.
Yesterday his university in Frankfurt announced the professor had been forced to
retire because of numerous "falsehoods and manipulations". According to experts,
his deceptions may mean an entire tranche of the history of man's development
will have to be rewritten.
"Anthropology is going to have to completely revise its picture of modern man
between 40,000 and 10,000 years ago," said Thomas Terberger, the archaeologist
who discovered the hoax. "Prof Protsch's work appeared to prove that
anatomically modern humans and Neanderthals had co-existed, and perhaps even had
children together. This now appears to be rubbish."
The scandal only came to light when Prof Protsch was caught trying to sell his
department's entire chimpanzee skull collection to the United States.
An inquiry later established that he had also passed off fake fossils as real
ones and had plagiarised other scientists' work.
His discovery appeared to show that Neanderthals had spread much further north
than was previously known.
At the same time, German police began investigating the professor for fraud,
following allegations that he had tried to sell the university's 278 chimpanzee
skulls for $70,000 to a US dealer.
Why, though, had he done it?
"If you find a skull that's more than 30,000 years old it's a sensation. If you
find three of them people notice you. It's good for your career," Prof Terberger
said. "At the end of the day it was about ambition."
Other details of the professor's life also appeared to crumble under scrutiny.
Before he disappeared from the university's campus last year, Prof Protsch told
his students he had examined Hitler's and Eva Braun's bones.
He also boasted of having flats in New York, Florida and California, where, he
claimed, he hung out with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Steffi Graf. Even the
professor's aristocratic title, "von Zieten", appears to be bogus.
Far from being the descendant of a dashing general in the hussars, the professor
was the son of a Nazi MP, Wilhelm Protsch, Der Spiegel magazine revealed last
The university is investigating how thousands of documents lodged in the
anthropology department relating to the Nazis' gruesome scientific experiments
in the 1930s were mysteriously shredded, allegedly under the professor's
They also discovered that some of the 12,000 skeletons stored in the
department's "bone cellar" were missing their heads, apparently sold to friends
of the professor in the US and sympathetic dentists.
Yesterday the university admitted that it should have discovered the professor's
fabrications far earlier. But it pointed out that, like all public servants in
Germany, the high-profile anthropologist was virtually impossible to sack, and
had also proved difficult to pin down.
"He was perfect at being evasive," Prof Brandt said yesterday. "He would switch
from saying 'it isn't really clear' to giving diffuse statements.
"I'm not a psychologist so I can't say why he did it. But my guess is that when
he came back from the States 30 years ago he realised he wasn't up to the job of
being a professor. So he started inventing things. It rapidly became a habit.'
Missing links and planted stone age finds
The most infamous of all scientific frauds was unearthed in 1912 in a Sussex
gravel pit. With its huge human-like braincase and ape-like jaw, the Piltdown
Man "fossil" was named Eoanthropus dawsoni after Charles Dawson, the solicitor
and amateur archaeologist who discovered it. For 40 years Piltdown Man was
heralded as the missing link between humans and their primate ancestors. But in
1953 scientists concluded it was a forgery. Radiocarbon dating showed the human
skull was just 600 years old, while the jawbone was that of an orang-utan. The
entire package of fossil fragments found at Piltdown - which included a
prehistoric cricket bat - had been planted.
The devil's archaeologist
Japanese archaeologist Shinichi Fujimura was so prolific at uncovering
prehistoric artefacts he earned the nickname "God's hands". At site after site,
Fujimura discovered stoneware and relics that pushed back the limits of Japan's
known history. The researcher and his stone age finds drew international
attention and rewrote text books. In November 2000 the spell was broken when a
newspaper printed pictures of Fujimura digging holes and burying objects that he
later dug up and announced as major finds. "I was tempted by the devil. I don't
know how I can apologise for what I did," he said.
The supposed fossil of Archaeoraptor, which was to become known as the "Piltdown
turkey", came to light in 1999 when National Geographic magazine published an
account of its discovery. It seemed to show another missing link - this time
between birds and dinosaurs. Archaeoraptor appeared to be the remains of a large
feathered bird with the tail of a dinosaur. The fossil was smuggled out of China
and sold to a private collector in the US for ?51,000. Experts were suspicious
and closer examination showed the specimen to be a "composite" - two fossils
stuck together with strong glue.
To Make an Offering to Brit-Am
Send a check to
or deposit a donation in our
Contribute to Brit-Am
Correspond with us
Send Comments or Criticisms
You may not always receive an immediate answer but anything you say will be considered and appreciated
Send us an
Books and Offering Opportunities