"Brit-Am Now"-328

November 24, 2003

1. More on DNA and environment
2. Joan Griffith: Comments
3. Wendy Sutherland
4. Biblical Proofs  nos 41-111. THE TRIBE OF JUDAH
5. anti-semitism and anti-angloism

1. More on DNA and environment
Eric Schendel  wrote:
Re: "Brit-Am Now"-327
item 3. DNA and racial movements

>I am puzzled by your description of how DNA changes.  It sounds like you are
>arguing for Lysenko's long-discredited idea that somebody can inherit
>acquired traits.  Is that what you are really suggesting?  If not, how would
>you distinguish what you describe from lysenkoism?

We are not arguing in favor of Lysenko. We do not say that inherited traits
are necessarily inherited.
That is a different subject.
We are claiming something in  line with what all DNA scientists claim as
may be seen on every DNA web site,
scientific and popular journal discussing DNA.
What  do they say?
They describe DNA as consisting of strands of genetic coding.
Spontaneous changes (mutations) take place in the DNA and these can be
Different sections on the DNA strand are more stable than others.
On a stable section a mutation may take place once say every 50000 years.
Even though the mutation  (it is assumed) only takes place in one person
this happened so long ago
that the descendants of this person now constitute a whole people. By
comparing differences between
the DNA on this stable section amongst peoples one can define different
mutations of this DNA as being unique
to specific peoples.
ON other sections of the DNA strand it is less stable and mutations take
place every say 300 years or less.
By comparing differences in the DNA on this less stable section one can
differentiate between families
and even between distant cousins within families.
The above explanation might be very crude but it more or less covers what
seems to be the universally accepted
scientific explanation.

WE adopt opinions consistent with the above but suggest slight variations
that DO explain registered
phenomena better (in our opinion) than any other possibilities.
a. The mutations that take place do not always take place in only one
person but they could happen to whole populations in certain areas
at specific moments.
b. It would follow that tracing the said changes does not necessarily show
that everybody with the same changes had the same ancestor
only that the ancestors were in the same areas at a specific period.
c. We would go further and suggest that the changes were not random but
rather connected to other changes in the host body and that these changes
were triggered by environment. We would suggest that the potentiality for
these changes existed from the very beginning
only needed external influences to trigger them.  This is NOT inheriting
changes caused only by environment  but rather relaying modifications the
potentiality for which was inbuilt from the beginning.

These claims are not new and they are consistent with what scientists
themselves say only they claim that the changes are random
and just "happen" frequently to suit changes in the environment.
We would also say that the time scales given by the DNA experts are too
large and indeed when the theory was compared with registered reality
(using a sample from Iceland) it was found that the theoretical time limits
were at least 10 times too high.
The following extracts may help explain better the point we wish to make.

Extracts from an article in our magazine ("Tribesman" not called "Brit-Am
Truth") issue no.4


Lee M. Spetner (Not By Chance!: The Fall Of Neo-Darwinian Theory From An
Examination Of Information And Randomness In Evolution, by Lee M. Spetner,
PhD., 1996, Jerusalem, Israel, published by Kest-Lebovits, now re-published
by Judaica Press) explains the Dauer effect first reported by Victor Jollos
in Germany in 1921. The model explained by Lee M. Spetner is consistent
with our claims that racial color and racial physical characteristics are
an outcome of environment acting on an existing Genetic potential of
varying possibility. The said model describes Genetic Switch from one
characteristic to another. The model is described roughly below:

* Genetic Switch: The Model:

This is very simplified (perhaps overly so) but it does present the
principle we need to illustrate.

Suppose that two different alternative genes (A & B) for the same function
(e.g., skin color) are present in an organism: Each gene imparts a quality
as well as having a depressant component against the other gene. This
depressant operates with a delayed reaction.

Say, for example:

1. At first, there is a barrier against A so that only B expresses itself
and one of the side-effects of B is to produce a deterrent against A. In
other words, the A and B factors are both present but only B reveals itself
while A is turned off.

2. Something happens (due to environment in the model of Spetner) and the
factor A is triggered off. The barrier is overcome, and A expresses itself
at the expense of B. A comes to expression and produces a deterrent against
B. No new deterrent is being produced against A. There still however
remains deterrent against A due to the former dominance of B in the
organism. This deterrent operates with a delayed reaction. At this stage
the organism though appearing as A can still revert to B.

