Jewish gatekeepers are concerned. And for good reason. Anti-Semitism is once again ‘on the rise’. Even new strains of anti-Semitism are threatening to break loose. This is where the scientific study of anti-Semitism comes in.

One scholar that’s devoted to this subject is Dr. Charles Ascher Small, founder and director of the New York based Institute for the Study of Global Anti-Semitism and Policy (ISGAP). ISGAP now has offices on college campuses in Canada, Europe and the US. Recently, the Jerusalem Post interviewed Dr. Small who, not surprisingly, sees himself an expert on this subject. Small offered these provocative insights:

[Anti-Semitism] is inherently genocidal, because when the dominant way of perceiving reality was through the lens of religion, the Jews were the wrong religion and they were blinded by evil for not accepting the Christian notion of the messiah, so in order for the individual Jew to redeemed he or she had to accept the Christian version of the messiah.

Small, like virtually all of the world’s ‘experts’ on anti-Semitism (including the bizarre Dr. Theodore Isaac Rubin whose profundities were recently reviewed in TOO by Andrew Joyce), happens to be Jewish. Acknowledging that Muslims and atheists can also be ‘anti-Semitic’, Dr. Small nuances his analysis by saying that other groups mistakenly tar the Jews unfairly by viewing them through the lens of racial (impurity) or other xenophobic avenues.

‘”In contemporary times, says Dr. Small, “Israel, as the Jewish nation-state, has become a stand-in for the Jew in this regard.

“Now people in governments in the Western world, in the United States and Europe, say that for the world to be saved the stubborn Jew has to change. Not only to they have to change to protect their own society, but if only the stubborn Israelis would change, jihadism and radical Islam will dissipate.

The world will be saved.

And this is a very dangerous aspect of anti-Semitism that is irrational,” he asserted.’

Dr. Small has given the world a very concise and multi-purpose theory. It reveals a lot. Mostly, it reveals the self-serving mission of Jewish theories of Anti-Semitism. Dr.Small’s familiar storyline goes this way:

Jews are continuously persecuted but always blameless. This is because ‘anti-Semitism’ is a disease. And for murky reasons, Jews are the only target of this unique sickness. Key axioms baked into anti-Semitic theory include: (1) Jewish innocence, and (2) eternal and unjustified outside hostility which Small says is ‘irrational’.

How shall we explain this to the Palestinians?

Not to worry. Palestinian troublemakers are pretty much categorized as ‘terrorists’ these days, not anti-Semites — though there is, apparently, a virulent strain of anti-Semitism afflicting even Arabs, who are a Semitic people. So the inmates in Gaza are not off the hook by any means. And let’s not forget the dark history of Christian anti-Semitism either. After all, Jewish people have been intermittently expelled from dozens of areas over the past two millennium. The reason? ‘Anti-Semitism’.

Any questions?

Like all apostles of anti-Semitic theory, Small and his contingent spend little time publicly debating their ideas and conclusions, since anti-Semitic theory (AST) is essentially a closed Jewish discipline. It’s deeply affected however by ‘in-group/out-group’ thinking. Thus, one hears all about anti-Semites, but not from them. There’s no equal time clause for the bad guys in this field of study. It is an agenda-driven branch of knowledge.

But now Dr. Small has ratcheted up standard anti-Semitic theory yet another notch. Not content to merely tar critics of Israel or organized Jewry with the usual litany of denunciations, Small wants us to believe that the Goyish disease-carriers who dare to ‘defame’ the Jewish people are ‘irrational’ enemies of all Jews, and that these anti-Semites are ultimately intent on committing genocide!

Just hearing this malarkey makes me want to punch him in the nose.

Small’s scholarly observations get increasingly provocative — if not altogether unhinged — in the degree to which they gradually defy reality.

Wikipedia quotes Dr. Small saying, “The people [anti-Semites] who believe anti-Israel mythologies [tend] to believe that Jews are not honest in business [never!], have dual loyalties [absurd!], control government [impossible!] and the economy [ridiculous!], and the like”.

Is he kidding?

