There is now a stark example showing how the Jews
do damage to their causes because they begin every endeavor with the false
premise that they are perfect whereas everyone else is not only imperfect, but
evil. The consequence of what they see as reality is that they believe they
have rights no one else has, and obligations that differ from those imposed on
everyone else.
The example in question came in the form of an
article under the title: “British Jews Have Reason to Fear Corbyn's Labour
Party” and the subtitle: “The opposition leader has called Hamas terrorists
'brothers' and disparaged even domestic 'Zionists.'” It was written by Dovid Efune
and published on September 6, 2018 in the Wall Street Journal even though Efune
has his own publication – being the editor in chief and CEO of the Algemeiner,
a New York-based newspaper.
Two quotes from the Efune article show how the
Jews begin every endeavor harboring the false premise of their perfection. Once
you have absorbed this reality concerning the nature of the Jewish character,
you'll delve into the article and spot the problems that such attitude
generates for them. You'll also discover that they are driven by a destructive
mentality from which they cannot separate themselves. Here are the two quotes:
First, there is this: “Rabbi Sacks described Mr.
Corbyn as an anti-Semite. He doubled down, telling the BBC that the prospect of
Mr. Corbyn as prime minister was a danger to British Jews … 68 leading U.K.
Rabbis had written an open letter to the Guardian accusing Labour's leadership
of ignoring the Jewish community and the severe and widespread anti-Semitism
plaguing the party”.
Second, there is this: “Mr. Corbyn and his
acolytes are having none of this––and have engaged in concerted efforts to
undermine their critics. A Labour spokesman called Rabbi Sacks's comments
absurd and offensive. Mr. Corbyn claimed in an interview: 'I am not anti-Semite
in any way, never have been, never will be' [but] his actions and words tell a
very different story”.
What's wrong with that, you ask? What's wrong is
that the writer is American and writing for an American audience about a
dispute between two parties that happen to be foreign, and battling it in their
own country … far away from America. You would think that the writer, Dovid
Efune, would go out of his way to be impartial, eager to present the two sides
fairly. But that's not what he did.
Instead, Dovid Efune proved to be unabashedly one
sided, thus lost the confidence of his readers and damaged the cause he is
promoting. What aggravated the situation even more, is that his bias was shown
to relate to the false premise that the Jews are perfect, and everyone else is
evil. Since no one sane has accepted this view as a starting point for
believing that Corbyn was bad for Britain, Corbyn remained as popular as ever.
Looking at the two quotes above, we can see how
Dovid Efune betrayed the cause he is trying to promote. It is that when he
spoke of Sacks and 68 other rabbis, Efune reported what they had said without
him editorializing, even though the rabbis had leveled a ton of severe
accusations against their opponents. So far so good, but that wasn't the whole
story.
In contrast to his respectful treatment of the
rabbis, Efune spoke disparagingly of Corbyn and those he called “his acolytes.”
He characterized them as acting in a “concerted” fashion, an adjective used
here to disparage Corbyn and his supporters. And when the latter defended
himself saying he was not an anti-Semite, Efune characterized those words as
being a Corbyn claim. All in all, Efune practiced a double standard that was so
flagrant, it did much to destroy his credibility.
The article goes on in that vein for a few more
paragraphs with the author trying to pull the tricks that did a marvelous job
to confuse America's cultural peasants of the Congress, and causing them to
give the store to Israel with no conditions attached. Here is an example of
that: “His blind spot is his failure to distinguish between criticism of
Israeli policies and an irrational and thoroughly bigoted hatred of Israel
itself”.
When debated, this kind of accusation has led to
the determination that to be safe, an intellectual peasant must learn to utter
reflexively a number of sayings such as this: “Yes, with no justification
whatsoever, Israel cut down six Palestinian children playing on the beach, but
Israel has the right to defend itself”.
Recall that in the competition between the Brits
and the Jews to become the moral guide to America's governing elites, the Jews
had managed to dethrone the Brits and take their place. But if Jeremy Corbyn is
elected Prime Minister of Britain, the chances are that the latter will get
back into the driver's seat, and be in a position to tell America what it told
it once before. This was the time when America was talking about bombing North
Vietnam with nuclear weapons. Britain warned that this would be an act of
lunacy and talked America out of it.