Those of us who dare to criticize Israel's centrality in American life are at a real disadvantage. We are disgusted by what we see, but contemporary protocol requires us to show respect and tolerance to the very people who inspire the disgust in the first place. Worse still, our tormentors have no reciprocal obligation for civility. The deck of cards in this dispute is stacked. Saying the wrong word, uttering an incorrect phrase, and one can be tarred as a disreputable 'Anti-Semite', which has become the scarlet letter of our time.

Have Jews been mistreated, shunned, defamed and killed? Certainly. Have Jews done the same? Most definitely. And to make matters worse, they're still at it. Unfortunately, 'post-Holocaust' rules of discourse now dictate extreme rhetorical deference on this subject. This favors the opposition. There are linguistic land-mines everywhere. And they're been laid out almost exclusively by the other team. Fortunately, one Jewish blogger has recently provided the non-Jewish world with a 19-point guide on what NOT say about Jews and Israel if you wish to avoid the stigma of 'anti-Semitism'.

But as Gaza burns and Israeli criminality goes unpunished, the time has come to turn the tables on the world's most privileged victims. What, for instance, would happen if Jews were reduced to being treated and viewed just like normal, average, everyday human beings? Think of it. The repercussions would be colossal. All special political and cultural considerations that presently confer privilege on Israel and its minions would be ended. US sovereignty could be restored. Perhaps even justice and the rule of law could guide our nation's policies in the Middle East. Might censorious speech codes even be repealed? It's possible.

I concede that this is a radical proposal. There would surely be 'outrage' from the usual suspects. But the present levels of privilege, benefits and deference now accorded global Jewry are wreaking havoc on humanity. And in no small way, I blame entrenched 'anti-Semitic theory' for this, since it is an ideology that denies the yin and yang (or the sharing of any blame) within the historic narrative that purports to fully explain the enduring tensions between gentiles and Jews. Entrenched anti-Semitic theory also confers perennial 'victim status' on Jews. They're all 'survivors'. Is this conclusion really justified? In any event, the political payoff is enormous and across-the-board.

Anti-Semitic theory therefore is Zionist trope. Even the term 'anti-Semitism' is a ruse. After all, the intermittent animus directed towards Jews has little to do with their Semitic origins or even 'Semitism' itself--whatever that may be. Arabs, of course, are a Semitic people; yet Americans are continuously steered towards mistrusting or despising them.

Another fallacy that's baked into anti-Semitic theory is the contention that irrational gentile 'prejudice' and the unflattering characterization of Jews in the New Testament are the primary sources of modern 'anti-Semitism'. Those explanations are pure kosher boloney.

Entrenched Jewish privilege also flies in the face of the 'equal treatment' clause of the US Constitution since it provides special consideration and unique assistance to one ethno-religious group operating out of Tel Aviv but living everywhere from NY to Singapore. Anti-Semitic theory has also laid the groundwork for America's unconditional 'special relationship' with Israel. And it advances the astonishing view that Jews are never safe and that they always deserve special consideration and unique protections.

As for the intermittent discord between the two parties (Jews/gentiles), anti-Semitic theory strategically places blame. It is a one-sided and self-exonerating exercise. Thus, anti-Semitic theory functions as a bracing ideology within a larger power structure that includes formal lobbying organizations such as AIPAC, ADL, ZOA, AJC, WINEP, CPMJO, SPLC, AEI and scores more.

Regarding the aforementioned guide (for gentiles) on 'How to Criticize Israel without Being Anti-Semitic', this manual is designed for one thing: to constrict and manipulate political discourse. It is emblematic of a broader movement whose objective is to convince its target audience (non-Jewish whites) that self-censorship (at the very least) must be imposed on all individuals whose political talking points 'aren't fair' to Jews, 'aren't completely true' about Jews, and should therefore be eschewed by non-Jews if they want to avoid the stigma of anti-Semitism. These prescribed 'dos' and 'don'ts' are not only hair-splitting, but insufferably self-serving. These thinly-veiled speech codes will never end until non-Jews reject them aggressively and categorically.

This pro-Israel guide even inveighs against the false notions (very false!) of Jews having "dual loyalties" (oh never!) concerning Israel and America or that Jews play an oversized role in banking or media (another anti-Semitic canard!) and that even if a lot of Jews "do happen to be" numerically over-represented in certain key professions, one must never accuse them of using their access to power to advance Jewish causes, interests, and so on. The 'guide' is replete with the usual tricks, falsehoods, denials and implicit double-standards for which organized Jewry is famous. The entire enterprise would be laughable if it wasn't so invidious and effective. Many Jews, regrettably, are simply addicted to telling Gentiles how to think and what not to say. They are the world's most accomplished censors, with their latest efforts being directed towards writing and enacting 'hate speech' legislation.

