Imagine yourself working for the Human Rights Commission of your state or province. Imagine you get persistent complaints from the workers of a company, indicating that the employer mistreats them in all sorts of ways, most importantly when it comes to paying what he owes them for hours worked on overtime.
One day, the case of one employee sounds so outrageous,
you decide to pay a visit to the employer, and see what he has to say about
accusations that are getting louder and more frequent about his treatment of
the workers. Peter whose case sounds the most outrageous, goes with you, and
the three of you sit in the employer’s office to discuss the matter.
Peter pulls a list out of his pocket in which he has catalogued
the number of times that he worked overtime in the shop and did not get paid;
the number of times that he worked on fixing the employer’s house and did not
get paid; and the number of times that he ran errands for the employer’s wife
and did not get paid. And so, you ask the employer if this is true, and if yes,
what would be his defense?
Instead of responding to your questions, the employer
pulls a notebook out of the drawer, and says it is a statement that was
prepared by his accountant to answer any question you might have on this
subject. You say the accountant is not here to answer the questions in person,
and you cannot have a conversation with a notebook. Because he owns the
company, he must answer your questions now or he’ll have to answer them in
court.
The employer is shaken. Pretending to be clumsy at
navigating his way through the notebook looking for answers, he evades every
question you ask. He says nothing about Peter’s case, and keeps making
references, not to the shopfloor from where the problems emanate, but to the
office employees who just got a raise, he says; one that matches the rise in
the cost of living.
You get an idea what kind of person that man is; don’t
you my friend? So, I ask you now to forget that he is an employer, and view him
instead as being a master propaganda mouthpiece for the Israeli causes. You
don’t work for a government Human Right Commission either. Instead you work for
an International (NGO) Human Rights Organization.
If you cannot figure out how a propagandist for Israel
who is equipped with the mentality of the employer you just visited in your
imagination will behave, relax because you won’t have to imagine anymore. It is
that there is a real “notebook,” written in black and white, that you can read
and judge for yourself what kind of characters the Palestinians are forced to
live with at gun point day after day after day all their lives.
That notebook is actually an article that came under the
title: “Countering the False Apartheid Narrative,” and the subtitle: “Israel
Arabs have made dramatic advances.” It was written by Robert Cherry, and
published on February 13, 2022 in National Review Online.
From the title and subtitle alone, you already begin to
sense that the propagandist is digging a credibility hole where he’ll probably
end up burying himself as he proceeds with the discussion. Look at the title.
It says that the writer is not countering just a recent accusation, but
countering the entire apartheid narrative from beginning to end. And then, he
blows that argument to smithereens when in the subtitle, he admits that the
Arabs made advances lately, which means that the narrative could not have been
describing a situation from beginning to end consistently. Because of the
contradiction between the two sayings, you wonder when the apartheid ended for
the Arabs, allowing them to advance.
But you know what, my friend? Even if we consider that to
be an honest oversight, the rest of the article shows it to be a load of Jewish
bullshit anyway. Do you know why? Because in a manner akin to the employer who
spoke about the office workers when he was supposed to be speaking about the
shopfloor workers, Robert Cherry is talking about the advances that were allegedly
made by the Israeli Arabs, including the Bedouins inside the1967 borders, when
he was supposed to be talking about the Palestinians living under occupation
for several generations in the West Bank, and those living under a naval and
air blockade in the Gaza Strip.
Despite that blunder, Robert Cherry proceeded to make
points and cite statics that mean nothing to the issues raised by Amnesty
International when it reminded the world that Israel is still practicing
apartheid, the most horrible crime ever committed on this planet. Had the man
stopped here, he would have been dismissed as the Jew who felt duty-bound to
make a contribution to the raging debate, and is now expected to go hide
somewhere for the rest of his life.
But that’s not what Robert Cherry did. Like the idiot who
lives in a glass house, he thought it helpful to his cause to throw rocks at
those who live in normal houses. These may not be perfect houses, but they can
withstand attacks by an idiot any time. Here is what Cherry did that will soon
boomerang on him:
“Contrast these improvements with the actions of Palestinians. According
to a report, Hamas practiced ill-treatment with impunity. Women and girls were
inadequately protected against sexual and other gender-based violence. The
Palestinian Centre for Development and Media Freedoms recorded 97
incidents of attacks against journalists”.
And here comes the boomerang: Every jurisdiction has its embarrassing
moments, and they try to fix them. It is certain that Israel has such moments
too because despite their claim to be above it all, the Jews are not nearer to
the Almighty than the rest of us.
For this reason, we do not need another Golda Meir (the
pimping madam of Israel) to remind us that Israel is full of young and
attractive Eastern European girls who practice prostitution, and are eager to
serve and enchant tourists to Israel.