The Palestinian Case Promotes Jewish "Unity"
The same old manipulation, but creatively so
Simple moves work against simple players.
As you must have noticed, I haven’t been writing about Palestine, because there was so much noise surrounding it that I couldn’t hear myself think in the cacophony. This time, I believe, I have arrived at the highest level of interpreting the event and its reverberations.
There is nothing new about the overwhelmingly Jewish-owned media reporting about anti-Israel sentiments crying antisemitism even where there is none. Playing the victim is also a Muslim tactic that is used to justify attacking outsiders or invading foreign lands:
https://thestoryofmohammed.blogspot.com/
In the case of Palestine or even the globally-mandated H* myth, the tactic seems to serve the ulterior motive of rallying up Jewish unity; if Jews are not persecuted and threatened, there is nothing to unite them, because otherwise they tend to differ drastically in their various subcultures or, for that matter, in their lack of cultural foundations. While Muslim expansionism threatens all cultures, that happens only after Muslims constitute a majority, which is not the case in Israel. Palestine, nevertheless, has been singled out for the tactic. The move is ingenious, because opposing the way the Jewish state treats Palestinians is presented as a threat against Jews all over the Globe, so it only promotes Jewish unity, as if it was not highly-enough organized already.
If the logic is not enough, here is some proof. George Soros and Rockefeller Funding Student Protests Erupting at Universities:
Think of it as a chess game where the attacking party calculates mass response to their move. The expected (or perhaps even orchestrated) demonstrations are presented as “antisemitic,” that is, a threat against all Jews who, consequently, must keep together against it, despite their significant differences.
Therefore, the worldwide Jewish-owned media has been “supporting” the Palestinian case in spite of Islam posing a threat to Jews as well as to all Kaffirs (while Jews and Christians are allowed to subsist in a semi-human status in Muslim countries, which Islam considers “merciful”):
Of course, due to the tribal nature of humans, there is always a dominant tribe, and power breeds corruption, so there is no place on Earth, where the setup is “fair.”
I have been thinking about it all my life, and I’m left with the question I cannot answer: If I could select the ruling tribe, which one would it be? I’d like to say none, but power vacuum is always filled, because no matter how primitive or complex a social setup is, it always organizes itself into the same five layers:
The story of South Africa is perhaps even uglier, where apartheid was wiped out, resulting in a change of ownership of essential assets. As for the masses, they are now forced to live in a divided country where 13 tribes are fighting each other, while some of them are engaged in peacefully killing off the whitie:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/from-the-untouchables-to-the-expendables
Who owns South Africa now? That’s not the question. The question is the same as with just about every place worldwide: Who controls it?
Your caste analogy for globalism is spot on. In one way, it explains why many Hindus and Chinese in the West are so gung-ho gaga for globalism. They identify themselves at the top of the caste. With little history of representative government, or the Christian notion of "all are loved by God," in their own mythologies, what else can they do? It's top or bottom for them. For many in the West, it's middle. Christianity, and Enlightenment secular Christianity, have dampened such extreme impulses, some of which were in place in feudal Europe, and ancient Rome.
In reading this I pondered the "castes..." In all the societies We are most familiar with, there has been the accounting of the Individual's energy input - i.e., money in some form - whether trade/barter, or representational things from shells and beads to metals - to paper and electronic bits...
Has anyOne evaluated the social structure in the societies that developed in abundance, where accounting for Individuals' energy added into the community/system did not arise? I do know that the caring Ones took care of things, not the psychopaths controlling everything, as happened in moneyed societies...
Because I would guess there would be three "classes." The Ones who care enough to do things to solve problems - thereby earning respect, the Ones who just live Their lives - thereby getting by, and the psychopaths who learn to choose Ethical behavior else They are outcast - or killed.
This was a great article, and it is nice to see One who does not lump all Jews into one twisted picture. I have life-long friends (nigh 50 years!) who are of a sect that reviles the talmud for the psychopathic work it is, and are taught that They are NOT better for having been "chosen," just that They have more rules to follow.
They have had My european-mutt-with-native-american-on-both-sides back MANY times over the decades and We love One anOther deeply.
Considering what We are told is going on, it surely looks highly contrived - Some say that Mossad and the CIA created Hamas. And I give that high probability of being true. And so... I must conclude that when They speak of the "world stage" They mean just that. A stage where a scripted play is being performed to cast sandy hooks into Our emotions and drag Us to where They want Us.
Thanks for this examination!