The self-appointed Jewish leaders love to
be “offended” or worse. It's because when this happens, they can go after the
offenders and demand compensation from here to the moon, and from there to
eternity.
If you have deep pockets, such as being a
government or a bank or an institution where money flows in and out like a
river, the Jews will ask for monetary compensation. They call this kind of
find, discovering a treasure trove, and celebrate the moment as if it were the
apparition of their long-awaited messiah.
Otherwise the Jews will ask for an apology
of the type they can publicize and talk about forever. Or they'll demand a
declaration that you have reversed your views, framed in such a way as to
render it possible for them to make big propaganda hay out of it.
Powering this behavior of the Jews, is an
undercurrent they developed decades ago. What they did was latch on and exploit
a virtue of the democratic system which says that to be impartial and fair-minded,
you must refrain from tilting too much to one side of an argument. Thus, you
must balance the criticism or praise you heap on every argument you happen to
be discussing.
The best way to give you an idea how the
Jews exploited that virtue, is by telling of an experience I lived and relived
dozens of times when I was calling on potential publishers, trying to get my
work published. I never had to wait long before the marketplace of ideas was
deluged with commentary by Jewish pundits and their gentile sycophants who
always took one side of an argument and never even hinted there could be
another side to the same argument.
So, I would write an article to draw
attention to the reality that there is another side to the same argument. And
guess what happens. Invariably, the publisher I am facing would tell me I
failed to balance the article, which I should have done by plugging the Jewish
argument and saying nice things about it. I would respond that the Jews do not
need me to publicize their views; they do it continually themselves. Moreover,
by the time they have built-up a case the size of a mountain working the echo chamber
collectively, I would have the means to respond with a case that's only the
size of a grain of sand.
And then, I would look the publisher in
the eyes and ask: And you want me to split that grain of sand in two, and
dedicate one half to the Jewish side? What kind of balance is this … having a
mountain plus half a grain of sand on one side, standing against half a grain
of sand on the other side? You call that balance? This is when the publisher would
make it clear to me, I'll never get published in this country or anywhere else.
Well, my friend, now that the Jewish
rank-and-file is drifting away from the self-appointed Jewish leaders, the old
mentality is back operating at full throttle. It is that those leaders are
monitoring the publishing landscape, keeping a sharp eye on the moderate Jewish
pundits whose work appears in print, as well as the Jewish hosts of
audio-visual programs where they invite guests to come and present their views.
When the Jewish leaders see these people
hint at an attitude that says they would give the other side as much credit as
a grain of sand, they come down on them like a ton of bricks. The Jewish
leaders do it by pressuring the publications' bosses to force their underlings
to split the grain of sand and add one half of it to the Jewish mountain that's
already there.
One such moment came when CNN's Jake
Tapper interviewed Rashida Tlaib on his Sunday show. You cannot imagine how
many bellies burst open hollering: “What's this guy trying to do?” These were
the bellies of the Jewish leaders who then called CNN's management and asked
them to force Jake Tapper to balance the interview with Tlaib by unleashing the
mountain of anti-Egypt and anti-Palestine hatred which the Jews have been
puking for decades without anyone balancing what they were doing.
As if all of that were not enough, Steven
Emerson came along and tried to squeeze from the situation a few more drops of
propaganda he could use to boost the Jewish side of the argument. To that end,
he wrote: “Blind Anti-Israel Hate Drives the Campaign to Fire Jake Tapper,” an
article that was published on August 8, 2019 in the Jewish online publication,
Algemeiner.
Look how Emerson started his article: “If
the horrifying terrorist attack on an El Paso store had taken place in Israel,
leaving a number of Israeli dead, the killer would not rot in jail knowing that
his family would be taken care of”.
Yes, my friend, whereas the Americans are
careful not to politicize a tragedy of this kind, Emerson has politicized it.
He did it, not to serve an American interest, however legitimate or dubious it
may be, but to serve the system that allows the Jewish leaders to run to the
American political crowd and ask for the transfer of more money to Israel, and
the shipment of more weapons to it.
Well, let me tell you this, my friend. I
watched the video in which Jake Tapper spewed the words that sparked the
controversy. Honestly, Tapper looked like someone under stress, forced to
express a sentiment that runs contrary to his free will. I must conclude that
these were not Tapper's own words.
I have the firm conviction that the odious
words were those of the Jewish leaders who stuffed them into Tapper’s mouth,
forcing him to regurgitate them. It all happened when the self-appointed Jewish
commissars pressured the bosses at CNN –– one of whom is Wolf Blitzer who needs
no persuasion to begin with –– to force Tapper to go on the air and speak the
unspeakable words ... or find another job.
This being the case, if something must
change at CNN, it is that Wolf Blitzer and his team of producers and floor
directors must be sent to pasture or to any place that doesn't house a camera
or a microphone.