There are in fact mountains of evidence which do give more than a little credence to many of these so-called ‘anti-Semitic’ myths, as the links above reveal. But ideologues like Small dismiss counter-proofs as ‘anti-Semitic canards’.

Tellingly, the term itself is something of a canard since most people even don’t even know what the word canard means.

Small seeks nothing less than to conflate criticism of Jewish conduct (or Israel’s money-inhaling relationship with the American taxpayer) with stuffing Jews into gas chambers. This is, of course, mendacious fallacy. But it’s used all the same to legitimize the coercive muzzling of non-violent satire and opposition.

As for Small’s ‘research’, how can strongly self-identified Jews ‘study’ their enemies without having their own intense biases affect their scholarship? Are they kidding? It’s not possible. Yet Small and his beehive of experts fanatically believe otherwise. And their Jewish support network keeps funneling them money and cheering them on! Might this be an expression of mass psychosis? What we have here then, emanating from these all-kosher cliques are not ‘studies’ at all, but the emergence of more Jewish think tanks, spy operations, and on-campus propaganda mills.

Anti-Semitic Theory (AST) is the one conspiracy theory that we’re required to believe: the conspiracy against Jews.

But AST maligns millions of otherwise honest, responsible and law-abiding people who see organized Jewry doing harm and want to stop it. The unstated mission of AST is to keep these critics quiet and guilt-ridden via anti-Semitic taboos. Failing that, hate speech and hate crime laws have been crafted, many of which impose criminal penalties.

Controlling speech — even specific words — goes a long way towards managing political discourse. Public opinion follows. It’s a delicate operation but the payoff is huge. This soft control allows dominant voices to establish a ruling narrative that might not otherwise emerge. Consolidation of media ownership by like-minded people helps push this process forward. And to help shore up certain important lessons even more, there’s the never-ending drumbeat about dead Nazis (cinematic dramatizations, educational courses, books, TV shows, and documentaries), The Holocaust (ceremonies, museums, news programs, educational curricula, field trips, and media references), not to mention the ever-expanding US ‘War on Terror’. But the hysterical buzz over ‘terrorism’ is somewhat misplaced when one does an actual body count.

Indeed, both ‘terrorism’ and ‘anti-Semitism’ are highly charged terms, although their meanings (and moral underpinnings) remain fuzzy in the average mind. What’s significant however is that these words identify the bad guys. Meanwhile, US media not only describes Apartheid Israel as ‘democratic’, but reminds the average consumer of processed news that the US and the Jewish State are one another’s ‘closest allies’. Israel’s regional enemies on the other are treated as if they are an imminent threat to Western civilization. This media-induced worldview excites average Americans into embracing the next Mideast war. It’s become a pattern.

Adding fuel to the fire, many pro-Zionist pundits now accuse Obama of (secretly) being a Muslim. If only it was true! The US then might have a more balanced foreign policy. But even Obama, despite his feud with Benjamin Netanyahu, cannot possibly get much outside the Zionist straightjacket. America and Israel are now joined at the hip. But the cooked-up rumor about Obama being a Muslim is actually code. What Obama’s critics really hate is his lack of hawkishness towards the usual Mideast suspects, as well as even Russia, which is aligned with Iran and Syria. Israel relies on US bellicosity to maintain its fierce hegemony.

Although America is a wealthy, powerful, dynamic, secular, multi-racial, military titan with a core population of European-derived Christians (none of whom are — or will ever be — eligible for Israeli citizenship), the Jewish State has successfully enlisted US support since Truman, and indeed, far earlier. This support has evolved to be virtually unconditional. This fact alone is astonishing. Israeli power in America is a reminder of rising Jewish power worldwide. And it’s in a class by itself.

As for honestly exploring the impact of organized Jewry on the non-Jewish world, Small and his fellow-travelers suffer from a deep intellectual, political and emotional conflict-of-interest. This bias renders them unable to see themselves (and judge their conduct) as others do. Peddlers of AST even refuse to acknowledge that Jewish aspirations, Jewish myths, Jewish competition, Jewish power, and Jewish self-segregation almost-inevitably clash with the cultural and political interests of whatever host their culture Jews find themselves in. Don’t they get it? Or are they just pretending not to?

