"Brit-Am Now"-697
1. Bible Codes on Australia now Complete with Illustrated Examples.
2. The British in India
3. Question on Righteous Converts
and the Ten Tribes
4. Nigerians linked to Northern Europeans?
5. DAVID SCOTT HILL: Agreement with Brit-Am

1. Bible Codes on Australia now Complete with Illustrated Examples.
Our two recent articles on the Biblical Codes

"Australia  and the Land of Sinim:
Brit-Am Vindicated by Bible Codes"
"Brit-Am Bible Codes:  Australia  and the  Matrix"
based on the research of
Shmuel Trister
have been rewritten with additional information
We APOLOGIZE to all those who went to these articles
and did not find the matrixes and Hebrew scripts spoken of.
One subscriber wrote to me that he could not find them and I thought he was looking
at the wrong file!
I am still learning how to prepare files for the web-site so mistakes happen.
Have you seen the T-shirt slogan
"Talk Slowly. I am a natural blonde"?
I sometimes think there is something in that.
I am naturally blond and I can be slow.
Things that others pick up after seeing or hearing them once seem to take me three or four
times as much time and effort to take in and even then I am not certain.
It sometimes happens however that a compensatory factor later takes effect and
after I begin to catch on I keep on catching on
and make up for the slow starting.
Anyway, everything now seems to be working with the articles on our website.
The end result is much better than what we originally attempted to post
and we have gained some valuable hands-on experience.
Take a look at these articles as they now stand.
They are worth it in  my opinion.
If you notice anything amiss please draw my attention to it
because if you do not it may never be corrected or it will be corrected later
than was necessary.

See a picture of the oringinal flag of Australia with a large Magen David
in the corner.

Picture supplied to us by
Lorraine Harvey, Australia

2. The British in India
NY Times
April 30, 2006
'The Ruling Caste: Imperial Lives in the Victorian Raj,' By David Gilmour
Viceroys and Indians
Review by A. J. SHERMAN


IT is salutary to be reminded, now that some version of a Pax Americana is being extended with mixed results to several restive parts of the world, that the British Empire at its zenith was ruled by an improbably small number of men. British India with its teeming population of nearly 300 million people, covering present-day India, Pakistan, Burma and Bangladesh, regarded by Queen Victoria as her proudest possession, was administered throughout her reign by a mere thousand or so British officials of the Indian Civil Service, backed by some 60,000 British and 120,000 Indian troops. The handful of civilian officials, most drawn from a narrow cohort of middle-class young men, fanned out across the vast subcontinent, often sent to remote country districts seething with religious, tribal and communal complexities, with instructions no more detailed than "settle the country, make the people happy; and take care there are no rows!" Our image of these officers, who acted as benevolent autocrats over large populations, is derived mostly from fiction, literary or cinematic, that often presents them as arrogant, racist, at least snobbish and sometimes stupid as well. E. M. Forster, who profoundly disliked his heartier countrymen in India, is the best-known purveyor of this patronizing stereotype in "A Passage to India," but he was not alone: other writers deploring the entire imperial enterprise have portrayed its agents in British India as sordid in motive, crude and unfeeling in behavior, condescending to the subjects they ruled.

David Gilmour, biographer of both Rudyard Kipling and the grandest of British Viceroys, Lord Curzon, takes a more nuanced view. His research into private as well as official papers informs us how members of the Indian Civil Service in Victoria's time were recruited and educated, and what they thought and felt about their tasks. He describes how they balanced family life and multiple duties throughout careers marked by frequent transfers, prolonged separations from wives and children, illnesses and in many cases premature death. Neither an apologia nor an indictment, Gilmour's account is engaging in its depiction of the challenges, anxieties and satisfactions experienced by individual officials as they performed their duties. He does not gloss over failures and conflicts, yet his rounded history helps explain why many of the governed felt genuine affection for their rulers, and present-day Indian and Pakistani civil servants pride themselves on being heirs to the British Indian Civil Service, celebrated even by nationalists for its incorruptibility and competence.

Almost from the beginning, there was ambivalence among the British rulers of India, tension between proponents of benevolent trusteeship that would gradually prepare Indians for independence and those who took the view that India would be best off under permanent British governance. Most British administrators in India, consciously modeling themselves after the Romans, whose history they closely studied, felt justified in their imperial mission, proud of establishing an impartial system of justice; building railroads, highways and irrigation works; and keeping the peace that prevailed almost everywhere except in the turbulent northwest. Even officials convinced their dominion over India would eventually end maintained in public the imperturbable demeanor of rulers who expected an indefinite tenure.

This outward show was sustained by what one imperialist called "the masterful will, the stout heart, the active brain, the calm nerves, the strong body," but Gilmour makes us aware of the human cost, the strain of being on perpetual parade. His narrative, for all its depiction of remarkable achievement, is suffused with melancholy, not least because so many British, especially wives and children, died in India. Victorian officials denied homesickness, loneliness, even boredom; but despite strenuous duties, the annual migration to hill stations to avoid crushing summer heat, and a hectic round of sports, hunting and social events, they often suffered from all three.

Haunted by grim memories of the Indian Mutiny of 1857, socially isolated by convention and local religious customs, British civil servants frequently felt themselves exiles both in India and after returning "home," where for the most part they met indifference if not hostility after years abroad. Men who had enjoyed significant authority, battalions of servants, the grandiloquent titles and decorations of British India found they were nobodies in cold, wet Britain; and that their efforts, motives and policies were sometimes maligned or derided.

Gilmour argues that members of the Indian Civil Service have been misunderstood by many critics: they may have been self-righteous, held themselves apart, exhibited muscular self-confidence typical in representatives of superpowers at their apogee, but most did not consider Indians inherently inferior, and many believed that one day their subjects would govern themselves. Indeed, many felt some genuine fondness for those they ruled.

