If you want to know what has contributed
substantially to the decay of the Judeo-Israeli scheme aimed at maintaining
permanent control over America, you now have an authoritative case you can
study, thus satisfy yourself of that reality.
The case came in the form of an article
under the title: “Celebrating Israel as patriotic Americans,” and the subtitle:
“Jews must forcefully push back on the disgusting claims of dual loyalty.” It
was written by Rabbi Chaim Steinmetz and published on May 9, 2019 in the New
York Daily News.
You'll notice that the rabbi is either
oblivious of the changes that happened over the last decade, or he is launching
a desperate attempt to revive a past that's dying a slow-motion death. But in
doing what he's doing, Rabbi Chaim Steinmetz has confirmed that he and most
other Jews, have dual loyalty. In addition, his discussion has revealed two
other Jewish irritants which are contributing to the rise of the public's
dislike of Jews; a phenomenon they call anti-Semitism. These are the irritants:
First, if you observe something about the
Jews (such as their control of Hollywood, for example) and you report it
without bias, you are branded an anti-Semite. You deserve to be rendered
invisible, and have your career, if not your entire life ruined. But if ––
after making that observation –– you don't just report the truth but
editorialize that it is a blessing the situation happened at all, you are
branded a good person that's worthy of praise. The lesson here is that the Jews
see the truth as a bitter pill that must be coated with sugar before you
distribute it in their neighborhood … or you get ready to be punished.
Second, whereas Jews don't like being
called names such as lapdog or vulture or termite, they do not become so
furious as to insist that the caller's head be made to roll. On the other hand,
what explodes their bile, and splashes it in all directions to every horizon,
is the revelation that they or that Israel are granted a privilege to which
they are not entitled.
The reason for their fury, is that
pointing out such privilege can lead to a popular demand that it be denied. To
the Jews, losing a privilege that places them above all the others, is more
detrimental than calling them dogs, vultures or termites. When this happens,
they want to see some heads roll mercilessly.
Whatever his understanding of those
irritants, Rabbi Chaim Steinmetz went on to coat with sugar the revelation that
Jews suffer from dual loyalty, undoubtedly expecting that his explanation will
make it easy for Jews and gentiles alike to accept the principle of dual
loyalty. Here is what he said:
“This dual loyalty libel is not new: The
claim that Jews cannot be trusted to be loyal citizens. However, the United
States is not defined by a particular nationality, but rather by a set of civic
precepts. Louis Brandeis, who would later become the first Jew to serve on the
Supreme Court, explained that multiple loyalties are objectionable only if they
are inconsistent. There is no inconsistency between loyalty to America and
loyalty to Jewry [Israel.] Brandeis is arguing that you can be both a patriotic
American and Zionist, for two reasons. First, American identity is not an
exclusive identity. Second, Zionism has the same values as the United States. I
celebrate Israel as a proud Jew. For us, Israel marks a return home after 2,000
years of exile”.
So here you have it. The Rabbi has taken
up discussing the observation of Jewish dual loyalty, whose revelation has
forever irritated most Americans, itself a reality that caused the Rabbi’s bile
to explode and splash in every direction given that a revelation is the first
step toward eliminating what's revealed. And Steinmetz set out to coat the
observation with sugar to make it acceptable to Jews and gentiles alike.
Little did the Rabbi know that in so
doing, he advanced the notion that yes, most Jews suffer from a case of dual
loyalty, but you must not accuse them of it because (1) America never defined
itself by a particular nationality, and (2) the Jews consider Israel the home
to which they have returned after 2,000 years of exile, even if they never set
foot there. They simply live as proud Israelis in America, he says, the
implication being that there is nothing wrong with that.
What Steinmetz did not explain, and
neither did any Jew, is why it is that they consider antisemitic any
observation, however innocent it may be, if there’s nothing wrong with revealing
what’s observed about Jews?
They ruined many lives over the decades,
accusing ordinary people of antisemitism simply because they described what
they saw as accurately as could be done.
But this so frightened the Jews, they
stabbed the innocents in the back by the hundreds, thus created for themselves
a legacy that will cause people, centuries into the future, to observe that
Jews always got what they asked for: the sweet, the vapid and the bitter.