It is well established by now that the
immutable Jewish cultural and religious obligation is to accuse others of the
sins that the Jews see in themselves, and attribute to themselves the virtues
they see in others.
Thus, whenever a Jew explicitly tells his
or her audience to dissociate themselves from someone, or they say it by the
more subtle method of attacking that someone for one reason or another … or no
reason at all, the Jews would be expressing the ultimate form of hatred for the
one they disparage. Yet, the reason that the Jews give for asking their
audience to distance themselves from someone, is that they accuse him or her of
hating the Jews … calling the innocent anti-Semitic. And this is how the Jews
incessantly accuse others of the sins they see in themselves while attributing
to themselves the virtues they see in others.
There is manifestation of this phenomenon
in the column that came under the title: “Columbia celebrates anti-Semitism,”
and the subtitle: “The school's Global Leaders Forum welcomes Mahatir Mohamad,”
written by Clifford D. May and published on October 1, 2019 in The Washington
Times.
The content of the column can be
summarized as follows: Clifford May is asking his readers to (1) hate Mahatir
Mohamad because he says that Mr. Mohamad was deemed to express anti-Semitic
views, and (2) hate Columbia University for giving Mr. Mohamad the opportunity
to express his hatred of Jews in front of an international audience. The
trouble is that while Clifford May's column is a clear expression of his own
hatred for both Columbia University and Mohamad, he failed to give a single
example as to why the Jews consider Mr. Mohamad to hate them, thus deserving of
the anti-Semitic label.
So, the pressing question is this: What
does it take for someone to prove that he or she is not anti-Semitic? To seek
an answer to this question, look anywhere you want, and you'll find only one
clear indication as to what it will take to establish that proof. The
indication came from a French Jew who styles himself as a philosopher. He goes
by the name of Levy, and spends his time promoting two ideas at the same time.
First, Levy wrote a book in which he
explained to the human race why people everywhere should have undivided, total
and sincere love for the Jews regardless of what they do. Second, Levy
continually incites the “Western” powers to blindly hate the Arabs and the
Muslims. He incessantly urges the West to do to these people what America did
to Qaddafi's Libya. This was a disastrous military attack that Levy himself had
been advocating for years. When done by the Americans and their allies, it
turned out to be an adventure whose aftermath continues to be an unmitigated
calamity in North Africa, now moving into the sub-Sahara.
Because it is nearly impossible for the
English-speaking Jews to express themselves in the language of love the way
that other Jews do in the other languages, you'll find that the Anglo-Jews
stick with the language of hate whose fluency they have mastered. In fact, to
urge an audience to love the Jews, the Anglos do so by expressing hatred for
those they accuse (falsely or accurately) of wanting to harm the Jews. The
following is an example of how Clifford May has done just that:
“Given a choice, I'll take anti-Semites
over anti-Zionists. Garden-variety anti-Semites disparage Jews. They don't want
them working in their businesses, living in their neighborhoods or joining
their clubs. That's nasty but survivable, and alternative businesses,
neighborhoods and clubs can generally be found. Anti-Zionists, by contrast,
want to deprive Israel of the right to exist. Were anti-Zionists to achieve
their goal, what would happen to the 6 million Jews who live there?”
What Clifford May has done here, is
construct a hierarchy of hate to make political opposition to Zionism the
highest form of Jew-hatred. Because this level of hate has the potential to do
to the 6 million Jews living in Israel what was done to the 6 million that
perished during the Holocaust, May expects that humanity will automatically
feel sympathy for the Jews the way that it did upon learning what the Nazis had
done to them.
Clifford May has thus calculated that
hatred of what might happen, will cause humanity to fall in love with the Jews,
and will move to protect them. This is a typically Anglo-Jewish method for
generating artificial love by playing up the hate narrative: the only language
that the Anglo-Jews speak fluently.
In fact, the Jews invented this method to
be in a position to accuse the people who do not profess love for the Jews or
Israel … accuse them of being anti-Semitic even if they do not express
anti-Semitism. Go over the May article, and you'll find that despite being
labeled anti-Semitic, Mr. Mohamad displayed no sign of being anything like
that. But while accusing him of anti-Semitism, Clifford May has summarized as
follows, what Mohamad really thinks:
“Mr. Mohamad is not a Holocaust denier. At
Columbia he confirmed that there was a Holocaust. The event moderator never
asked a tough question or challenged the speaker's assertions and expressions.
'We have a lot of wisdom that we can draw on from you,' the moderator flattered
the politician. At the conclusion of the program, he exclaimed: That was amazing!”
Yes indeed, it is amazing. That's because
you can always count on Clifford May to bring the truth out as he tries to hide
the truth. It's like the old saying which goes like this: Tell me a lie, and
from what the lie is trying to hide, I'll figure what the truth is.