If you believe that every problem has a solution that can be arrived at if the interested parties would stop beating around the bush and go directly to the heart of the matter — you’d know there is a solution to the never-ending Jewish misery.
Apparently
more sober than he has been for years, Clifford D. May wrote a column that
touches on that subject. It shows him wrestle with concepts he still cannot
resolve. You’ll begin to understand why that is when you study the column he
wrote under the title: “For Israelis, one more battle in a forever war for
survival,” and the subtitle: “The alternative would be another Holocaust.” It
was published on May 25, 2021 in The Washington Times.
Also,
apparently rid of the outlandish paradigm in which he used to dwell
intellectually; Clifford May nevertheless still hangs on to a number of old
concepts that keep him connected to the false narratives of the past. This is
what keeps him from going to the heart of the matter where he could be solving
the problem that preoccupies him — the continued existence of what he calls the
Jewish state.
The
old paradigm has its roots in the events that transpired almost a century ago,
and that’s where Clifford May has gone looking for ideas to start his column.
Here is how he did that: “In the 1930s, the Nazis declared, ‘The Jews do not
deserve to live!’” And so, you can
imagine how distorted and unrealistic his point of view is going to be as he
talks about the 2020s and beyond. In fact, the following is a condensed version
of the ideas he strung together like the links of a chain to reach weird
conclusions and construct false paradigms. You can be certain that no one but
the crazies take such ideas seriously:
“Hamas,
Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah and the Islamic Republic of Iran are
attempting to act with rockets fired from Gaza as they did last week, and maybe
with nuclear warheads from Iran down the road. Some acknowledge that Israel’s
enemies intend to replace the Jewish state with an Islamic state. And there are
those who concede, Israelis may avoid that fate if they will make the
concessions demanded of them, in particular to end the occupation. Some suggest
it might be sufficient if Israelis only withdrew from the occupied territories.
But in 2000, 2001 and 2008, Israelis offered statehood in Gaza and the West
Bank. The Palestinians said no”.
What
Clifford May wants to accomplish in laying out that string of ideas, is to
carry on with two contradictory discourses simultaneously. On the one hand, he
says it is unthinkable that Israel will ever want to end the occupation of
Palestine, which is what some people say Israel should do. On the other hand,
Clifford May says that Israel offered to end the occupation three times between
the years 2000 and 2008, but the Palestinians said no, they don’t want to be
independent. And that, in the language of the crazies means that the
Palestinians love being owned by the Jews; a state of mind that will someday be
adopted by the entire human race.
In
effect then, speaking on behalf of the Jews that wish to keep Palestine under
their control, Clifford May is saying the following: Don’t call us criminal
armed bandits who refuse to return what we stole, just because we coveted these
properties for centuries, and because we intend to keep them now that we have
them. Instead, blame the Palestinians themselves for refusing to take back the
properties, which we assure you, we offered to return to their rightful owners
three times before with no avail.
To
prevent his contradiction from being detected and from falling apart, Clifford
May came up with a false alibi, which he erroneously believed will strengthen his
argument. He said that, “In 2005, Israelis not only ended their occupation of
Gaza, they also evicted the territory’s Jewish communities.” The way he said it
implies this was a goodwill gesture on the part of the Jews, a move that did
not work well for them.
Well,
it’s been 16 years now during which time the civilized world has been talking
about this subject. What is said in a nutshell, is that even though the Gaza
resistance movement kicked the Jewish settlers and the Israeli military that
was protecting them out of Gaza, Ariel Sharon who was Prime Minister of Israel
at the time, should have negotiated an orderly withdrawal with the Palestinian
leadership.
Unfortunately,
Sharon was too proud to do that, but did something worse instead. Once the
chaotic withdrawal was completed, Sharon blockaded Gaza by air and sea. It must
be that he expected the Gaza resistance movement will take this lying down. And
boy, was he mistaken!
Without
mentioning any of that, but carrying on with a fraudulent narrative that paints
Gazans as determined to hurt Jews for no reason, Clifford May went on to say
this: “Hamas soon took power and began firing missiles over the border and
digging tunnels under it.” Thus began his discussion of the latest flareup
between Hamas and the Israeli military.
Done
with this discussion during which he streamed the familiar Jewish talking
points, May could not end the article without doing something very Jewish. This
time it was to bolster the stereotype of the Jew who would take the finger and
go for the arm. Here is how he ended his article:
“Marking
the anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp,
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said that ‘never again’ means telling the
story of the Holocaust again and again. Wrong, Tony. The phrase for that would
be ‘never forget.’”
And
then, mindful that to the Israelis, defending themselves means attacking the
neighbors who do well for themselves, Clifford May added the following: “For
Israelis ‘never again’ means defending themselves in a forever war”.
Well,
for now at least, Clifford May has been judicious enough to omit mentioning the
need to drag America into these wars.
But there is always a next time, a next finger and a next arm.