There was a time when the rabbis used to bray: “You can't
compaaaare,” and later started instructing the public about the idea of: “You
can't equate” though I don't remember hearing them bray: “You can't equaaaate.”
The intended effect was the same, however: to set Israel and the Jews apart
from the rest of humanity, thus establish that they are closer to God than to
man. But then came the people who told Israel and the Jews they are closer to
Satan than to man or God.
It is relevant to remember these episodes because the rabbis
and the Jewish leaders who came after them never ceased to compare and to
equate Israel with anything and everything that could help them make their
point. Two editorials on the subject of the UN report discussing the Israeli
military assault on Gaza demonstrate how far these people will go in doing the
things they say would be anti-Semitic if others did them.
First, there are the editors of the New York Daily News who
bellyache about the UN in a June 23, 2015 piece they titled: “The U.N.'s blood
libel,” in which they revile the World organization for telling the truth about
Israel. Yes, they use the expression blood libel, which they will most
certainly trivialize by abusing it the way they abused and trivialized the
Holocaust.
Second, there are the editors of the Wall Street Journal
(WSJ) who bellyache about the same UN in a June 25, 2015 piece they titled:
“The U.N.'s Israel Inquisition” and subtitled: “Another skewed report that
blames the Jewish state for war crimes,” in which they revile the World
organization for telling the truth about Israel. Yes, they use the word
Inquisition, which they will most certainly trivialize by abusing it the away
they abused and trivialized guess what, yes, the Holocaust.
So the question to ask: how and where did the idea of blood
libel originate? Well, the Jews call blood libel the Christian belief, started
in early medieval times, that Jews kidnapped Christian children, murdered them
and used their blood to make matzoh bread at Passover. Obviously this was a
false story, but it had roots in two realities, one being a physical reality,
and the other folkloric.
The folkloric root is none other than the biblical myth
about the Jews being slaves in ancient Egypt, and their taking a savage revenge
on the Egyptian families. They did so in the middle of the night by painting a
cross made of blood on the door of every household that had a newborn baby. The
angel of death then made his round and murdered the babies while the Jewish men
were robbing the homes and temples of Egypt of their treasures, and the women
were making the matzoh bread they all consumed before running into the desert.
As to the physical reality, it had to do with something that
is commonly practiced in Europe to this day. It is the kidnapping of children
having Northern European attributes by gypsies and bohemians who feel
discriminated against because of their appearance. Raising these children as
their own, and marrying them when they grow older, helped produce a new breed
of people (now called the Roma) who are still discriminated against, but not as
severely as before.
As to the Jews – unable to have a nose job, grow taller or
hairier – they practiced activities similar to those of the modern Roma, at the
height of the Roman Empire to shed their Semitic look, thus mingle more readily
with the Roman elites. The ordinary people who observed the Jews kidnap children,
merged what they saw with the Jewish folklore of biblical times, and came up
with the story now called blood libel.
The Jews no longer kidnap children, except in occupied
Palestine where they harvest their internal organs and sell them to the highest
bidder. Otherwise, they replaced kidnapping with adoption, taking in blue-eyed blonde
babies with whom they intermarry to create what they used to boast was the Kirk
Douglas look. It is a new “race” of Jews that used to be called the
Douglasoids. And having produced a fairly large crop of wealthy Douglasoids by
now, this breed of fake Jews reproduces itself by seducing high-profile
attractive girls (mostly Catholic) and popping the question: Will you marry me?
There are at least two things wrong with this new breed of
people. They may look like Kirk Douglas but they feel like Dracula when it
comes to shedding Palestinian blood, and they think like apes when it comes to
matters of justice, the law and human logic.
This is why the use of the word Inquisition by the editors
of the Wall Street Journal is revealing when seen through that prism. Here is an
example: “Israel refused to cooperate with the inquiry, since there was little
question what its conclusion would be.” This is typical of the way that the
Jews operate both locally and internationally.
The last such loathsome infraction occurred when a Jewish
law firm convinced the Canadian government to circumvent the judicial process
and hand it more than ten million dollars on the grounds that “there was little
question how the court will rule,” or something to this effect.
That shameful episode happened at a time when the consensus
was that the Jewish firm did not have a case to begin with. It also happened at
a time when the treasury was so strapped, it could not come up with a million
dollars to compensate hundreds of old veterans who were used like guinea pigs
in experiments that were conducted on them by a foreign power in collaboration
with their own government. This was such a scandalous case, people asked me to
report on it, and I did.
And the sickly charade of America, Canada and Israel calling
themselves regimes based on the rule of law continues as shown by the last
paragraph of the WSJ editorial. It goes like this: “The Obama Administration
says it will oppose bringing the report to the U.N. Security Council,...”
that's bad enough but it does not stop here because these people don't know
where to stop. So they go on: “...but it lent legitimacy to the enterprise when
it joined the Human Rights Council...”
Do you realize what this means in practice, my friend? It
means that America considers it lawful, therefore “legitimate” to apply and
enforce the international laws on all the nations of the planet. But when it
comes to Israel, an “enterprise” that does not whitewash the Jewish activities
must be considered unlawful, therefore illegitimate.
Why is that? Because Israel is above the law and cannot be
compared or equated with someone else. But anything that is done to Israel –
even when it deserves it – can be compared or equated with things like blood
libel and the Inquisition. That’s the difference between ordinary humans, and
the closer to God specimens.