Jews of the Clifford D. May type, have a nebulous kind
of definition for what is called antisemitism, and they use it to tranquilize
if not hypnotize the rank-and-file to keep them eternally under the wing of
their leaders, waiting for the messiah to come and deliver them.
When you assemble what they call a manifestation of
antisemitism, you’ll easily see that all their descriptions have one thing in
common. It is that if someone does not love, or at least pretend to love,
Israel and the Jews like a devoted dog loves its master, he or she is viewed as
being an anti-Semite.
And so, as far as these Jews are concerned, they begin
by considering everyone as guilty of antisemitism until proven to be otherwise
by committing a heroic act that demonstrates their intense love for Israel and/or
the Jews, or being a low intensity loyalist to the Jewish causes for a
prolonged period of time. Otherwise, the gentiles among these people, and even
the non-fanatic Jews among them will be suspected of antisemitic tendencies,
and treated as such by the fanatic Jews.
That mentality blinds the Jews from accepting the
reality that the “Jewish question” is nothing more than a small pebble on a
mountain of concerns that preoccupy most people. The main concern of ordinary
people being the quest to provide the necessities of life for themselves and
their families. In fact, most people spend 99.99 percent of their time thinking
about themselves and their families while spending 0.01 percent of their time
on all other matters, which may or may not include the Jewish question.
Thus, when you see people like Clifford May discuss
the Jewish question as if it were the main driving force behind an event, you
know you're entering the Twilight Zone of yet another Jewish fantasy aimed at
keeping the rank-and-file on a leash. And that's the feeling you'll get when
you read the article that came under the title: “Anti-Semites suffer defeats in
the UK and the US,” and the subtitle: “Jews, like other minorities, deserve
protection.” It was written by Clifford D. May and published on December 17,
2019 in The Washington Times.
Reading the article, you'll be exposed to Clifford
May's view of a human race that is so much at odds with reality, you cannot
help but view Clifford May himself and all Jews like him, as being at odds with
the human race. For example, with his very first sentence, May reveals that he
views himself as standing on a mountaintop preaching to humanity with these
words: If you happen to be an anti-Semite, you've had a disappointing week.
He goes on to describe the British Labour Party and
its leader Jeremy Corbyn as the losers in the election that just concluded in
that country. Even though Clifford May admits that the subject on which the
election was fought was Brexit, he still makes it sound like Corbyn's
friendship with the people whom the Jews hate, had been a big factor in the Labour’s
defeat at the poles.
And then, instead of accepting that this is a Jewish
problem which concerns the Jews alone, and go from there to recommend that they
look at themselves and fashion a solution to their problem, he makes the
problem one of humanity. Why is that? Because humanity is sick, he goes on to
say. Here is how he put it: “You should recognize that this is a forever war.
Jew-hatred, an ancient and shape-shifting pathology, is on the rise almost
everywhere, often with lethal results. Anti-Semitism can't be cured, but it can
be treated”.
Again, to make it sound like the Jewish problem is as
important to humanity as it is to the fanatic Jews, Clifford May mentioned that
President Donald Trump signed an executive order, “giving Jews on college
campuses legal protections.” And so, to elevate this political stunt to a level
it does not deserve, Clifford May has mentioned minor incidents that took the
readers to the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Clifford May used the confusion that started at this
point, and added to it a rant that turned it into a trick by which to reassure
the Jews that if they are confused about their identity, so is everyone else.
Here is how he did it: “Identity is a puzzle –– one we're unlikely to solve
anytime soon. For now, suffice to say that such terms as people, nation, tribe,
ethnicity and even race have fluid meanings”.
But being a Jew, he wanted to have it both ways. And
so, he shot himself in the foot as usual. Here is what he did: “At issue now is
what in past centuries was called 'the Jewish question.' Should the government
turn a blind eye to discrimination based on this identity?”