This syndrome (some call it ‘Jewish blinders’) afflicts countless academics, intellectuals and activists. Jews commonly establish extensive ethnic networks wherever they dwell. Even some ‘progressive’, Jewish-led, US-based protest groups that claim to want to pressure Israel to change its ways, nevertheless create soft barriers to limit non-Jewish participation.

The hypocrisy is stunning. Jewish-Americans have famously promoted racial integration (in America), ‘secularism’ (marginalization of Christianity), as well as displacement-level Third World immigration here. One big, happy, inclusive family, right? But the Jewish State is aggressively pursuing an opposite agenda for itself, as it strategically marginalizes and pushes out its native, non-Jewish inhabitants.

Jews are a very brilliant people. They are also a transformative people. Their extraordinary effectiveness in advancing political change requires cohesion, purposefulness, intelligence, aggression, planning and tenacity. This rare combination of traits and abilities allows organized Jewish groups to effect radical change. These actions however often create intense discord. No collection of self-serving theories from Small and his cronies can explain this away. ‘Anti-Semitism’ then should be seen as a cultural defense mechanism.

Of course, precisely what ‘anti-Semitism’ is, nobody can say. How it functions in reverse however is revealing. And its impact can be devastating. Activists like Small and his associates at ISGAP, for instance, grant themselves the liberty to impugn the character — if not the sanity — of their adversaries with complete license, without any effort at all to ascertain the rational basis of anti-Jewish attitudes. This is tyranny. AST conveys rare privilege: the right to defame and damage your opponents while basking in permanent victim status. AST is designed to delegitimize opposition or even rational discussion.

Dual Loyalty as an Example of a Rationally Based ‘Anti-Semitic Charge’

For example, consider the ‘anti-Semitic charge’ that Jews have ‘dual loyalties.’ Of course, many American Jews have dual loyalties. This is where Small’s serial denials really start to go off the deep end. Indeed, scores of prominent Jewish-Americans alternate between working for the US government and working for pro-Israel activist think tanks; many are duel US-Israeli citizens or have family and close personal ties to Israelis, and some have served with the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) or have family members who have served.

One prominent Jewish-American, Chicago Mayor and former Obama White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel, became a civilian ‘volunteer’ for the IDF during America’s first war against Iraq in 1991. And like countless US-based Zionists, Emmanuel has never served so much as one day fighting alongside US troops. Check out this stunning list of America’s most well-known, US-Israeli dual citizens who ‘work for the American People’. America’s news media is similarly affected.

Indeed, when one looks for Israel-leaning, American journalists (and media moguls) they’re everywhere. Yet Small and others would have us believe that this eye-popping over-representation of the world’s most important victims in dominant areas of American news, entertainment, governance and war-planning poses no particular risks to anyone anywhere. Shall we check with the Iraqis on this?

This situation would be funny if not for the fact that it’s so dangerously real.

As it turns out, one mini-scandal involving media did erupt recently when it was leaked that the US-born son of prominent New York Times columnist, David Brooks, had enlisted in the IDF. This was another one of those OMG moments when an established media authority figure, who’s often hailed as your quintessential ‘moderate American conservative’ and who is otherwise described as ‘fair’ even by many establishment liberals (mostly Jewish), gets caught red-handed in the act of being maybe just a bit too personally involved in matters involving Israel and US war policies. Brooks and the Times were saddled with a sudden and glaring problem involving the appearance of bias and with it, a loss of credibility.

It’s worth noting that most Jewish journalists as well as most Jewish politicians generally assume a calm but firm demeanor when publicly discussing matters involving Israel or the ‘Jewish community.’ Brooks is no exception. He’s a class act. But it was Former US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, who perfected this posture. Kissinger, it turns out, now holds both American and Israeli passports. Who would have imagined? And now Brooks’ son quietly jumps aboard the IDF war wagon. Interesting!

