They made their own bed, and now they complain they must
sleep in it.
No, that's not it. The reality is even worse than that. It
is that they crapped all over what they thought was someone's bed but it turned
out to be their own bed. Well then, can it get worse than that? You bet it can.
It can because when it comes to Jews, infinity is not the
end of something. To them, infinity sits together with the starting point where
they begin every scavenging journey in which they seek to grab what someone
else has produced, and they run looking for another prey on whose achievements
they can feed and live the good life. And the Jews repeat the performance for
an infinity of infinities, never to learn from their failures.
The ace card they have been using to clean up the table has
always been “ambiguity.” In their hands, ambiguity became the double-edged
sword whose two edges they used to their advantage. Each time, they made
impressive strides playing the game, but then the table was turned on them.
Instead of benefiting from using the sword, it was the sword that turned
against them with both edges. And the Jews found themselves reaping what they
had sowed, and they didn't like it. But they never ceased playing the game.
You can study an example of the Jewish scavenging journey in
the article that came under the title: “Getting off the Fence About Jeremy
Corbyn's Anti-Semitism” and the subtitle: “I won't vote Labour again until he's
gone.” It was written by Josh Glancy and published on August 27, 2018 in the
New York Times. No matter from which angle you look at this article, you can't
escape the conclusion that it is a struggle to define anti-Semitism.
The truth is that European anti-Semitism began in the Middle
Ages when, true to form, the Jews tried to impose their supremacy on the
primitive Europeans by showing them what the Arabs––cousins of the Hebrews and
fellow Semites––had achieved dabbling in the new science called alchemy
(chemistry). But to the Christians of Europe, the experiments they were seeing
looked like “black magic” that could only have been inspired by the devil. They
surmised that the Semitic Arabs and Jews were conspiring with the devil to
abolish Christianity and impose the cult of sorcery on the European Continent.
Much has changed for the Europeans since those days in that
they eventually adopted Arab chemistry as well as math, the other sciences, the
humanities and the various arts that launched the European Renaissance. But
things did not go well for the Jews who retreated into ghettos and engaged in
practices that made the locals believe were macabre rituals using the blood of
Christian children. But that wasn't it. The Jews were simply kidnapping street
children and raising them as Jews in the ghetto … all that in an effort to
change their own Semitic appearance, and make themselves look more like
Europeans.
The result has been the cross-breeding, centuries later, of
a population that had a small to no lineage connecting it to the Semitic
Hebrews of the Middle East even though it called itself Jewish, adhering as it
did to the Jewish religion that was itself reworked by the rabbis into
something different from the original version. In fact, every Jew that does not
look like an Arab today can be thought of – with a high degree of certainty –
that he or she is the descendent of a kidnapped European child going back to
the Middle Ages.
But getting rid of the Semitic look while behaving as
superior to everyone else, claiming that God chose them to be his favorite
children, made the Jews despised by everyone else. Instead of dropping this
belief, which is at the core of their culture, the Jews chose to combat
rejection of it in two ways. The first was to call every sign of opposition to
their self-bestowed status, a manifestation of anti-Semitism. The second was to
run a simultaneous argument that says they are no longer the hated Semites of
old.
In fact, they have been hammering on the idea that they are
Europeans deserving to be respected like any European, whereas the Arabs and
the Muslims are the authentic Semites that deserve to be hated the way they
were in the Middle Ages. And the Jews hasten to add that this does not mean
Palestine belongs to the Palestinians; it means it belongs to the Jews who are
products of a successful cross-breeding program in the works for almost a
thousand years.
Instead of helping them, the new attitude helped intensify
the normal human aversion to this aspect of the Jewish culture, an aversion
they continue to call anti-Semitism because it is the way they can monetize it.
This is the approach you must take when you set out to
define anti-Semitism. Because nothing in the Josh Glancy article comes close to
that, the article can only be categorized as yet another Jewish whine about the
anti-Semitism that no longer exists.