Actually, the Wall Street Journal editors did not come right
out and said it’s okay for gay people to murder children, but they said the
things that imply they meant it. So the question: Why did they not realize what
they were doing?
You can try answering that question after reading:
“Democrats vs. Israel ,”
a piece that also came under the subtitle: “Sanders puts two hostile voices on
the party's platform committee.” It was published on May 27, 2016 in the Wall Street
Journal.
It is the same old story about editors being so blinded by
the intensity of their Jewish fanaticism, they could not see past the end of
their noses. And right there, at the limit of their vision, there was this set
of instructions … this one thing only. It was a list of talking points designed
to lead to one conclusion and nothing else ... this conclusion: The
righteousness of the Jews extends beyond infinity; the unrighteousness of those
who do not love the Jews extends beyond infinity. It is that when talking about
the Jews, the currency used must be nothing less than a set of absolutes.
You'll see how fanaticism made the WSJ editors sound like
they say they do not mind seeing gay people murder children because
homosexuality is part of a value system that's tolerated by Americans of the
liberal democratic persuasion, and rejected by the enemies of the Jews. Yes,
there is the fact that a large segment of the Jewish population also rejects
homosexuality and that conservative Wall Street Journal does too. But in the
eyes of the editors, this reality does not elevate the homophobic enemies of
the Jews to the level of the homophobic Western lovers of the Jews.
The editorial is about a paradigm that's shifting in America . The
shift is opposed by the Journal editors in the way that a child tries to stop a
moving train. He does it by imagining himself to be Superman pushing backward a
train that wants to go forward. The train in this analogy is the sense of
justice that the American people say is the moral force motivating them to do
what's right regardless of the consequences. To the dismay of the Journal
editors, this is how that force manifests itself: “A Pew poll found that
self-identified liberal Democrats now tilt to the Palestinians, 40% to 33%.”
And that was enough to make the editors see red.
Realizing there is nothing they can do to stop the train,
let alone push it backward; the Journal's toddling Superman tries to sabotage
the rails on which the train rides by painting an unflattering picture of the
men that Sanders put on the platform committee of the Democratic Party. This is
what the editors say about them: “The pair are expected to push hard for a more
'even-handed' position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict”. Got it? To the
Wall Street Journal, even-handedness is now a crime. At least it is for this
one occasion.
Even if you're not old enough to remember a time when it was
anti-Semitic to say that the Jews were lobbying to make America biased towards
Israel rather than be even-handed, the fact that they now openly call for
America to be biased even as she plays the role of honest broker, should send
the chill down your spine. This will happen if you think of the venomous
morality that these people have stealthily been injecting into the American
culture for half a century.
And that's not all. Realizing that they have no convincing
legal argument they can advance to oppose Sanders' choice, or oppose the views
of the two gentlemen, the Journal editors try to pull a fast one. To do that,
they rely on the mistaken notion that America
and Israel
share the same values. The trouble, however, is that they end up creating a
situation that backfires on them.
Here is what happened. First they chided one of the
appointees for articulating his views with regard to the Gaza War. He had said
this: “The Israeli massacre of precious children is a crime against humanity.”
And then, they ended their presentation like this: “support for Israel should
come naturally to the Democratic Party. Last we checked it was better to be a
homosexual in Tel Aviv than in Gaza .
As they write their party's platform, Democrats might ask why Israel that
fully shares their values, should be the one they condemn”.
In other words, the editors of the Wall Street Journal are saying
to the 15 members who will write the Democratic platform: Don't worry about
Palestinian children being massacred because the Israeli pilots responsible for
the massacres may turn out to be homosexual.