Brooks’ sudden exposure became a hot topic and a somewhat embarrassing one at that, since it definitely does matter when an influential and ‘trusted’ Pundit of Zion gets caught with one foot in the Zionist battlefield. And ‘moderate’ Mr. Brooks has entered these political waters many, many times. But Brooks somehow forgot to mention that his own son is putting his life on the line for a foreign power (Israel) as Daddy Brooks plays the role of a ‘unbiased’ All-American news analyst.

This unexpected turn of events caught Brooks with his pants down. And it did not look very good for either Brooks or his esteemed employer. Of course, Brooks — like hundreds of other Jewish-American opinion-makers — has gotten away with these itty bitty deceptions and omission for decades. Nevertheless, the inescapable issue of dual loyalties could not be ignored. Was Brooks’ career as a hasbara operative over?

Nope. Not even close.

Fortunately for Mr. Brooks, the dominant media dropped the whole subject as suddenly as it appeared.

Hey, c’mon. He’s a really good guy.

Sure enough, the Times gave Brooks ample editorial space to explain his heartfelt views and he, in turn, expressed pride in his son’s decision to participate in Israel’s ongoing Gaza beatdown. It was a touching moment. Brooks is now back analyzing the Israel-Palestine conflict with the same detached authority that made him a tenured Times stalwart neoconservative in the first place.

Of course, the very idea that duel US-Israeli ‘citizens’ can impartially legislate or advocate for American interests with the same uniform focus as Americans who have only one national loyalty and one national identity is more than a bit unrealistic. After all, sovereign states do inevitably have diverging national interests. Plus, not only is Israel constantly at war or threatening war (often with countries that America trades with) but the Jewish State has been on the US dole for decades. Israel is a geographically tiny, very distant, newly-minted nation that is all about Jews and their security. The US population is 97% non-Jewish. This doesn’t matter?

With that in mind, contrast David Brooks’ treatment by the Times with what happened to two prominent, non-Jewish journalists who recently committed speech infractions against the usual suspects. CNN’s Jim Clancy — an anchor at CNN for some 34 years — apparently tweeted something ‘offensive’ about Israel’s US-based, propaganda machine. CNN’s Rick Sanchez meanwhile made accurate ‘but inappropriate’ references to the extraordinary media influence enjoyed by you-know-who. Sanchez got so uppity that he even called Jewish TV funnyman, Jon Stewart, a “bigot’.

So what? Big deal. But when these two Goy-based mini-scandals erupted, the ax fell immediately on the TV careers of both Jim Clancy and Rick Sanchez. Kaput.

Eradicating the irrational scourge of anti-Semitism is an endless task, wouldn’t you say, Dr. Small?

Fortunately for Israel, this ‘dual loyalties’ brouhaha is pretty much a sideshow since many Jewish-Americans don’t suffer so much from loyalty that’s divided equally between two states, but rather, a devotion to Israel that supersedes their affinity for their host country. Massive and uninterrupted Jewish-Israeli espionage against the US, for instance, highlights this under-reported phenomena. (Recently Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Hollywood producer Arnon Milchan were implicated in FBI documents in a successful scheme to obtain nuclear technology on behalf of Israel.)

Therefore, ‘dual loyalties’ allegations may in fact understate the problem. The broad and entrenched base of Jewish/Israeli activism that now permeates Washington and US culture in general is both unprecedented and lethal, as the US wars on Iraq, Libya, and elsewhere prove. ‘Dual loyalties’? If only it were so!

Indeed, the sheer number of Jewish/Israeli clubs, lobbies, agencies, caucuses, congresses, committees, conferences, pageants, festivals, award ceremonies, fundraisers, federations, lobbies, symposiums, organizations and so on, speaks volumes about Jewish insularity and hyper-energetic Jewish activism. At the same time, Jewish Americans still enjoy not only unfettered freedom throughout the Western world, but unrivaled influence as well. This includes the sphere of American public education too, where mandatory Holocaust education is also ‘on the rise’.

