The Dershowitz question


ed note–Prima facia evidence as to why it is a complete waste of time to try and have a reasonable, rational conversation with those of the self-chosenite variety, as they are not interested in arriving at the truth, but rather only in achieving their agenda and even when they must lie through their teeth to do so. 

The essay is in and of itself a living, breathing ratification/validation of everything that has been alleged by them since the time of Pharaoh in that they collude and conspire with each other against the interests of any Gentile host society. If there were a speaking engagement scheduled and the speaker in question were the most rabid pro-zionist Jew and a campaign to shut down that venue and prevent that individual from spouting his/her Hebraic black magic, why we would all be inundated–including by the likes of this author–with screeching Op-eds warning of the resurgence of the 3rd Reich and that a new Hollerco$t was being planned. However, when organized collusion takes place in the interests of censoring a discussion that is problematic in terms of the honest and accurate description of Jewish power emanating out of Judaic self-delusion, well, in such a case, ‘brownshirts’ of the Hebraic variety getting together for ‘book burnings’ is perfectly, well, kosher.

Now, as the world stands at the precipice of oblivion resulting directly out of the toxic nature of Jewish power and the disproportionate role it plays in human affairs, it is high-time that the rest of the world come to understand how pointless it is trying to have any kind of rational intercourse with a tribe of people who believe in all that nonsense of a jealous, vindictive, angry, violent god named yahweh favoring one tiny spec of human DNA as his ‘chosen’ people. You would get further talking to some street crazy screaming about an imminent invasion from outer space then you would with these people.

Simon Hardy Butler, Times of Israel

“What do you suggest I do?”

That was the query from eminent attorney Alan Dershowitz that I found in my e-mailbox a few days ago in response to a message I sent him relating to the scheduled appearance this month of notorious anti-Semite Gilad Atzmon at New York’s Theatre 80 St. Mark’s. Dershowitz has, in the past, referenced Atzmon in his writing, and I thought he might be interested in this latest Big Apple adventure—which I wrote about in a recent blog post for the Times of Israel. I sent him a link to my article as well.

“What do you suggest I do?” he asked. The question lingered in my mind. Suggest? Wouldn’t it be up to Dershowitz to know what the right course of action would be?

His inquiry surprised me, to say the least. But I suspect it probably shouldn’t have. Dershowitz is one of those folks who may need recommendations, solutions, rather than problems posed to him. He may need something spelled out.

So I conveyed out to him what I thought would be appropriate: writing. Writing an editorial in a major New York publication, such as the New York Daily News. He has done this sort of thing before. Why not do it again … this time, addressing the issue of Atzmon being able to broadcast, at a local Gotham venue, the hate speech he so frequently issues?

The truth is, I was disappointed in Dershowitz’s interrogative. I shouldn’t have to tell him what he should do in this case. He should already realize it. And the fact that he responded to my email instead of leaving it unanswered puzzled me. What was the point? If he didn’t want to do anything, why send his message to me at all?

Lorcan Otway, Theatre 80’s owner, did me the courtesy of addressing my dismay about Atzmon’s event in an eloquent fashion, and although he didn’t persuade me to agree with him, he made a powerful point about the need to allow for freedom of speech and not to censor others. Atzmon allegedly paid for the opportunity to speak at Theatre 80, and I did raise that issue, yet the institution does have the right to take whatever customers it wants. Otway, in this case, stayed consistent with his beliefs, and I respect that. He’s a good man.

Atzmon, on the other hand, is not, and the public denigration of Jews and all things Judaic on his website, gilad.co.uk, as well as in his Facebook and Twitter postings, is problematic to say the least. I don’t believe he should be given a forum to vent his anti-Semitic nonsense, but I understand Otway’s perspective … and for the record, Otway is not anti-Semitic. He disagrees completely with Atzmon’s outlook. Still, he is doing what he considers to be the right thing. I can’t argue with what he thinks.

I can, though, with Dershowitz, who seemed reluctant to address the problem I brought up in his message to me. Maybe that’s just as well. There is a protest apparently scheduled for the day Atzmon will host his event at Theatre 80, April 30, and it appears we, the people, need to address this hate speech the way we should: legally, peacefully and by ourselves. For no other individual can do it.

That is, I believe, the way it should be. That is, I suspect, the real answer to the Dershowitz question.

Isn’t it?

  1. #1 by Angie on 04/19/2017 - 4:02 pm

    Wish that I could be there, as I think Gilad is a hero.

  2. #2 by James Benn on 04/19/2017 - 7:56 pm

    One is immediately struck by the unpleasantness of Alan Dershowitz’s face. Puts me in marnd o’ Ruth Bader Ginsburg, it do. Or Alan Greenspan for that matter. The fleshy proboscis. The rubbery, downcast lips. The myopic stare. A different species altogether according to the late and deeply lamented Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson. Clearly all cut from the same cloth. Makes you wonder if they were ever young.

    By contrast, Gilad Atzmon has quite a pleasant face. Just goes to show, I suppose, how deceptive looks can be. I would never have imagined it belonged to a ‘notorious anti-Semite’ until ‘Simon Hardy Butler’ pointed it out.

    Then again, the author’s own name is quite deceiving. Not a name you would normally associate with a Talmud-thumping Jew. Butler? English, surely? Well I suppose there may have been a few Jewish butlers swanning around the houses of landed gentiles back in the day.

    But what is this dull piece all about? A kvetching lamentation – or lamentable kvetch perhaps – about Dershowitz’s lack of enthusiasm vis-à-vis Atzmon? ‘What kinduva Jew is Dershowitz if he refuses to leap to the defense of the Tribe at the first sign of danger?!’ It that it? Namely, a reminder that all good Jews must react and behave as one. Like a pack of mongooses. Or a swarm of gnats.

    Ya gotta admit though, it would make life relatively simple. All moral questions would boil down to ONE question … Is it ‘good’ for US … the ‘chosen’ of God … the apple of His eye? Is this the higher morality to which Chosenists are indissolubly linked? Not for they, the prevarications of J. Alfred Prufrock…

    And indeed there will be time
    To wonder, “Do I dare?” and, “Do I dare?”
    Time to turn back and descend the stair,
    With a bald spot in the middle of my hair —
    (They will say: “How his hair is growing thin!”)
    My morning coat, my collar mounting firmly to the chin,
    My necktie rich and modest, but asserted by a simple pin —
    (They will say: “But how his arms and legs are thin!”)
    Do I dare
    Disturb the universe?
    In a minute there is time
    For decisions and revisions which a minute will reverse.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: