For the purpose of this discussion, political denial refers to the
attitude of the Jews who deny the undeniable facts of a situation as a way to
pressure the self-prostituting politicians of the so-called Liberal
Democracies, to say that the sun rises in the West whenever such affirmation
serves the interests of Israel.
As to the scholarly researchers, they are the serious historians
who set out to tell the true story of the circumstances that led to the Second
World War, what happened during the war, and what resulted after the victory of
the allies. It is fair to describe these individuals as an embattled group,
given that in the course of their work, they encounter ferocious pressure not
to deviate from the Jewish version of history in all matters relating to the
Holocaust. The penalty for disobeying the Jews being that the historians risk
earning the label ‘deniers of the Holocaust,’ even risk going to jail in some
countries –– they leave parts of the World War II history incomplete, and other
parts as distorted as the Jews make them.
That's the effect of the Jewish influence on the history that has
come and gone. As to the history that's in the making, examples abound of the
Jews imitating their sordid past; a time when they used to play games for which
they were punished. Such punishment ranged from being denied working in certain
jobs to being mass exterminated in acts such as the Holocaust.
Here is an example of what the Jews are doing now that intensifies
what they call expressions of anti-Semitism. It is an article that came under
the title: “Europe's Appeasement of Iran Remains a Threat to the West,” and the
subtitle: “While Emmanuel Macron was complaining of NATO's 'brain dead,'
European efforts to circumvent US sanctions on Iran continues apace.” It was
written by Jonathan S. Tobin and published on December 6, 2019 in National
Review Online.
What Tobin is doing here is what Jews are known to have been doing
throughout time and space. He is urging someone, this time America, to commit
an act that will lead to war. What happened is that the Jews pressured America
to pull out of the nuclear deal it had negotiated with Iran and other world
powers. America then imposed sanctions on Iran. To compensate the latter for
the economic losses it is incurring, the Europeans and their friends started a
program by which to alleviate the sting of the sanctions.
This is what prompted Tobin, in lockstep with other Jews, to do
what they learned to implement as a matter of routine: he presented the
self-prostituting politicians of the so-called Liberal Democracies, with an
upside down argument he hopes will convince the White House to double down on
the wrong it is already committing. In fact, Tobin is telling the Americans
that the European moves to relieve the pressure on Iran will lead to war,
therefore America must intensify its warlike moves to achieve peace. Now that
Tobin has sensed that someone has accepted his upside-down argument, he'll sit
back and wait to see if the White House will buy the Jewish argument that when
it suits Israel, the sun rises in the West.
This prompts the following question: Is it possible that someone
could study this performance and not conclude that the Jews are generating the
kind of universal resentment, which they will call anti-Semitism and blame it,
not on themselves, but on a defect in the human character? No. No one in his
right mind will fail to reach such conclusion, which is why the Jews are incessantly
working on it, hammering the notion that anti-Semitism must be confronted. And
when you get down to the specifics of how they want to do this, you find them
asking to be handed dictatorial control over the society that's listening to
him.
And so, it happened that in Europe, the people revolted against
those Jewish demands, and began to show their anger in peaceful ways. But
instead of taking this as a hint, and changing their ways, the Jews are
interpreting the revolt as being an expression of anti-Semitism that must be
condemned.
You can see that in an article which came under the title: “The
Evil of Antisemitism,” written by Michael Curtis and published on December 6,
2019 in The American Thinker. Here is how Michael Curtis begins his argument: “It
is saddening to recount the animosity, bigotry, and prejudice toward Jews,
expressed by pygmy minds, social media and universities”.
Faced with this kind of response from the Jews, the public––mostly
young men in Europe and elsewhere––took matters in their own hand, and sent a
stronger message to the Jewish establishment. In France, from among the many
other places, here is how Michael Curtis has described the situation:
“The area of Alsace as well as Paris, have been the target for
antisemitic manifestations. In the town of Westhoffen, 107 graves in the Jewish
cemetery were sprayed with swastikas and other graffiti. In the small commune
of Quatzenheim, 96 Jewish tombs were desecrated with Nazi slogans. Antisemitic
graffiti was displayed in the small village of Schaffhouse-sur-zorn and in
Herrlisheim, where 37 tombstones and a monument to Holocaust victims were
damaged”.
Did Michael Curtis learn anything from that? Not on his life. Look
how he ended the article: Antisemitism is an inexplicable disease, the
consequence of racism, xenophobia, and the search for a scapegoat. It is an
evil that should be eliminated.