The Special Status of Jews in the West

It’s fair to say that the Jewish agenda in America today is to lower the curtain on public expressions of Christianity, but elevate certain official views of Jewish behavior and of the history of ‘anti-Semitism’ to a status where they cannot be questioned without legal consequences. Europe is already on this Zionist-friendly fast track, and in even more advanced stages. In addition to the existing European laws that outlaw ‘Holocaust denial’ and ‘group libel’, legislation is now being crafted within the EU to further criminalize non-violent and even comic manifestations of ‘anti-Semitism’. These penalties dovetail nicely with America’s ‘Global Anti-Semitism Review Act of 2004‘ that passed in both the US House and Senate unanimously before being signed into law by President George W. Bush.

So despite the showy demonstrations in support of Free Speech that appeared everywhere after the lethal Charlie Hebdo and kosher market attacks in Paris recently, pro-censorship laws specifically designed to shield the Jewish community in France (but not the Muslim one) were in place long before these massacres took place and they remain in force now. Free Speech and ‘artistic freedom’ may be priceless. And their value may even produce huge marches. However, when push comes to shove, these cherished ‘rights’ inevitably take a back seat to Jewish sensitivities.

On the other hand, immigrant Muslims — many of whom are refugees from catastrophic wars initiated by the West — are routinely subjected to derision and fear-mongering via media and government war policies. Unlike the West’s established, savvy, and well-connected Jewish community, Muslims are neither protected from Western-initiated wars (that’s putting it mildly) or defended from Western ridicule. Most Muslim-immigrants in the West are of relatively low education, low income, and low on political sophistication. Ideally, these people should be repatriated to their native countries. Then left alone.

But neither the people of Europe nor the people of America have the power to accomplish this popular objective. The US war lobby and the US multi-racial lobby are far too strong. And they often work in unison.

In any case, the Western world’s one-sided laws, taboos and policies — coupled with ceaseless Western airstrikes against Muslim targets — inevitably added fuel to the rage that sparked the Muslim attacks in Paris. How could they not? Ironically, many of these unwelcome immigrants are victims, too.

Fortunately, AST is starting to feel some heat.

Jewish hypocrisy and Zionist malfeasance can no longer be swept under the rug. After all, Zionized America’s serial warfare has come at a staggering cost. Though estimates vary widely, in Iraq and Afghanistan alone there are probably well over 600,000 dead (and millions more displaced) since Washington initiated its nation-building missions in the region following 911. Interestingly, specific war plans targeting Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran and other entities (all of which are historic enemies of Israel) were well underway in Washington long before the three buildings in NYC fell.

It’s also worth remembering that not only did powerful, pro-Israel lobbies in Washington help engineer all of America’s modern wars against Muslim-majority nations and targets, but some even helped write legislation that imposes crippling economic sanctions on another besieged Israeli foe, Iran.

US sanctions against Iran are so all-encompassing that even European multinationals that do business with Iran have been blasted for violating these Zionist-friendly prohibitions. One French company (BNP Paribas) was recently hit with fines approaching nine billion dollars for conducting business with Iran.

It must be remembered that Zionized Washington routinely bombs or sanctions Middle East countries to counter military threats that do not exist (Iraq, Syria, Libya, Iran) and to preemptively stop the possible spread of nuclear weapons (Israel not included). The process is entirely politicized. After all, the US is not threatened by any of these puny states. These policies then, constitute a kind of political corruption since they result from the pressure exerted by an ethnic lobby that is indifferent to national interests. Worse still, a military first strike — especially in the face of UN opposition — is illegal under numerous international laws and treaties. Bad things sometimes happen when Israel and Washington hold hands.

It’s also worth noting that the decades-long commitment by Washington to a ‘Two-State’ solution in Israel/Palestine is now dead, killed in no small part by interminable negotiations and other Israeli obstacles. The Zionist plan for the indefinite subjugation of Palestine however remains very much alive.

Why is it that the Israelis and Palestinians have never achieved a lasting ‘peace agreement’? It is because the Israelis don’t want and don’t expect a negotiated settlement, as it would necessitate a meaningful compromise. The Israelis figure that they can get it all if they simply wait it out and use military force as needed to keep life miserable for the natives while they slowly cleanse the area of non-Jews. And no one — not even Washington — can stop them. This process will likely take decades longer. But the Israelis are determined and Washington hasn’t the power to force a compromise. This situation bolsters the case that it is Israel — not America — that is now the world’s foremost superpower. After all, who runs Washington?

