When someone is ill and goes to see a doctor, he wants the symptoms of his illness alleviated for sure. But if the doctor does not address the cause or causes of his symptoms, the patient looks for another doctor that may have a different approach.
This
is a good enough metaphor to represent not just physical illnesses, but also
the antisocial behavior whose symptoms are disagreeable to the public but
remain unseen to the disorderly who fails to even recognize them. If the
disorderly is young, his bad behavior is explained to him, and he is told not
to repeat it. If he does not, he is sent to a correctional institution that
works on him as long as it takes to change him. But if the disorderly is an
adult who refuses to change, he is shunned by the public as long as he does not
break the law. If he does that, he is prosecuted and dealt with accordingly.
There
exists a social illness that has caused the patients to misbehave offensively in
the eyes of every society through space and time. It has been rejected everywhere
and in every era. That rejection was given the erroneous name of antisemitism.
Even though Semitism refers to an Arab/Hebrew ethnicity, those who practice the
misbehaving activities today, come from all sorts of ethnic backgrounds, having
converted to Judaism, a religion that was once associated with the Hebrews, but
now has little or nothing in common with them. In effect then, the Jews of
today are impostors impersonating the Hebrews of yesterday.
That
pretense in itself, is one of the causes as to why those who call themselves
Jews are reviled today as they have been in the past, everywhere they went. Still,
a bigger cause for the Jews being reviled, is what they do, having pretended to
be descendants of the Hebrews. They claim to have been “Chosen” by God to reign
supreme over all of humanity, and to own the planet with all that it contains.
That’s what makes the Jews pariahs in the eyes of those who do not use them as
useful idiots, or exploit them.
Having
been at it for centuries, and having been punished severely for their conduct,
the Jews have developed myriad ways to work on taking over the planet while
pretending to live a normal life like everyone else. For this reason, it is
difficult for the average person that’s busy earning a living, to detect what
the Jews are doing. But given enough time, Jewish misbehavior gives them away
as to their ultimate intent. This is what causes normal people to react
normally, and this is what causes the Jews to falsely accuse people of
antisemitism. They blame their woes on the normal effect that’s exhibited by
normal people, instead of blaming their woes on their own misbehavior which causes
those effects.
Now
that the objectionable behavior of the Jews has been detected and countered by
ordinary people, you see the self-appointed leaders of the Jews go against
society, including their own rank-and-file. They seek to justify their stance
by continuing to blame their woes on humanity, which they claim has gone rotten.
They do this, instead of seeing themselves as the rotten ingredient that’s
making life difficult for themselves, for the Jewish rank-and-file and for the
rest of the human race.
An
article published recently shows how the Jews tiptoe around this issue. The
article came under the title: “Antisemitism contagion contaminates college
campuses,” written by Quin Hillyer, and printed in the July 24, 2021 issue of
The Washington Examiner.
Hillyer
raises your eyebrows by starting the article with an attack on academe, which
he characterizes as hotbeds of virulent antisemitism. He asserts that they are
not moral exemplars for condemning Israel, having accused it in a way, he
laments, goes beyond respectful discourse. And this is when you stop being
amused reading the article. It is that Quin Hillyer is one of those who throws
the accusation of antisemitism and terrorism at anything and everything that
refuses to toe the Jewish line. Yet, here he is saying that academe’s discourse
is beyond respectful. What gall! If we can forgive him for the hypocrisy he is
exhibiting, taking such a stance, he still has to explain: What did academe say
or do to deserve being so accused?
You
search the article for reasons, and what you discover is the following:
“It
is … acceptable if wrongheaded, to take issue with Israel’s settlements on the
West Bank. It is quite another thing to accuse Israel and the Jews of
conducting genocide or practicing apartheid or pushing Jewish supremacy, a
neo-Nazi theory that accuses Jews of seeking world domination”.
What?
Can he say that again? Did he say it was acceptable to take issue with the
settlement policy in the West Bank? Is it not true that he and those like him
blow their entrails out of their bellies, hollering no, no, no, whenever
someone suggests that Jews have no right to settle in the West Bank? Are they
not the ones who say that to deny the Jews the right of return to Zion, is to
deny them the right of self-determination, which makes it so that to take issue
with the settlements, is to spout an antisemitic trope that leads to the
genocide of Jews? Is Quin Hillyer saying that he can accuse humanity of
committing genocide against the Jews, but humanity cannot accuse the Jews of
committing genocide against the people of Palestine whose country they have
been occupying for generations?
There
is actually an answer to this series of questions. It is that Quin Hillyer did
no exactly say it was acceptable to take issue with Israel’s settlements. What
he said was this: “It is one thing to take issue with Israel’s settlements, it
is another to accuse Israel of genocide.” So, that’s what it is. He is saying
that when he cannot deny all the accusations thrown at him or Israel, he’ll
accept Israel being accused of stealing the West Bank, if this will divert
attention from Israel being accused of committing genocide.
And
this highlights the problem that the Jews have with the way they are trained to
speak. They make truth conditional on their ability to hide it.
Had
they come out and said, it was legitimate to damn Israel for stealing Palestinian
property, but they have an explanation as to why Israel is doing it, then
gotten into a debate, we would be having a different debate now. Unfortunately,
we’re not having such a debate.
This renders the rest of Quin Hillyer’s article moot. If he wants to have a meaningful debate, he’ll have to shed his Jewish attitude, and start talking the way that human beings talk.