Here is a new Jewish message to the human race: We can hate
you to the point of ruining your lives, even kill you or have you killed if we
believe we can get away with it, but you cannot hate us so much as to complain
about it. You must accept what we do to you, even love us for it.
This is what seeps out Jonathan Greenblatt's missive to
humanity. It came in the form of an article under the title: “Holocaust denial
is a form of hate,” and was published on July 20, 2018 in the New York Daily
News.
When discussing a subject of this nature, the first thing we
must do is keep in mind that we cannot regulate natural human tendencies using
artificial means. That is, we cannot force someone to love or to hate by
punishing them for not harboring the correct feelings. All that we'll
accomplish when taking this approach, is intensify the existing feelings of
that someone.
An example that no one sane will refute is that of Romeo and
Juliette. If, in real life, you try to force the two lovers to hate each other,
they'll love each other even more. Another example that some people might wish
to refute or put in perspective, is that of forcing people to stop hating
someone. To understand what happens here, we must recognize that people harbor
different levels of hate for different levels of offenders. We must, therefore,
restrict this discussion to the people that continually stir the hatred of
others by hurting them or by continually offending their sense of morality.
Some people will argue that if you try to reform such people
by punishing them, they'll develop a more intense hatred for those they do not
like. Other people, such as Jonathan Greenblatt, have a different point of
view. To expand on that view, he asks a question: “Should Holocaust denial be
allowed on Facebook?” And he says that Mark Zuckerberg, who founded the
organization, says “yes.” And Greenblatt says he doesn't like the answer.
Greenblatt goes on to explain that denial of the Holocaust
must be banned because the arguments used to express it are probably based on
lies, and that the denial itself –– lies or not –– is intended to propagate
antisemitism. This puts denial of the Holocaust in the category of hate speech,
and because, “Facebook does try to ban hate speech, it should root out
Holocaust denial on those grounds, not simply because it's false.” Wow! What a
convoluted piece of reasoning.
What Greenblatt has said in effect, is this: Ban denial of
the Holocaust because it is a bunch of falsehoods. Come to think of it, don't
worry about the falsehood part of my argument. But you must ban Holocaust
denial because it is intended to propagate antisemitism even if Zuckerberg says
he doesn't believe people get it wrong intentionally … Well, now that
Greenblatt has realized he cannot tell what someone's intention is, you still
must ban Holocaust denial, he says, because it is hate speech, and Facebook
wants to ban that kind of speech.
What is wrong with this argument is common to most Jewish arguments.
It has to do with the Jews trying to have it both ways. When, for example,
someone argues that Israel conducted itself the way that Hitler did because it
annexed lands that belong to neighbors the way that Hitler annexed the
Sudetenland and started a war, the Jews cry foul and say you cannot compare the
two. But when it suits them to compare what Israel is doing with what someone
else is doing, they do not hesitate to compare. The problem, however, is that
they refuse to show how the comparison works. And that's what they are doing
here.
The reality is that the hate speech that's banned on
Facebook and elsewhere, is the kind that incites people to harm others. No such
incitement is detected in the examples that Greenblatt has cited. In fact, to
speak of a Jewish conspiracy aimed at collecting German compensation or
stealing Palestinian properties, is not inciting; it is expressing an opinion.
When Louis Farrakhan says he doesn't know how many Jews were killed, it takes a
mental case to accuse him of inciting harming Jews. And besides, what Farrakhan
said is not denying the Holocaust; it is affirming it. When Arthur Jones speaks
of a Holocaust racket, it is not worse than the Jews constantly accusing UNRWA
of colluding with Hamas to perpetrate the “myth of Palestinian refugees.” Are
the Jews anti-something? What would that be?
Greenblatt goes on to do something that is very Jewish and
very objectionable. He says this: “Despite the anti-Semitism deep in the core
of these ideas, they're allowed on Facebook whose standards say “We define hate
speech as an attack on people based on race, ethnicity, national origin,
religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, gender, gender identity, and
serious disability or disease”.
Well, as demonstrated above, to deny the Holocaust is not to
attack Jews. Thus, to accuse Facebook of violating its own standards is to
commit a demonstrable falsehood that can only be characterized as hateful. This
is what Greenblatt did, and he earned the hate that's coming to him. But why is
he and other Jews like that?
The reason why used to be a mystery, but the secret is out
now. It is that the ultimate goal of the Jews is to force the human race to
fall madly in love with them. A French Jew that believes he is a philosopher
wrote a book to say this much.