EDITORS: Yes, we know. We call it historical “narrative” backfill propaganda. The recent DNA studies out of Europe prove that the site you quote from is showing a bias on this subject (while the rest of their work appears solid). Anyway, think about it. How could any researcher with integrity make such a sweeping statement without providing convincing proof? Where’s the evidence? Did he/she miss the memo about the remarkable UK DNA studies of the so called Ashkenazi Jews that even includes Chinese blood — confirming that the Radhanite “Jews” (Read: Babylonian) intermingled with the Khazars, Sogdians, Persians, and Chinese along the Silk Road? They ignored Sir Arthur Koestler (1977) calling the suppressed Khazarian Empire story, with its companion Ashkenazi story, possibly “the most cruel hoax which history has ever perpetrated.” If they had any integrity on this subject, they would, at minimum, have pointed out others who differ with their sweeping whitewash of the subject.

That piece you cite calls the whole discussion a “fraud” and claims “such theories have nothing to do with the truth.” These statements are evident propaganda since they do not address the facts of current DNA, or even the very logic of the nature of human sexual attraction across ethnic lines (which honest DNA studies show). https://soghdilar.home.blog/2019/04/15/the-jews-exodus-to-khazaria/ For example, if Sogdian DNA shows traces of Chinese blood, then some Sogdian in the past copulated with a Chinese person. The same applies to Ashkenazi or Sephardic DNA. If Persian/Babylonian blood is revealed, then that family has Persian/Babylonian ancestors.

Norman: We have also just double-checked the Smithsonian Sogdian website. It contradicts what you just said: “Although most Sogdians were Mazdeans in religious practice, others were Buddhist, Hindu, Christian, or Jewish, and some even became Buddhist monks.” https://sogdians.si.edu/the-sogdians-abroad/

Also, we read: “Roman sources show that by the last centuries BCE, Palestinian and Babylonian Jews were participating in the silk trade from China; certainly, then, some resided in Sogdiana.” https://sogdians.si.edu/believers-proselytizers-translators/

The reason will become clear when the conclave applies its talents to exposing the brilliantly concealed criminal fraud underlying all credit-based bank “lending”.

To perceive the crime, first understand the difference between the respective obligations arising from: (a) a “unilateral promise”; and (b) a “bilateral loan contract” (e.g., to lend (and borrow) money).

Only (b) involves a true debt obligation, whereas bank “lending” is based on (a), which does not involve a debt obligation at all, since no bank asset moves from the “lending” bank to its customer in response to the customer’s “promise”. Banks simply establish an accounting process to monitor and document the keeping of that promise.

Every bank simply converts (i.e., steals) the customer’s asset (credit-balance in the bank’s liability account) in order to create the false impression that it can “lend” such “credit” to the customer. But it can’t do this because no one can lend their own liability (AND such credit is already the customer’s asset, ab initio).

The fundamental crime is the initial conversion of the customer’s negotiable instrument (promise). This is aggravated by fraudulent deception, which is intended to conceal the true bookkeeping processes involved.