One of the most hideously dishonest intellects on this
planet is that of Alan Dershowitz. Some people even think of him as unique in
this sense. If that was the case, it is no more because the editors of the Wall
Street Journal (WSJ) are beginning to crowd him in this exclusive domain.
They tell who they really are in a piece they wrote under
the title: “Kerry's Rage Against Israel” and the subtitle: “The Secretary
doesn't understand why his peace failed.” It was published on December 29, 2016
in the Wall Street Journal. Here is the revealing passage:
“The Security Council resolution substantially changes
diplomatic understandings stretching to 1967. Mr. Kerry claimed that Resolution
2334 'does not break new ground' … The reality is that the resolution denies
Israel legal claims to the land while reversing the traditional land-for-peace
formula that has been a cornerstone of U.S. diplomacy for almost 50 years”.
Look what the editors did. They sandwiched the principle of
Israeli “legal claims” between two non-legal arguments. The one before it says
this: “diplomatic understandings.” The one after it says this: “the traditional
… formula.” Because neither diplomatic understandings nor traditional formula
carry legal significance, you want to know what the editors mean by denial of
legal claims.
You do the research and discover that this is an Alan
Dershowitz kind of exercise in intellectual dishonesty. Here is what he has
been doing. Every time that Israel committed the criminal offense of expanding
the Jewish settlements in the occupied territories, and the world expressed
disgust, Dershowitz shielded members of the brainless Congress from the fury by
telling them – in any number of writing styles – that if Israel was not allowed
to expand beyond the 1967 lines, it will be forced to go back to the 1948
lines. And that area is so small, you couldn't cram five and a half million
Jews in it.
So now, the editors of the Wall Street Journal have adopted
that same approach, and used the writing style of sandwiching the scary lie
between two apparent realities to make it believable. The lie is that they hide
the fact that the only legal claim the Security Council gave to Israel since 1967 is the ability to negotiate a
land swap with the interested parties – Egypt and Jordan at the time – now
the Palestinian Authority. Everything else that the Jewish mob of pundits has
been asking for since that time never had legal force.
Still, the Dershowitz character is not the only aspect of
Jewish mentality that is abhorrent to the human race. There are many more
aspects, and the editors of the Journal make use of two in their piece.
One of the aspects may be called the stealthy lie. Here it
is: “...a worthy goal assuming a Palestinian state that doesn't become another Yemen or South Sudan .”
The fallacy inherent to this statement is that the Israel/Palestine combination
is not now a version of Yemen
or South Sudan . But the fact is that the
combination is that, if not worse … and has been for half a century. In fact,
there have been three hot wars and a number of quieter ones; and there has been
two intifadas with a quieter one that has been ongoing for some time. And this
is not chopped liver as would say the dear natives.
The idea of separating the antagonists by implementing the
two state-solution is meant to resolve this problem. The trouble is that the
Jewish character allows the Jews to look at reality and see something else. So
while they are screaming from one side of the mouth that the Palestinians are
not being good boys or good girls; they are also screaming from the other side
of the mouth that Israel is
an island of serenity in a turbulent Middle East .
Go figure.
The other abhorrent Jewish character is that when the Jews
see something they covet and decide they must steal, they attribute to its
owners bad characteristics, and use that as excuse to relieve their victims of
what they have. Here is that passage: “Palestinians will now be emboldened to
believe they can get what they want at the U.N. and through public campaigns to
boycott Israel
without making concessions”.