Sadly, even though most low-information American voters couldn’t care less about Palestine one way or another, they should. A Zionist victory over the beleaguered souls in Gaza not only boosts Israeli triumphalism, but it also increases the likelihood of greater Zionist hegemony elsewhere, including Washington and American culture in general. And if Zionists succeed in using the US to crush the alliance between Russia, Syria and Iran, watch their oversized global footprint harden even further — and with it, the artificial centrality of Israel in American life.

As for discussing these hot topics, people should be free to be ‘pro-Jewish’ (or pro-Zionist) and those who oppose them should be permitted to take the position of being ‘anti-Jewish’, ‘anti-Zionist’ or ‘anti-Israel’, without stigma.

Do you approve of Israeli conduct and behavior? I don’t. But reform is possible. In the meantime, everyone should be free to discuss these issues and advocate their position on a level playing field.

Keep it fair. Keep it accurate. Count the bodies. Follow the money.

Perhaps someday the various opposing teams can find common ground, devise a solution, cut a deal, and make the necessary compromises. It’s possible. But ‘anti-Semitism’ and ‘anti-Semite’ are Jewish-manufactured buzz words that give one side in this dispute an undue advantage. Loaded and prejudicial terms like ‘anti-Semite’ then, should be retired altogether, just as words like ‘nigger’ and ‘kike’ have been driven out of respectable conversation.

If Small was honest, he and his coterie would claim that so-and-so hates Jews unfairly. That’s legitimate. But in Small’s narrow world, Jews may not be shunned or mistrusted or hated for any reason whatsoever. You must instead feel guilt for any and all criticisms of Jews, no matter how factually based.

As for Israel’s Muslim problem, that too is a Zionist canard. Just ask any of the tens of thousands of Palestinian Christians who have unhappily fled the Middle East’s ‘only true democracy’ since its founding. All native non-Jews are second class citizens in Israel. Sad but true. But religious distinctions between native Christians and native Muslims in Israel are an unimportant distraction designed primarily for low-information US voters. Fortunately for the Israelis, the number of low-information US voters is huge and growing. Fortunately for us critics, Israeli conduct itself is undermining anti-Semitic theory.

A very powerful, very wealthy (and heavily subsidized) rising power cannot behave ruthlessly and get away with it forever. Also, Israel is not the Western-style ‘democracy’ it pretends to be. For example, ethno-religious discrimination that is outlawed in the US and Europe is as kosher as matzo ball soup in the Jewish State. Even ‘inter-faith’ marriages in Israel cannot be performed if one party is Jewish. Housing and education there is also deeply segregated. Many restrictive laws and customs in Israel are in place to maintain Jewish separateness and to protect the Jewish gene pool. This is one unacknowledged reason why Israel wants to get rid of the native Arabs. It’s not really about ‘security’ in the military sense of the word, since the war has been won. Israel is now basically militarily invincible in any war against other Middle Eastern countries.

Many Jews there however privately fear Jewish intermarriage and miscegenation in the event that Jews and Arabs co-exist peacefully. Jewish leaders want to keep Jewish blood pure. This necessitates permanent separation which is aided by permanent conflict. Ironically, this is why even ‘peace’ threatens the Jewish State.

In any case, Israeli apartheid is doing just fine, thank you. But saying ‘apartheid’ and ‘Israel’ in the same sentence can incite a Zionist backlash of thermonuclear proportions. Managing all political speech remains a top Jewish priority.

Is Israel a ‘racist’ state? Sure. But it wouldn’t really matter if not for (1) the prolonged and needlessly cruel treatment of its native, non-Jewish subjects, and (2) the unscrupulous harnessing of Western power — by duplicitous means — to achieve the transformation of Israel into a nuclear and political superpower.

Shouldn’t this concern Americans?

It should and it does. Only not so much where it matters — in Washington, Hollywood, and US newsrooms.

Is saying this ‘anti-Semitic’?

You bet it is!