Casting of Stones.

On 25.11.19 in the Times paper, one of the many that has never really had much idea about providing a fair balanced representation of facts with anything political that identifies with social progression especially when it is offered by a Labour Party; has seen fit to have the chief rabbi Ephraim Mirvis leader of 62 orthodox synagogues in the UK, pontificate his opinions with the intent to be as vitriolic as possible aimed at one person and what that person represents with their radical offering in for a economic and sociological equitable future that is a challenged to the established order of financial power. Views expressed so far by Mirvis, with his narrow special privileged experience, were outrageous and offensive which did effectively (one might suggested) elaborate a stance on his own bigotry. This extraordinary unwarranted singularly biased outburst in the middle of a crucial election period for the UK, was constructed with a clear intention to influence any Jewish support that traditionally backed The Labour Party, calling on them to ditch any inclination to continue such support for the whole Labour Party movement and in particular Jeremy Corbyn on the basis that the Party and him were contagiously anti-Semitic and unsuitable to be in power or form a progressive government. It was an assembled  deliberate damaging written artifice, designed to be as toxic as it could be which also chimed well with the Times position that gives long standing supportive spread to the Conservative Democratic Unionist Party. It seems clear from his comments that he displayed a calculated sectarian partisan approach and one has to wonder, given that what he intimated at is not new, just why vent off now and what is actually behind his venomous missive? (1 extract)

That Mirvis has a constructed view on the Labour Party over the slow handling of a few individuals that have an unfavourable opinion on elements (?) of Judaism absolutely does not mean that there is a contagious anti Semitic presence within the Labour Party. In any organisation with a large membership there will be occasional outburst on contentious issues, by some, that is not acceptable, that fall inside what may be deemed expressions of unwarranted and irrational prejudices or castigating fearful opinions of intent. By their very nature and content such outburst can stand out and say more about the person giving vent to the offensive opinion than the ability of the comment to do severe harm, assuming it is not an expressed attitude that wants to promote actual or intimidation force against someone or body thereof.

Mirvis as a leader represent an orthodox sect of jews, of which there are a few like Hasidism, which is an extreme practicing faction of the jewish rabbinic religious following people and is probably unrepresentative in any great numerical terms of the whole Jewish religious following, so one can be cautious about the actual influence he has overall. Never the less his preposterous proffered stance was designed to inject repulsive interference into the tortuous proceeding that mark the current election phase with him playing on the dog whistle sound of anti Semitism that causes all to scuttle away from any adhering association to it, in mindless panic.

In some way, adding to the truthfulness of fake news, it would seem that the intercession by Mirvis may have been propagated by the aggressive London based Israeli PR machinery operating with the direct support of the Israeli government that continually monitors all news and influential individuals to squash any negative aspects that undermine the acquired position of the Israeli state. It is abundantly obvious just what his comments were about and it had little to do with the pretence of anti semitism heaped personally upon Corbyn et al. Bearing in mind that Semites are all of the Arab nations with the extraction of which, being jewish, is just an element.  This Semite definition also includes Palestinians and with them being prisoners of the Israel state, Israel is very sensitive to the accusation of also being anti-Semitic itself. This is demonstrated with the ‘open prison’ incarceration of Palestinian and the theft and illegal occupation of land with its political ethnic cleansing, oppressive hostility, property destruction, state murder, ideological indoctrination and corruption of truth

.

One suggests that this maligned state interference from Israel (just like the BoJo hidden Russian interference report) is behind this dog whistle being blown. This more than anything else is the reason why there is constant barrage about anti Semitism, raised at any opportune moment on any expressed or tendentious script that can be correlated into anti Semitism to stop any discussion or analysis by anyone, on Israeli jewish actions supported by an extremist sect that demand their “god given right to exist” in perpetuity against all opposition or criticisms of state actions no matter what. It is no secret that Corbyn has been obliquely disparaging about Israeli actions and its treatment regarding Palestine and in having some sympathy with the Palestinians (Semite) people’s plight; this is not a definitive indication of anti Semitism but by expansion and being critical about Israel it is taken and smothered with accusations of anti Semitisms.

One could draw an outlandish simile from the above, pulling on a biblical yarn that goes like this:

In the bible according to John chapter 8, verses 3–7 in order to lay a trap for Jesus Christ, the Pharisees brought a woman accused of the act of adultery to JC who was asked ‘should they stone the woman as is according to Moses law’? In this the Pharisees were attempting to draw JC into speaking to the law or going against it, in public, thereby hoping to have something to accuse JC of religious and unlawful impropriety of some description perhaps conflicting against his own views. They would from that act gain Roman support to take action against him to carry out their dirty work. The Pharisees where collaborators with the Romans and wanted to remain in cahoots with them and wished to publicly demonstrate their own authority but were reluctant to act directly against him.  JC was a growing problem for them as they were incensed with JC ‘teachings’, action and the revolutionary new ideas. Ideas which he offered that threatened to sweep away the restrictive Old Testament practices that formed the religious sect’s foundation and JC preaching’s were a challenged to the high orthodoxy of the sects and controlling influences. Recognising the entrapment, JC ignored their torments initially, bent to write in the sand and:-  ‘So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her’.

It is interesting that Mirvis has cast a number of simile stones at Corbyn, whom in many ways is exposing views not dissimilar to the perspective he (like JC?) takes on wealth, power, inequality and controlling influences. Yet by Mirvis’s own action one cannot find anything that he has equally thrown at the leader of the Conservative Democratic Unionist Party of an excoriating derogatory nature. A party led (in ones opinion) by the accused Liar, Adultery, Fabricator, Dissembler and wholly Untrustworthy BoJo; nor was there any criticism of the acts perpetrated upon the poor by the Conservative Democratic Unionist Party over the past ten years or of their own disguised, islamaphobia, homophobic, racist, anti Semitism. So one might conclude that Mivis is very comfortable and supportive with such impiousness of some, providing it does not threaten the soul of jews, or perhaps not too bothered about the souls of others; Semites, Christian, Muslim, or this is just the Israeli state exercising their puppet Mirvis in fear of JC?....

Of course this is just one’s own irrelevant casting of stones opinion knowing little about human souls only observing how they demonstrate their assumed higher ‘humanity’ beyond beasts and on this one cannot be certain that there may be a majority of ‘secular’ UK/Israeli jews, very capable of looking to their own souls without constrictive scripts laid onto them.

(1) He wrote: “How complicit in prejudice would a leader of Her Majesty’s opposition have to be to be considered unfit for office? Would associations with those who have incited hatred against Jews be enough? Would describing as ‘friends’ those who endorse the murder of Jews be enough? It seems not. “It is not my place to tell any person how they should vote. I regret being in this situation at all. I simply pose the question: What will the result of this election say about the moral compass of our country? When 12 December arrives, I ask every person to vote with their conscience. Be in no doubt, the very soul of our nation is at stake.”

© Renot

3011190855