If A continues to express itself and to reproduce as A-type, the deterrent
remaining from B diminishes while A produces deterrent against B. This
continues until A becomes the "true" permanent factor and the organism will
reproduce only with A until or unless some other major external influence
is interposed. The organism in question has therefore changed almost
permanently from type B to type A!! In other words at first there was one
dominant factor that was overcome by another one; initially the change may
be temporary and reversible, but eventually it becomes permanent.

This is the model presented by Lee M. Spetner. The model is describing
individual genes but genes work in groups and interact with each other.
Considering the model on a group level makes it even more realistic.
Expanding the model to consider the Genetic Pool of a whole community
acting in some way as one co-ordinate organism even further heightens the
realism of the model. People react as groups....
The above model of L.M. Spetner helps explain how 2 groups of people of the
same ancestry could vary in some respects (color or what not) if separated
for some time and subject to different influences.

2. Joan Griffith: Comments
Subject: Re: "Brit-Am Now"-327
<<In short in my opinion: There is no conspiracy by anyone but there are
forces at work that act with more potency than if the worst conspiracy
I think that is absolutely true.
I was thinking about prophecy recently & looking at the destruction to be
called down on our peoples (mainly Israelites! i.e., not Jews in
particular). I realized as I read that this is actually punishment for our
sins. I don't know why that never really hit me before, as many times as I
have read it and knowing the blessings & curses listed in the Torah.
So, we are actually sowing the seeds of our own destruction by doing things
like removing Judge Moore from his court seat. If you have not heard of
Judge Moore, he is the one who had a sculpture of the 10 Commandments in
the courthouse, and the high court ordered him to have it removed. What
kind of a nation kicks God out! what else can America be doing but
spiraling downward?

But also, I was talking to a woman who believed in the conspiracy theory.
President George Bush is supposed to be their man, and they (the high
conspirators) are ready to take over the country. I said Look, all his
people are in the Council on Foreign Relations. All his people are in the
Cabinet and elsewhere in government. They have already taken us over. So
what now? lol. You can't talk to these people.

Remember, with these DNA searches they are using one particular piece of
information to do their tracking, one for the male and something different
for females. So they can match in general, but they are not even attempting
to match anything specific. that is probably why some of the information
seems so strange. They are narrowing down what they can find out.
I saw a film on the Discovery Channel some time back that purported to
prove that an ancient --several thousand years ancient -- person they
called the Cheese Man was the ancestor of a current villager, using the DNA
from the old guy's teeth. Talk about robbing graves!!

I had read someplace that the rationale about the long and round heads had
changed, but I did not know what the current understanding is. Thanks for
that! And for everything else.

Joan Griffith

  3. Wendy Sutherland
Not so long ago there was an interview on the web from the radio Arutz-7
with Wendy Sutherland. We recommended it to
our subscribers. Since the matter has aroused some controversy in some
circles we thought it appropriate to make the following
observations. In the interview our own works were praised but they were not
the only sources employed.
We are  one of the leading clarifiers of Ephraimite identity so it is hard
to see
how we could be left out of any equation involving this truth though for
various reasons quite frequently we are left out.
Since the interview we have given a short talk to a group led by Wendy and
are scheduled to give another soon.
Up until then I had not met Wendy in person and since have spoken only very
briefly with her though she was acquainted with Rabbi Feld.
In principle we are prepared to talk before ANY group that invites us to do
so and to meet up with any interested
visitor to Israel or citizen of Israel when this is pertinent. If the group
can afford to pay for the lecture and would normally do
so then we too would like to be remunerated. Likewise if the person is
interested in Brit-Am then we would prefer that they
buy books from us or otherwise contribute to Brit-Am. This is how we
function at present. It is a necessary preference of ours BUT not a
The same principle holds all the way through.

4. Biblical Proofs  nos 41-111. THE TRIBE OF JUDAH
             When the Patriarch Israel was dying he blessed all of his
sons. Concerning Judah he said:
"Judah you are he whom thy brethren shall acknowledge the righteousness of:
your hand shall be in the neck of your enemies; your father's children
shall bow down to you" Genesis 49; 8.

