Their family heirloom used to be the gun that fired the silver bullet that cancelled someone’s life and career instantly. The silver bullet is the accusation that someone is antisemitic.
Look at the Jews now as they throw the
accusation left and right, and fail to scare or even impress someone that might
have begged forgiveness in the past for making a mistake, and promising that
the mistake will never again be made. None of that is happening now because the
accusation that someone is antisemitic, has lost its bite.
In fact, the accusation of being antisemitic is gradually going the way that other accusations have gone. Among these were the
accusation of being a Holocaust denier, a terrorist, a Nazi sympathizer, of
belonging to a hate group, and a few more that escape my memory at this time.
However, as if to gush their act of last
hurrah, a number of Jewish pundits have once again resorted to the use of the
silver bullet in a desperate attempt to slow down the American awakening to the
reality that the old subservience to the will of Jews, is disappearing as
surely as have the dinosaurs.
Among the dinosaurs of punditry, you’ll meet
three who did their last gushing but failed to cause the massive splash they
were hoping would result. Even though they spewed their useless arguments on
the same day, September 24, 2021, on the pages of the same publication, The
Washington Examiner, the combined shriek of the troika’s wailing about the
antisemitism of Americans, did nothing to scare anyone.
One dinosaur goes by the name Zachary Faria.
His article came under the title: “The Democratic Party’s antisemitism problem
isn’t going away. It’s getting worse.” Another dinosaur goes by the name Jackson
Richman. His article came under the title: “Progressives show their anti-Israel
card.” And a third dinosaur goes by the name Kaylee McGhee. Her article came
under the title: “Did AOC just accuse her fellow lawmakers of endangering her
safety?”
First, here in condensed form, is what
Zachary Faria wrote:
“It remains undeniable that the party coddles
its antisemitic members. The vote happened after House leaders removed the
funding from a bill at the behest of its Hamas-sympathizing members. The
members who opposed the funding are, among others, two brazen antisemites who
have received only slaps on the wrist for their repeated antisemitic comments.
Democratic leadership humors those members who represent the activist base.
There are no repercussions when members spew antisemitic bile”.
To understand what Zachary Faria is moaning
about, we recall how things used to be. It’s only a short time ago that when a
Jew spotted someone exercise their right to speak freely, the Jew went to
someone higher up and demanded that the free spirit be silenced and cancelled
on the grounds that no Jew had the brains to engage that someone in a debate,
and win the argument. For this reason, the higher-up was obligated to show pity
toward the Jew, and punish the free spirit for not being so understanding as to
recognize the Jewish handicap, and make it so that what the Jew said, did not
expose him or her for being well behind the human race.
Second, here in condensed form, is what
Jackson Richman wrote:
“It was an antisemitic act of warped virtue
signaling. The progressives have demonstrated their ideological determination
and growing clout. There is a distinct unpleasantness in play here. After all,
it's not as if they're hesitant about spending trillions of dollars on the
Democratic Party's other pet projects! Absent countermanding GOP votes. The
progressive albatross over the House should alarm everyone. The progressives
cannot be trusted to do the right thing — however obvious it might be”.
Jackson Richman expressed the fear that the
free-spirited progressives have developed an ideology that was so appealing to
the public, its clout continues to grow. But this wasn’t the Jewish view, he
explained. To the Jews, the situation was vexing to the utmost because it equated
stealing money from America’s taxpayers and sending it to Israel—a good thing in
itself—with spending money on projects like feeding America’s school children,
housing the homeless, boosting the mental healthcare programs, and so on—which
are bad things in themselves. Jackson Richman went on to say that this
situation should alarm everyone, and the progressives must be declared
untrustworthy for adopting antisemitic stances.
Third, here in condensed form, is what Kaylee
McGhee wrote:
“Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez seemed to
accuse her colleagues of physically threatening her. ‘What we saw is a
willingness to rip our communities apart and put member safety at risk,’ she
said when asked about the vote. To be honest, it’s a bit difficult to make out
what this sentence even means. Perhaps she thinks this is the way to excuse her
own vote. Or maybe she is trying to pin the blame on her fellow lawmakers. What
did happen is that she was rightly called out for peddling antisemitic rhetoric.
If she can’t handle some well-placed criticism, she ought to consider whether
she’s in the right profession”.
Kaylee McGhee says she is being honest in
saying she finds it difficult to make out what Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
[AOC] has said. And so, McGhee guessed what AOC must have been saying. To
double her chances at guessing correctly, McGhee came up with two
possibilities: (a) It was a way for AOC to excuse her vote. (b) It was a way to
blame her vote on her fellow lawmakers. Whatever it was, says McGhee, the
reality is that AOC was called out for peddling antisemitic rhetoric. What?
Where is the connection between the two? Now, it’s up to Kaylee McGhee to
explain how what she says has happened, leads her to conclude that AOC was
called out for peddling antisemitic rhetoric. Where and how has the antisemitic
rhetoric figured?
Still, Kaylee McGhee went on to build on that absurdity by advising AOC to consider if she’s in the right profession. By the same token, will Kaylee McGhee take her own advice, and look for another job?