Consider this statement: They gave a gang-rape party and
made it sound like fun. Many attended the party, enjoyed the first few moments,
but then some attendees felt disgust and departed early, leaving behind the
diehard rapists who kept the horror going. As to those who left early, they
forever kept their mouths shut, pretending not to be aware of what happened
because they felt shame, unable to explain why they went to the party in the
first place.
Guess what; I am sitting on a story I never thought I'd have
the opportunity to tell, but such moment has arrived due to the publication of
the Mike Evans story which came under the title: “Hatred of the Jews returns
with a flourish,” and the subtitle: “Anti-Jewish slogans were heard in
Charlottesville, and anti-Semitic incidents are on the rise across the globe.”
It was published on August 17, 2017 in The Washington Times.
After a long introduction about the Charlottesville incident, Evans tells how he
personally faced anti-Semitism starting with this preamble: “You don't feel the
full weight of hatred until you become the target. And that's what happened to
me on my 37th birthday.” He goes on to tell how he learned that someone was
planning to assassinate him on his birthday, but was saved by the authorities
who did their job by eliminating the threat, and informing him of what
happened.
He says this is proof of hatred for him because he is a Jew,
and this sounds like an accurate statement. In fact, many get killed in America
everyday by people who hate them for one reason or another. Others are saved in
the nick of time and, like him, get to learn what was about to happen but was
thwarted by the authorities. These people feel lucky, and move on with their
lives. But why is it that when something happens to a Jew, it becomes a big
story that eclipses even gang-rape stories such as the one described above?
I must pause here because I realize it is getting
complicated. So bear with me while I explain this part in detail. I shall do so
with the stipulation that what I know is a collection of bits and pieces of a
story as told to me by second hand and third hand witnesses long after the
events. Also, I had some knowledge beforehand which I added to those parts, and
spliced the whole thing the best way I can into the composite you see below.
At some point during the decade of the 1970s I knew I was
under surveillance by Canada 's
secret police because the Jewish establishment didn't like me writing an
article a few years previous, that was printed in the country's biggest
newspaper about Egypt
being a civilized country. What I did not know at the time but learned lately,
is why the effort that was mounted by some people to end the criminal insanity
of the police spending taxpayer money to collect information about me and
spreading it among those who would use it to hurt me in everything I did for
myself, everywhere I went.
This was the moment when the gang-rape analogy came-in handy
to explain to me how the Jews managed to win the argument that the surveillance
of me must continue. I was told these events were happening at a time when Israel had received drones from the United States and was using them to spy on Lebanon in a
clear sign it was preparing to conduct a large military operation there. Some
people in the Canadian foreign service were opposed to that, but they were not
the people who stood up for me. So there were two parallel stories.
And this is where the evil genius of the Jews played a
crucial role. Knowing that the group defending me did not care about Lebanon , and knowing that those who worried
about Lebanon
did not care about me, the Jews came up with a formula that neutralized the
objection of both groups. To this end, the Jews bet on the tendency of people
to enjoy the voyeurism involved despite the raised objections – mining as they
did the raw information they received about me, and using it. And so the Jews
constructed this argument: No harm will come to Lebanon because the drones only
collect interesting information about people we should get to know well, the
same way that we know so much about Fred, and he's doing well, and we're doing
well.
Do you see what this is about? It is the Jewish analogue of
the Nazi reliance on the science of eugenics to learn interesting information
about the people they used to examine. It is criminal banality that gave each
of the groups objecting to the surveillance, the excuse to put the onus of
lobbying to end the practice on the other group. But like the saying goes, when
something is everybody's business, it becomes nobody's business.
The result has been that the expressions of indignation
waned, everybody got used to the ongoing crime, the surveillance of me
continued for decades, and Lebanon
suffered successive Israeli invasions that ultimately produced the Sabra and
Shatila massacre, among many other horrors.
That was a horrific massacre to recoil even the Nazis but
not the Jews who found a justification for it. It was ordered by the people who
operated the drones that sent back “interesting information” showing the gunners
where to aim their shots to cause maximum damage to Arab life and property.