You do not need a PhD in Newtonian classical physics to know
that every action provokes a reaction of some sort … be that in the various
processes of nature, or the reality of our everyday human existence.
But despite this truth, which is as absolute as the speed of
light, the Jews are trying today – as they have been for thousands of years –
to reverse the laws of nature and replace them with artificial conceptions.
They want to make it so that they can engage in any action that pleases them
without there being a reaction to what they do.
What the Jews are trying to suspend basically, are the
organisms' responses to stimulus that have been evolving since the Cambrian
Explosion some 600 million years ago. Having culminated in what we call human
nature, such responses make up the set of reactions that come naturally to
human beings when provoked by offensive actions. Except for the vacuous skulls
of the American governing elites, the Jews are having a hard time convincing
anyone that such suspension and replacement can be done successfully.
You can see how the drama surrounding the interaction
between ordinary people and the Jews is unfolding where the human reaction to a
Jewish action is often labeled anti-Semitism. And of course, when the
accusation of anti-Semitism is leveled, the accusers go on to pressure the
government to respond by enacting new laws that have the effect of implementing
collective punishment on the public, and restricting the freedom of individuals
to carry on with their normal lives ... let alone pursue happiness.
Two articles, written on that subject, illustrate how the
Jews are engaged in the murder of free speech in the English-speaking world,
using the charge of anti-Semitism as the battle cry that allows them – at least
for now – to get away with the most horrific crimes someone can commit against
democracy.
One article came under the title: “Shine a harsh light on
anti-Semitism” and the subtitle: “Ignoring the rising tide of hate is irresponsible,”
written by Bridget Johnson and printed on August 10, 2018 in the New York Daily
News. The other article came under the title: “Why Won't the Labour Party's
Anti-Semitism Scandal Go away?” It was written by Stephen Bush and published
also on August 10, 2018 in the New York Times. Here is the essence of what
Bridget Johnson is saying:
“Anti-Semitism has been on the
rise from street corners to shops and schools. We're told that it should be
ignored, that drawing attention to the hate only gives the movement oxygen, but
it's by ignoring it that anti-Semites and Neo-Nazis have found a foothold on
ballots this election season. Anti-Semitism is a national security threat and a
virus that aims to rip the fabric of our communities and pit neighbor against
neighbor. We can't assume it won't snowball and grow into an even nastier
beast”.
What Bridget Johnson is doing here
is ignore the Jewish actions whose cumulative effect has led to the reactions
she complains about. From the likes of Alan Dershowitz that worked to purge the
nation's campuses of professors who refused to embrace Israeli apartheid … to
the training of Jewish students to intrude on non-Jewish campus gatherings and
order everyone to drop what they are doing and listen to the Holocaust stories
they came to tell them about; the college faculties and college students
reacted the way that human beings naturally do. And the Jews called that
reaction anti-Semitism.
And here is what Stephen Bush is saying:
“Mr. Corbyn is the leader of the
British Labour Party. He is an avid and unwavering supporter of the Palestinian
cause. For Mr. Corbyn, foreign policy means the developing world and,
especially, its liberation struggles. The charge against Mr. Corbyn is that he
is unable to distinguish between legitimate criticisms of Israel and hate
speech toward British Jews when he hears it. Anti-Semitic themes and
anti-Semites must be called out, even if the result is a destabilizing civil
war that distracts from the party's other goals. Mr. Corbyn isn't wholly inflexible.
He can compromise when he needs to. But when it comes to Palestine, his
passion, don't expect any wavering”.
What this means is that Stephen
Bush wants Mr. Corbyn to waver on Palestine for no better reason than to show
he rejects the anti-Semitic tropes –– not his own; he has none –– but those of
others. And this is the kind of Jewish moral clarity that has been sending the
Jews to their sad windups time after time after time.