The words "shall acknowledge the righteousness of" in Hebrew are "Yoducha"
and are translated in the KING JAMES as "shall praise" but in this case our
translation is the more literal one. The Hebrew expression "Yoducha" even
connotes "own up" or "acknowledge the righteousness of after a
disagreement"! The brothers of Judah will acknowledge his righteousness!!!!


"The sons of Judah; Er and Onan, and Shelah...
"And Tamar his daughter-in-law bare him Pharez and Zerah. All the sons of
Judah were five.
"The sons of Pharez; Hezron, and Hamul.
"And the sons of Zerah; Zimri, and Ethan, and Heman, and Calcol, and Dara:
five of them in all. (1 Chronicles 2; 3-6).

"And afterwards Hezron went in to the daughter of Machir the father of
Gilead, whom he married when he was threescore years old; and she bare him
"And Segub begat Jair, who had three and twenty cities in the land of
Gilead"  (1 Chronicles 2; 21-22).

"And the sons of Judah; Er, and Onan, and Shelah, and Pharez, and Zarah:
but Er and Onan died in the land of Canaan. And the sons of Pharez were
Hezron and Hamul" Genesis 46; 12.

Most of Judah became dominant amongst the Jewish people but elements of
Judah were also taken away by the Assyrians or in other ways became
attached to the Ten Tribes. Even so, in Biblical terms "Judah" refers to
the Jewish people and other sections of Judah that were lost are subsumed
together with the "Ten Tribes" of "Israel".


Yadi (Cilicia in northwest Syria), apparently became the Jutes of Denmark
and southern England.
Yeda (in Scythia amongst the Nephtalite Huns),
Iutae (Bactria),
Jutes (Denmark),
Juthingi  (Switzerland and Alsace).
JEWS (of Israel and of Diaspora),

Clans of Judah ("Yehudah"):

        ¨         Zarah = Zaratae (Scythia)
        ¨         Hesron = Chassuari (Franks).
        ¨         Hamul = Hamlyn (Frankish Germany); HAEMELE (Anglo-Saxon
        ¨         Paretz (Pharetz) = Frisi (Friesland in north Holland, and
in Anglo-Saxon Britain); Parissi (Parissi of Gaul, Parissi of Celtic
Britain in York area; Parsi (Parthians in Iran), Phiresi in Scandinavia
        ¨         [Paretz of Judah and Paresh of Menasseh intermixed and so
the same identifications may hold for both groups].
        ¨         Shayloni = Sali (Franks).
        ¨         Carmi = See Carmi of Reuben (Carmania, Crimea, Carini).
        ¨         Eitan = Eytan (an Irish ancestor in Irish Mythology).
        ¨         Calcol = Calcol (an Irish ancestor according to Camden).
        ¨         Calubi (Chalubi) = Chalybes of Scythian Caucasus and
Calybes of Celtic Spain -both famed metallurgists.
        ¨         Darda = Ancestor of groups amongst Scandinavian Royalty.
¨         Yair (Jair) = Iari of early Middle East and later Iari of Ireland
and Scotland. See the book Lost Israelite Identity (1996) by Yair Davidy
for more details.

5. anti-semitism  and anti-angloism
>From: david buckman
>Dear Yair Davidiy, Since The English and Americans are the decendants of
>Joseph, Are all those people running them down, ANTI SEMETIC. Since the
>war in Bagdad, they have had a terrible time with the mass media and scorn
>from all directions due to them carrying out their duties as God,s servant
>nations administering justice against terrorism.
>I would appreciate your comments.
>                                                                      David.

Answer: Anti-Semitic really means anti-Jewish. It connotes a dislike or
hatred of  the Jewish people beyond rational criticism. The British and
Americans and their kin may not always act in a sympathetic manner in many
ways. Nevertheless much of the universal antagonism towards them springs
from a deeper irrational, more sinister, source. Very often people who
intensely dislike the "Anglos" are also anti-Jewish. The Zionist leader,
Max Nordau (1849 - 1923), once defined a people as a group "with a common
The Jews and the "Anglos" should realize that they are basically one people
and that the enemy of one is also the enemy of the other.
One of  the very many factors that spurred me into beginning my researches
on the Brit-Am question in the beginning was the fact that the same people
seem to hate us for unjust reasons.