So watch out. 'Anti-Semitism', say the experts, is a 'virus' with no rational basis. That's the official decree. But real history is not so black and white. This is why the entire paradigm of anti-Semitic theory needs to be revised, deconstructed and junked.

In a free and normal world, one should be permitted to like Jews or not like Jews. It depends upon how they act and what they do. And I'll be the first to concede that Jews are a very talented bunch. But identifying one's friends and enemies should always be an autonomous and rational exercise. No one however has the right to initiate physical violence. But these core values, incredibly, have been turned on their head. Anti-Semitic theory maintains that a 'hostility' to Jews (regardless of how they conduct themselves) is ever-present and that it is an inherent 'sickness'. On the other hand, Jews (and their allies) may initiate violence to achieve any number of noble political objectives. This bizarre mindset now guides official Washington. This double-standard goes a long towards explaining why both the US Senate and House unanimously passed resolutions (Senate 498 & 526, House 107) standing firmly behind Israel's ongoing attacks on Gaza and declaring the puny Palestinian resistance there 'unprovoked'. Washington meanwhile is funneling 'emergency supplies' (weapons) to mega-powerful, hyper-militarized Israel even though it's the people of Gaza--not Israel--who face annihilation. Like 'anti-Semitic theory' itself, Washington's political balance is completely out of whack. The Israel/Palestine conflict is immensely complex and morally ambiguous, to say the least. Yet not one US Senator or Representative--from Bernie Sanders to Rand Paul--broke ranks with the Israel lobby on any of these remarkable resolutions. Not one.

In America today, one can unashamedly root loudly and publicly for the Jews/Israelis--even when it spells existential disaster for others. So why then aren't free and independent people allowed to root against the Israelis? I'm not here to claim that all pro-Zionist positions are indefensible. But America's elected 'leaders' have become Zionized robots. Being reflexively pro-Zionist is now a job requirement in our nation's capitol. Have we Americans lost control of our own country?

Indeed, political dissenters who challenge Pro-Zionist policies in Washington have been targeted and removed from elected office for years. Former US Congressman Paul Findley identified this phenomena 30 years ago in his groundbreaking book 'They Dare to Speak Out'. Unfortunately, conditions in Washington have only worsened. Today, there are no politicians who even remotely qualify as 'anti-Israel' left in our nation's capitol. In official Washington, all traces of resistance to Zionist orthodoxy have been eradicated. This is not healthy.

Remember also: organized Jewry can be unscrupulous. The outside world sees this and understands this. Average people worldwide now understand that pro-Israel organizations inside Washington pushed America into an unnecessary and barbaric war against Iraq in 2003 that lasted nearly ten years. Iraq today is a disaster. Yet these same people and organizations now want to inflict similar damage on Iran. But this is a criminal enterprise. The persistent phenomena of 'anti-Semitism' cannot be separated from this deplorable pattern. Thus, the misnamed phenomena of 'anti-Semitism' should be understood as a (sometimes) legitimate defense mechanism. This understandable aversion to harmful Jewish activities however is deliberately misidentified by many Jews and falsely diagnosed by them. By deception they do war.

For instance, consider how Jewish influence-peddlers (Adelson, Zuckerberg, Soros, and virtually all of America's leading Jewish liberals) are welcoming still the boatloads of 'poor and needy' non-white immigrants into America. This is sabotage. Meanwhile, these same do-gooders manage to tolerate the ethnic-cleansing of 'poor and needy' indigenous Arabs in and around Israel. Anti-Semitic theory downplays or ignores this glaring inconsistency. But we evil 'anti-Semites' don't. So who's being honest here?

When non-Jews become fed up with the often-destructive machinations of organized Jewry, protests and even violence can ensue. Jewish experts however routinely classify these rebellions as 'outbreaks of anti-Semitism'. This is a self-serving crock, though it often succeeds in quieting dissent. Are we to believe that only Jews are victims or heroes in this back-and-forth drama? If you believe that, you've been watching too much television.

Indeed, Jews are not inherently (or historically) a particularly righteous, or virtuous, or benevolent people. If they were, they'd be far more popular. Jews are a tribal, ambitious and ethnocentric people. It's therefore the job of us (non-Jewish) outsiders to level the political playing field. Step one: take back control of the English language by dumping the tribe-friendly term 'anti-Semitic'. Call anti-Semitism what it really is: a widespread and understandable aversion to what Jews do. That's one working definition anyway. Like it?

I hope that someday we can honestly make peace with organized Jewry. But they must first reform their ways. In the meantime, why not examine the phenomena of 'Jewish supremacism'?--and then keep on examining it. Let's put the heat where it belongs.

In the real world, there is now some necessity­ and even virtue ­in the complex phenomena commonly derided as 'anti-Semitism'. After all, it takes courage and stamina to speak out against the genuine misdeeds of organized global Jewry. It can be a perilous venture. Let's begin our journey together by collectively rejecting the insidious term 'anti-Semitism'.