How do you characterize someone who betrays? A "betrayer"? No, the commonly used, and just as commonly accepted term, is "traitor".
A number of social commentators have tried to make the case that the meaning of "traitor" is illegitimate when extended beyond the legal meaning. But the meaning conferred by common usage is far more frequently intended, and consequently not just legitimate, but more legitimate.
The American Jewish community has been hoodwinked by the Zionist leadership into unwittingly betraying the US. The US is the country of their citizenship, the country that gave them the right to live and act and prosper, free of prejudice. Yet they have turned away from loyalty to the US in favor of a foreign country, Israel, which has pursued its own interests at the expense of the US.
If Israel is not an enemy of the US, it is most certainly a ruthless predator, willing to comprehensively victimize an "ally", an ally so subverted that it has become paralyzed, unable to acknowledge its predicament and too helpless to defend itself.
This is simply the latest example in the 5000-year cultural practice of using the Goyim as "cattle" for the benefit of God's "chosen" ones.
When 270 million non-Jewish Americans -- I leave out 50 million evangelicals -- finally realize what has been done to them, that The American Jewish community has betrayed them in favor of Israel, how do ***YOU*** think they will feel? How do you think they will react?
This is not a threat to either Israel or the American Jewish community. Rather, it's a warning. Loyalty to Israel over the US -- even unrealized and unintended -- is a mistake, a perilous mistake.
[Go ahead Thomas, "moderate" this out of existence.]
Really, Thomas? Who is the drama queen here? You're embarrassing yourself with this name calling. My comment disappeared. What am I to think, you're on a coffee break? So I posted the link to my backup, my all-but-invisible, low-traffic,... make that no-traffic,... blog. The "rules" you cite give the Jews a free pass on their complicity in the Zionist project. It's ok to criticize Zionism or Israel, but not the Jews that make their crimes possible. That appears to be the rule, and it amounts to Antiwar.com caving to Jewish/Zionist intimidation. It may be discretion -- as in "discretion is the better part of valor" -- but absent the lethality of bullets-and-bombs-combat, it's cowardly. It was cowardly then, as it is cowardly now. That said, it ***IS*** Justin's website and he gets to decide on when "discretion" -- strategic restraint -- is called for. I've had this issue since before you were moderator. Someone Jewis...
Comments