An incident happened in one of the American states (cannot remember which) a number of decades ago. It has become a good point from which to start analyzing the content of Clifford D. May’s latest column.
That column came under the title: “Why a Jew’s visit to
the holiest Jewish site provokes outrage,” and the subtitle: “Imagine if Pope
Francis said: ‘Only Christians are permitted in the Vatican! No Muslims and no
Jews!’ It was published on January 10, 2023 in The Washington Times.
What happened in the American state whose name escapes me, was that a
Jewish delegation visited the place where it conducted talks with local
officials, and concluded a business deal. As per habit, the Jews then treated the
Americans with the same accolade they used on the Turks, the Iranians
and other Asian countries at a time when Israel was wooing these people trying
to turn them against the Arabs. What the Jews did in Asia and then America, was
to tell their hosts they and Israel were very much alike, and very different
from their foes.
In America, the Jews added something they did not somewhere
else. They said that historically speaking, the American state where they stood
was familiar to the Jews whose roots in this land go back a century or more.
This was the remark that prompted American nativists to murmur what later
became a loud voice. Worried by the thought which decades later prompted other nativists
to march while chanting: “Jews will not replace us,” the earlier murmur proved
to be a warning of what was to come.
It is that the early nativists had seen how the Jews
operated in occupied Palestine, and feared that the same Jews will treat them
in a similar fashion. In fact, what the Jews had said then and continue to say it
now that terrifies people, is that they had a connection with Palestine, the
reason why they can steal that country and make it their own. Any nativist that
hears that claim becomes alarmed when the Jews add that they have a connection
with their property, be that a single American State or the entire Republic.
It is obvious that Clifford May did not factor any of
those realities into the article where he complains that a Jew visiting a
Muslim site alarmed the locals as well as the world community. That’s because
the question that automatically came to the minds of these people was this:
“What’s that Jew up to now?” And that question takes on an even greater
significance when you learn that the Jew is none other than:
“Itamar Ben-Gvir, whose Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Power) party is a member of
the coalition that has restored Benjamin Netanyahu to the prime ministership.
Mr. Ben-Gvir is on the far right of the Israeli political spectrum, but that’s
irrelevant here. He’s an Israeli, a Jew, and an official in the elected
government that has sovereignty over the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif who said
that in his official capacity as national security minister, he will ensure
that Muslims and Christians as well as Jews are free to visit the site”.
So, here it is, Clifford May wants you to believe that
despite the baggage carried by the Israeli minister, you must consider
everything to be irrelevant except the fact that the minister of the occupying
power happens to be a Jew. You must also consider it irrelevant that the
minister promised Jews will have easy and permanent access to a Muslim
religious site, which Clifford May reminds the readers, is already under
Israeli sovereignty.
Thinking he’s talking to the jelly spined members of the
American Congress but being more cautious, Clifford May tried to lecture to the
Arab nations on what they need to do going forward. Mind you, he did not give
them direct orders as he would to the Americans, but resorted to the more
respectful method of speaking his mind by complaining about the way they
responded to the Israeli minister’s declaration. Here, in condensed form is a
compilation of what Clifford May has said in this regard:
“UN Assistant Secretary-General called Mr. Ben-Gvir’s visit particularly
inflammatory. Hamas, the Palestinian Authority and the Kingdom of Jordan issued
statements declaring that if blood spills, Israelis will be to blame. The
Jordanian statement condemned the Haram al-Sharif and the violation of the
sanctity of the al-Aqsa Mosque. When walking becomes storming based solely on
the nationality, race, ethnicity or religion of the individual putting one foot
in front of another, shouldn’t there be objections from members of the
international community? Instead, however, the UAE demanded the UN Security
Council hold an emergency meeting to discuss the presence of a Jew at Judaism’s
holiest site. The Emiratis doubtless want to be seen as defenders of Islam and
Palestinians. They might ask themselves: Does endorsing an intolerant interpretation
of Islam really benefit Muslims and Palestinians?”
To end his discussion, Clifford May resorted to the ritualistic Jewish
method of shooting himself in the foot trying to have it both ways. This is
what he wrote:
“Antisemitism is a virus. Most Israelis have concluded that it cannot be
cured by making concessions to those who despise them. If you’re looking for a
succinct explanation of why Israelis elected a right-wing coalition, there you
have it”.
Do you realize what the author just did, my friend? Having
dismissed the baggage that the Israeli minister came with – attributing the
world’s rejection of what he said he was going to do as being an attack that is
solely directed at his Jewishness – Clifford May now wants you to believe that
yes, there is evil in what the Minister is doing, but the evil was instilled in
the minister by the human race itself.