Featured Post

It seems Pope Francis needs to brush up on his Tertullian!

It has been reported (in The ChristLast Media, I must note) that the current Pope does not like the phrase "lead us not into temptation...

"Let no freedom be allowed to novelty, because it is not fitting that any addition should be made to antiquity. Let not the clear faith and belief of our forefathers be fouled by any muddy admixture." -- Pope Sixtus III

Tuesday, August 30, 2005

Jonathan Swift, call your office. (For the millionth time!)

Rachel Neuwirth, writing for Israelinsider (What can I say? Our Jewish friends are on a roll. Apparently, Big Terror can focus one's mind.) offers the following.


A modest proposal to protect the U.S. by expelling Jews

Part I.

Nine large, American cities are prime targets because of their size, importance and their concentrations of Jews. If the presence of Jews in these cities increases their appeal as targets then logically the absence of Jews would decrease that appeal by a comparable amount. The security of three hundred million Americans must not be kept at risk merely for the sake of not inconveniencing Jews who comprise barely two percent of our population. Because the potential danger is so immense and so imminent, the relocation of American Jews must be expedited.

Removal of Jews should not be too difficult. Jews want to be seen as loyal Americans. Most would cooperate, if reluctantly and emotionally, in their removal as their patriotic duty to increase the safety of their fellow Americans. Jews are accustomed to relocating and have done so repeatedly from biblical times. In recent times, nearly a million Jews were expelled from Arab countries and more than a million Jews have also left the former Soviet Union. Even inside America, Jews often move for purely personal reasons. Relocation is a familiar Jewish experience.

Then there is the question of propriety. Is it proper to compel Jews to relocate -- especially after they have become so comfortable in this country? Fortunately this question has already been answered. For security reasons, and for the greater good, none other than Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is even now in the process of expelling eight thousand Jews from their homes in Gaza and is using the Israeli army and police to do it. And more than ten times that number of Jews are likely to face expulsion from the West Bank later on.

The number of Israeli Jews targeted for expulsion in both Gaza and the West Bank is proportionally equivalent to America relocating about five million American Jews. This forced relocation has been ruled to be a perfectly legal action taken by the Israeli government, and President Bush, who is considered to be a great friend of Israel, supports it.

Relocating American Jews will be far easier than expelling Jews in Israel. American Jews tend toward pacifism, are highly law-abiding and non-confrontational -- except for the highly vocal Jewish leftists who, in this case, would likely support Jewish expulsion. Furthermore, the American Jewish leadership has already endorsed the principle of forced expulsion of Jews in Israel as the legal right of that government to act in the interests of security and the greater good. Thus American Jews cannot now object to being subjected to the same requirements in the interest of U.S. national security.

Necessary expertise in Jewish relocation procedures can be borrowed from Israel. The Sharon government knows how to recruit, screen and train thousands of men and women from the Jewish community to form police expulsion units and cope with the related logistics and media management. As in Israel, these expulsion police would be well paid, not be required to identify themselves to the expellees, and the courts will go easy on any charges of police brutality.

This had the potential for going horribly wrong, but Rachel did a good job. It is not humor, and not exactly satire. Effective, though.

As in Israel, U.S. Jews who voluntarily sign up early for expulsion will receive extra benefits while those who object or delay could face fines or even prison. The American Jewish leadership must demonstrate their national loyalty by signing up early and encouraging their followers to do likewise.

American Jews wield influence far exceeding their numbers which is viewed as a provocation to many in the Muslim world. The expulsion must include all Jews, including elected officials and those of influence.

We do not know how much time remains before a possible attack is launched by al-Qaeda. Therefore this evacuation must proceed quickly in the interests of national security. Naturally, it will be necessary to compile lists of Jews and Jewish leaders and Jewish organizations must be required to furnish such information. Unaffiliated Jews must also be identified and included on these lists.

It will not be possible to properly liquidate all property and assets in a short time, so the Jews will have to select whatever they can transport in limited-size vehicles and forgo the rest. Their European forebears and Israeli cousins have followed these procedures on numerous occasions in the past. As a result, few American Jews will be unduly alarmed or angered by this element of the American-Islamic peace and reconciliation process.

In the interests of national security and of fairness it should be a crime for any non-Jew to harbor a Jew. This procedure must be executed thoroughly and without favoritism so that the Muslim world will see that we Americans are sincere.

Jewish institutions, including hospitals (along with their Jewish patients), colleges, schools, synagogues, museums and the like must be emptied of Jewish personnel and content and prepared for evacuation.

Jewish expertise, or as some say dominance, in the film industry could be put to good use in ensuring the successful and smooth operation of the relocation program. For example, the distinguished Jewish American filmmaker Steven Speilberg could produce and direct a film showing the happy and successful adjustment of a sympathetically portrayed American Jewish family to their new home community in rural Alaska. The classic film made by a distinguished German Jewish director 62 years ago, documenting the happy and prosperous Jewish community in the relocation center of Thieresienstadt and filmed during the difficult period of Jewish relocation in the Second World War, could serve Spielberg as a useful model.

This could be Señor Spielbergo 's big break!

Spielberg (or any number of other justly celebrated Jewish filmmakers) could also be tasked to compile a film record of how Jews lived in America before their relocation, which would serve as a nostalgic memento for the relocatees in their new homes, as well as a useful educational tool for the whole population. The film could be shown in schools across the country, as well as in Jewish museums and Holocaust centers, in order to encourage ethnic and racial tolerance and multiculturalism.

Jews would be relocated to relatively uninhabited places, away from any potential target area. Their new homes should be in currently under-populated areas like Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Montana, North and South Dakota, and Alaska.

The Jews should be assigned specific areas that will be reserved for Jewish occupancy, in the same manner as the reservations for Indian tribes. Since Jews are essentially a tribal group, they are sure to appreciate having tribal homelands of their own, outside the strife-torn Middle East.

Ouch.

New housing and other facilities should be paid for largely by the Jewish community, in exchange for the value of the land they would receive from the government.

Jews should be given the option of digging up their dead and transporting the remains to the Jewish reservations. Abandoned graves would then be bulldozed.

Double ouch.

Those few Jews who are unwilling to resettle on the reservations will be encouraged to find new homes in other countries.

Triple, even. No fair guessing what Part II entails.

No comments:

About Me

My photo
First of all, the word is SEX, not GENDER. If you are ever tempted to use the word GENDER, don't. The word is SEX! SEX! SEX! SEX! For example: "My sex is male." is correct. "My gender is male." means nothing. Look it up. What kind of sick neo-Puritan nonsense is this? Idiot left-fascists, get your blood-soaked paws off the English language. Hence I am choosing "male" under protest.

Labels

Blog Archive