For a while, ambiguity worked for the Jewish debaters
because it gave them a mechanism by which to have it both ways. They looked
smart talking from both sides of the mouth, and sounded sharp explaining
everything with a Smart Alec quip such as: “antisemitism is spread by
anti-semites, not what we say or do.” And this one: “He is more afraid of
Israel's action than Iran obtaining the bomb.” And many more such nonsensical
locutions that did not deserve being responded to, and were not.
But then, the Jews went too far playing this game and
abusing the public in the process. They reached a point that gave ordinary
people the chance to see through them, and develop strategies by which to
out-debate them. When this happened and was repeated time after time, the
Jewish debaters and their supporters had no choice but to do what they always
do; fall back on their old line of defense which is to cry antisemitism. It is
how they sought the sympathy of the general public and that of the debating
opponents throughout history. They obtained the sympathy at the start of each
cycle but then lost it and suffered greatly as a result. So, where in the cycle
do they stand now? Only time will tell.
You see an example of that behavior in the Victor Davis
Hanson article that came under the title: “The Israel Double Standard” and the
subtitle: “The prejudice against Israel in diplomatic matters is as troubling
as more crude bigotry against Jews.” It was published on January 16, 2013 in
National Review Online. Here too, you see the author do what they all do which
is to chastise someone for expressing what they feel about Israel's treatment
of the Palestinians. He then switched to talking about the mistreatment of Jews
and of Israel without talking about the Palestinians again except to revile
Hamas, and make it sound like they represent all of Palestine and the
Palestinian people.
And so, you see Hanson talk about the shortcomings of Saudi
Arabia, Russia, Nigeria, the American poet Amiri Baraka, the New York Times,
NPR, the French Dieudonne M'bala, the American Kanye West, China, Turkey,
Bashar Assad, al-Qaeda and John Kerry. And he accuses the whole world of
adopting a double standard that disfavors Israel and the Jews.
Well, you may or may not get the chance someday to sit with
Hanson, but if you do, and if you take up the subject with him, I'll tell you
what will happen. You will begin by saying that the world has chastised these
people, institutions and nations at one time or another; how can he claim it
did not? And he will say, yes the world did chastise others but not as
constantly as it did Israel. And you will say that he cannot therefore accuse
the world of singling out Israel. And he will say that only Israel and the Jews
face an existential threat. To this, you will remark that he just singled out
Israel and the Jews as being unique. Whose fault is that uniqueness: the
world's or theirs?
At this point he will give you a long mambo-jumbo polemic
that is neither here nor there, trying to explain that the Jews have a number
of unique natural rights that no one else has, but that they must be treated
like everyone else because they make-up an undivided part of the human
collective. This will prompt you to ask: Is this why Jewish problems never
resolve? And he will say they become problems only if you think of them as
problems, which is why humanity must accept this reality for what it is and
learn to live with it. In other words, he is saying the Jews must have it both
ways.
But for the last two or three thousand years, the world has
refused to live with this sort of reality, let alone accept it. How can he say:
do not chastise Israel for anything it does, till every problem everywhere in
the world has been resolved to perfection? And how can he say: this would be
the natural thing to do even though no one else says they cannot be chastised
till Israel has resolved all its problems to perfection? And you will insist on
a better explanation, and he will say: You do not understand.