Despite occasionally numbing administrative detail, Gilmour's judicious study contains vivid individual histories, some amusing and many poignant, that allow us to see real people beyond the caricature of starched pukka sahibs dressing nightly for dinner in remote up-country bungalows. Their collective story of effort, self-sacrifice and courage is moving, and lends weight to Gilmour's conclusion that the Indian Civil Service "represented the British Empire at its best and at its most altruistic."

A. J. Sherman, a scholar in residence at Middlebury College and associate fellow of St. Antony's College, Oxford, is author of "Mandate Days: British Lives in Palestine, 1918-1948."

3. Question on Righteous Converts
and the Ten Tribes
Captain Ian McRae wrote:
Shalom Yair,

Just having a look again at your book, "The Tribes".   On page i Rabbi Feld says, "....the Jerusalem Talmud declares in the days to come the ten tribes will be righteous converts".

What is meant by "righteous converts" ?     Does it mean full converts to Judaism, or is it something akin to "righteous gentiles" ?

Ian McRae

It means according to the simple intention
that they will be full converts to Judaism.
It can in addition be intended to say that MOST
righteous converts are from them.
On the other hand it is obvious from the Prophets especially
Ezekiel that things will change and that both sides will be altered.
Judah and Joseph will re-unite and religious differences removed.

Note our Summary to Ezekiel:

Ezekiel refers to the three stages of exile of the Lost Ten Tribes (11:14 according to Commentators). They will be ingathered (11:17). God is still with them (11:16). Ezekiel (11:18) hints that first the exiles will return to the Land of Israel and after that they shall put away their idols and keep the Law (11:2). Ezekiel says that Judah has an obligation to help the Lost Ten Tribes return. The complete return of Judah is dependent upon the return of Samaria (16:53, 55, 61) meaning the Ten Tribes especially Manasseh. Manasseh today is mainly the USA. God will renew His covenant with Judah and with Israel (16:62).

Judah must seek to bring the Lost Ten Tribes back. God makes the participation of Judah in the process of returning the Lost Ten Tribes a prior condition for the rehabilitation of Judah herself!
<<I WILL GIVE THEM UNTO THEE FOR DAUGHTERS>>: Judah will have some degree of directional task to play in helping the Ten Tribes return and showing them the way in which they should go. Judah however is also obligated to get his own act together or else (God forbid) be punished.
<<BUT NOT BY THY COVENANT>>: The Lost Ten Tribes will not necessarily have to convert to Judaism in our sense of the word though they will renew the covenant between Israel and the Almighty and Judah is obligated to assist them.

God will once again accept Judah and all Israel.

The policy of Brit-Am is to leave these questions open or at least not involve ourselves
overduly with them.

4. Nigerians linked to Northern Europeans?
The Yoruba people comprise 30% of the population of Nigeria
and are ethnically linked to other peoples in the region so that what applies
to the Yoruba presumably could apply to the others.

Linkage disequilibrium in the human genome, Nature 411, pp. 199 204, issue
of 10 May 2001.


By contrast, LD in a Nigerian population extends markedly less far. The
results illuminate human history, suggesting that LD in northern Europeans
is shaped by a marked demographic event about 27,00053,000 years ago.

We next studied 96 Yorubans (from Nigeria), believed to share common
ancestry with northern Europeans about 100,000 years ago18. At short
distances, the Nigerian and European-derived populations typically show the
same allelic combinations.

Ignore the time gaps given. DNA studies are notoriously inaccurate in such matters.

This fact was pointed out on another list by Marc Washington
who also links the Yoruba to both peoples in North Europe and to
those in East Siberia:

<< the images of the Amur and others very
much resembles the broad-faced, high-cheekboned Kung
tribes of South Africa. In fact, in instances (hair-type aside)
certain individuals from the Northern European group and
selected Kung are wholly and virtually indistinguishable from
one another.>>

It should also be mentioned that R1b Y haplogroup which is
characteristic of people in Spain, Ireland, and Celtic Britain etc
is also found to a significant degree in the Cameroons in West Africa.
This has not been attributed to recent racial mixing since the Cameroon
type has distinctive characteristics of its own.

What conclusions can we draw from all this?
Very few.
Just keep it in mind and consider it along with the skepticism required when considering
all DNA findings.
Brit-Am Replies to Queries: DNA

Marc Washington is one of a group of Afro-Centrist scholars (tracing everything
back to Africa) who are usually been dismissed by the academic world because
some of them make exaggerated claims.  Nevertheless our impression is that
there is often some truth in these claims and they are often worth considering
and are backed up with facts worth taking into account.

5. DAVID SCOTT HILL: Agreement with Brit-Am
From: DAVID SCOTT HILL <davidshill@charter.net>
Subject: Brit-Am Now -696  # 4

Hello Yair...hope all is well. I am the person that emailed John Hulley in your Brit-Am -696 # 4.

I myself absolutely have no anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist feelings, and consider myself a "Old School" British-Israelite, Pro-Jewish and Zionist.  I am a member of BRIT-AM and support your views and really do appreciate your work on the recognition of the Tribes of Israel and Judah. Love your website. Very informative and interesting.

I do realize that their are BI groups and pastors out there that do not hold my views or Brit-Am beliefs. The Anti-Semitic poison has surely infiltrated a number of these groups, unfortunately. Some of their material is good, but when the subject of the Jews comes up...it is always the same old lie... of Edomites, Khazars, counterfeits, ect....... Why they can not see the obvious Biblical and Historical evidence that the Jews are Judah is beyond my understanding.  Hate definitely blinds people to the truth.

I would appreciate you posting this in the next Brit-Am Now. I agree with your article http://britam.org/British-Israel.html

Keep up the great work Yair.
Yours truly, David Hill.