Increasingly, it looks like Eric Sevareid's observation
isn't just a metaphor but a saying that seems to have at least a grain of truth
in it.
It is that the late CBS commentator once suggested that when
an aberrant culture such as the Mafia, is passed on from generation to
generation, it can affect the genetic make-up of its offspring to the point of
altering the genetic make-up. Perhaps someone will someday show that one such
culture was responsible for creating a generation with a higher IQ than those
who begot it. But for now, we seem to have evidence that one such culture was
responsible for creating a generation with a lower IQ than those who begot it.
To add to the thousands of examples that were parsed on this
website, here is one more that was written by an adult who could not develop a
line of thinking coherent enough to make a child proud. It is an article that
came under the title: “The Next Failed Peace Talks,” written by Ruthie Blum,
and published on May 12, 2017 in Algemeiner. It is worth noting that Ruthie
Blum is an editor at the exceedingly backward Gatestone Institute; and that her
article was originally published in an Israeli newspaper before its reprint in
Algemeiner.
Like all the articles that were written by the mob of Jewish
pundits on the subject of President Abbas of the Palestinian Authority meeting
with President Trump of the United States
to discuss the revival of the Palestine
peace talks – Blum's article too crumbles like a house of cards. It happens
because all those articles lack the logical skeleton that might have kept them
standing.
As suggested in the title of her article – speaking of
failed peace talks – Ruthie Blum makes a case for rejecting the premise itself
of forging a peace deal with the Palestinians. And she ends the article with
this question: “how will Trump respond to the inevitable failure of such
negotiations?” It is obvious that she and the other members making up the mob
of Jewish pundits do not like the Oslo formula
“peace for territory” because they want both for Israel . They believe that the
longer Israel
can hold on to the land, the greater the chance it will manage to ethnic
cleanse it, and ultimately achieve the goal of having its cake and eating it
too.
Where the logic of Blum and her comrades disintegrates, is
in the attempt to have it both ways not only for Israel , but for them too. That is,
they are running two contradictory discourses at the same time in the same
breath. They say they want to see peace come to Palestine ;
they also say they don't want to see peace come to Palestine . But this does not mean they reject
peace, they go on to say; it means the Palestinians reject peace.
In case you find it difficult to believe that all
Palestinians reject peace, Blum makes it easy for you to believe. She says it
is only the Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas that rejects peace. That's because
he has a personal reason for rejecting what would have been good for the people
of Palestine ,
the region and the world. And here is the passage that explains it all:
“Trump will learn that his methods will not work. Even a
business deal cannot be forged when the true aim of one side is failure.
Indeed, it is precisely the lack of Palestinian statehood that has been Abbas'
meal ticket internationally –– and the only thing that has kept him the least
bit relevant at home”.
So there you have it. Ruthie Blum, like all the members in
the infamous mob of Jewish punditry to which she belongs, wants you to believe
that in the choice between (1) the Jews rejecting the peace because they want
the land with or without the peace, and (2) the Palestinians rejecting the
peace because their octogenarian President wants to feel relevant till he dies
– you must choose the second proposition.
This said; Blum pretends to have the ability to predict what
will spontaneously happen next. Here it is: “[Abbas'] bad-faith negotiations
will be marked by and culminate in Palestinian violence.” Which is why she
feels compelled to wonder what President Trump will do: “Will he follow in the
footsteps of his shameful predecessor and hold Israel responsible, or will he
realize he's been duped? Let us hope it is the latter”.
Of course, this is not a supernatural sort of foresight.
It's a plan that's incorporated in the Israeli scenario whose aim is to provoke
a confrontation with young Palestinians, thus torpedo the peace talks the
moment they start to look they might come to a happy conclusion.
The Israelis used this tactic time after time over the decades.
As it happens, their preferred method is to send soldiers into the al Aqsa
mosque wearing boots, thus anger the young Palestinians who respond noisily but
without violence.
This is when the Jewish soldiers will shoot them, kill a few
and get CNN's Wolf Blitzer to interview the chief of police in Israel who will
say that the Palestinians were responsible. He'll explain that the Palestinians
are evil, and they abuse the good nature of the Jews.
Because this is music to Blitzer's ears, he will ask the same
question in different ways to get the Israeli to repeat the same answer in
different ways. Blitzer will then sum up the discussion by repeating that the
Jews are good, and the Palestinians are evil one last time. That's CNN for you.