They are their own worst enemies because no matter how much
education they acquire, and no matter how high a post they have occupied on
previous occasions, they keep themselves prisoners inside a cocoon where they
remain cut-off from the rest of the world if not physically, at least mentally
and emotionally.
They build the cocoon with a wall so thick, even sunlight
cannot penetrate it, and they cannot see outside either. The result is that
they fail to observe the world that is, but see a scary world of their own
imagination; one that is out to get them. These are the Jews who have spent
three and a half millenniums making life on this planet miserable for
themselves and for the rest of humanity.
Two of them, Barry A. Fisher who is an attorney specializing
in human rights issues, and Peter Sichrovsky who was at one time a diplomat and
a member of the European Parliament but is now a journalist and a writer, have
written an article together. It shows what hopeless situation these people put
themselves in as they miss every opportunity they get to leave the cocoon and
share with the rest of humanity the life adventure that we call peaceful
coexistence.
The title of the article they wrote is: “Sweden 's 'State of Palestine ' Offense,” having also a subtitle
that reads: “Before the rest of the European Union follows suit, members may
want to consider the Swedes' history.” It was published on November 17, 2014 in
the Wall Street Journal. The authors begin by complaining that Sweden has
recognized the State of Palestine despite two reasons, they say, should have
prohibited such move. One reason is that the peace process between Israel and the
Palestinians stipulates that the end of occupation can only be negotiated
between the parties. The other reason is that Palestine does not meet the traditional
criteria for recognition as a state, having no control over a defined territory
and population.
This being in contradiction to Sweden 's
move, you would think that the lawyer, diplomat, member of parliament,
journalist and writer which they are – would explain how it is that Sweden
did what it did, and that several other European nations are poised to follow
suit. Well? Do they explain the contradiction? No, absolutely not. What they do
instead is write several paragraphs to pave the way for the delivery of their
last sentence: “Britain , France and Spain would do well to ponder the
Swedish example before following it.” How disappointing!
But why ponder? Because Fisher and Sichrovsky say that the
image the world has of Sweden
is a false one. That nation is not in reality what the world sees, they say. Sweden is not
principled or evenhanded, which is why it must not be viewed as a leader in
international policy, they advise. And so they explain that Sweden has a
history which is less benign than the image it projects of itself. Tired of
this load of irrelevance, you ask: What has that got to do with the matter of
ending the occupation? Is the right of the Palestinians to a nation of their
own predicated on the merit of their case, or is it based on the resolution of
an allegation to the effect that Sweden is uglier than it looks?
Fisher and Sichrovsky do not answer those questions because
Jewish logic does not allow reasoning by honest debate. What they do instead,
is spew a 650-word diatribe in which they badmouth Sweden as if it were the worst
thing that happened to planet Earth. They paint the country as an antisemitic
sympathizer of current terrorist organizations. They also claim that Sweden had
forged an alliance with the Nazis and maintained a strong relationship with
them throughout the Second World War while pretending to be neutral.
There is worse to Sweden 's history, they say. Going
as far back as 1685, the Jews were prohibited in Sweden , a condition that lasted two
and a quarter centuries. In more recent times, the country dragged negotiations
relating to Dutch gold restitution, an act that delayed the cause of justice. Sweden could have been nailed for this in a US court, they advise,
except that other controversies gave the country the chance to get away with
evil. And this has had the effect of Sweden 's “undeserved image of
purity remain[ing] largely intact.”
This is why, the two influential Jews go on to say, the
occupation of Palestine
must continue, and why the Palestinian people must not have a country of their
own. And so, I ask the readers this question: Do you now see what the highest
form of Jewish logic looks like?