What is a fictitious paradigm? It is the creation of a paradigm that bears some resemblance to a real setting, but that is also different from it in key areas. The purpose for creating such a fiction is to confuse people who would have been targeted for entrapment in a hoax by making them believe that elements of a fictitious paradigm are part and parcel of the real setting … and then pulling a fast one on them.
For more than half a century, the Jews of Israel and
those of America have been contriving a fictitious paradigm, targeting
America’s political elites first and foremost, but also targeting everyone else
in America and the world. Their purpose for doing this, is simple to
understand. It is that they stole a country from the Palestinians, and they
determined that the way to explain and defend their crime, was to make-believe
that they are the aggrieved saints whereas the Palestinians are the aggressive
demons.
Their method of operation has been to constantly identify
the key areas in the existing setting as it unfolded, and tweak those areas to change
the premise of the narrative in such a way as to turn reality upside down. One
of the American Jews who contributed much to this demonic exercise, is Clifford
D. May. He’s been at it again recently, in that he wrote an article under the
title: “Amnesty International spreads the virus of antisemitism,” and the
subtitle: “It defames, demonizes and attempts to delegitimize the Jewish state.”
It was published on February 8, 2022 in The Washington Times.
To respond to Amnesty International, Clifford May
rehashed the tweaked areas that turned the real setting into a fictitious
paradigm. And so, the thing to do, is for us to expose the Jewish lies by showing
how the author mixed them with a little bit of truth or with irrelevant
observations to construct frivolous arguments, a situation that suits thieves who
would steal a country, just fine.
Here is the first tweak that is irrelevant on the surface,
but hides within it the seeds of a crime against humanity. Clifford May wrote
this: “Zionism merely holds that the Jewish people have a right to
self-determination.” The distortion is in the fact that the sentence is a play
on the word “people.” Here is the explanation. If I say to you that the room is
full of people, it means that every place in it is occupied by men, women or
children who are not necessarily related to each other, or have anything in
common.
But if I say to you that the Jews are a people, you
automatically assume a genetically connected ethnic group. This is a false assumption
because, like Christians and Muslims, the Jews are everywhere on the planet,
belonging to all kinds of ethnic groups. They are of the same religion because
they converted to it at some point in their lineage. But they are not of a
genetic stock that is eligible to inherit the estate known as Palestine or any
estate that’s not given to them voluntarily by its owners or given to them by
law.
In fact, Clifford May says this much, but mixes an
undeniable reality with a big lie that distorts what is real, while giving
credence to what is false — at least to the people who are not paying attention. Here is
what Clifford May did. First, he wrote about “Jews living in a slice of their
ancient homeland.” He did so to claim Palestine for those he falsely identified
as a genetically connected Jews. But this being a problem that blew in the face
of the rabbis decades ago, Clifford May quickly rectified his mistake by making
a bigger one. In fact, it is one that demolished his entire argument. Here is
how he did it:
“Israelis come in all colors, including
Black Jews from Ethiopia and Brown Jews from India. Most Israeli Jews are of
Middle Eastern and Northern African descent. What’s more, of every 100 Israeli
citizens, 20 are not Jews. They are Arabs, Muslims, Christians, Druze, Baha’i,
Circassian”.
How can someone sane call this assortment to be one and the
same, and claim that the artificial concoction, made of parts from everywhere, is
the true heir to Palestine whereas the Palestinians who lived there since the
beginning of time are imposters who should go somewhere else?
Let Clifford May answer that question. Meanwhile, he
promulgated other falsehoods that need to be responded to, but because of the
lack of time and space, I shall respond to only one more. It has to do with the
question of when a colonial situations becomes an apartheid situation.
Until the decade of the 1950s, the Arab nations
surrounding Israel had no armies to speak of because they had been colonized
for hundreds of years. They were allowed to have lightly armed police forces
that kept the peace locally, but not a military that’s equipped to fight a
foreign army. When the Jewish infiltrators into Palestine started to massacre
the local farmers on a large scale, the Arab governments sent their police
forces to protect the fleeing Palestinians, and secure their own borders. These
forces collided against the armed Jewish marauders from Europe who were
equipped with state of the art weapons, including an air force made of at least
two warplanes.
Nevertheless, Jordan was able to secure the West Bank and
save Palestinian lives while Egypt was able to secure the Gaza Strip and save Palestinian
lives. The people of Palestine did not mind the Jordanians or the Egyptians
being on their territory because they viewed them as protectors. They
considered the enemy to be the Jews who occupied a big chunk of their Palestine
which they sought to liberate.
All of that changed in 1967 when Israel launched a sneak
attack on its neighbors and occupied the West Bank and Gaza. Not only did the
Jews gain still more land, but they also gained a population that was not
Jewish. This meant that sooner or later, Israel will become a democratic
minority of Jews with the semblance of equal rights for everyone, or become an
outright apartheid state where a Jewish population (whether a minority or a
majority) enjoys rights denied to others.
Not much thought was given to this reality-in-the-making
when the situation was that of a colonial paradigm in which the Palestinian
Liberation Organization (PLO) was fighting a Jewish colonial force of
occupation. But when the Oslo Accords ended the state of war between the
Palestinians and Israel, which Yasser Arafat recognized as a state, the
colonial paradigm ended, and was replaced by the apartheid situation that it is
now.