Every time someone tries to have a serious discussion about World affairs with the Zionists, they come at you with all kinds of superficial and meaningless arguments. If you happen to have a minimum knowledge of the subject being discussed, you can beat your opponent hands down because they have no more a leg to stand on than their arguments have a wing to fly with.
What these characters have is a trick which they will inevitably pull on you. It is what they consider to be the ace card which they will pull out when you defeat their regular argument. The card comes in the form of the history they invoke and when they point out that because this event took place in the past therefore that consequence will happen in the future.
Sooner or later you will come to realize that listening to a Zionist talk about history is like listening to a witch doctor talk about heart transplant. And you will have learned the valuable lesson that the Zionists are incapable of learning history let alone lecture on it. Therefore, if you listen to the Zionist interpretation of history you listen at your peril because their understanding of history is the stuff that holocausts for their people are made of and ruin for others are fashioned from.
It is not too difficult to see that if these characters understood history as much as they claim they do, they would not have sent their people lurching from one gas chamber to another and from one oven to another as it has been happening throughout history. The fact is that for three thousand five hundred years these characters have never understood what humanity was about simply because their culture has set them apart from everyone else.
The consequences have been that they never understood what happened in the past, they don’t understand what happens now, and they can never understand what may happen in the future. The Zionist leadership make their people live a holocaust without end because when they stand on the tracks of history they never see the train coming. They are the tragedy that was made flesh and given a human form.
Just look at what is going on right now. America was doing well in its relationship with the rest of the World before the Zionists came calling. Getting along with the World was the normal thing to have happened to America given that America is made of people who came from everywhere else on the planet. But then came the Zionists who started to explain history to America and the nefarious results began to manifest themselves almost immediately.
One result was a series of adventures which America was made to embark on by the Zionist advisers. She was told to pursue a course which it did with astonishing blindness and she hurt millions of people in the process. She had her nose rubbed in the mud and, in the final analysis, her actions served to define the word fiasco. In short, America has become the Jew nation of the world made in the image of the eternally despised wandering Jew. America went from a history savvy nation, to a history illiterate one in a generation or two.
Still, those Zionists show up at every venue where they are invited to speak and they bring with them what they describe as the historical incidences to buttress their argument. But the moment they open their mouth, you see they have not learned to read history yet, much less understand it. You can tell they are history illiterate but they want to teach history to you and to the audience.
What escapes these people is the fact that you do not read history in words but you in concepts and in complete ideas. In fact, if you come to believe there is a historical incident you can describe in a word, a sentence or a paragraph, you will automatically believe that the incident can be repeated in exactly the same way. But the reality is that no incident that has mattered to history could be understood in less than a multitude of ideas, impressions, presumptions, assumptions, gut feelings and a whole dialectic of points and counterpoints.
Considering that all of these factors act separately and together to give an event the ultimate shape that it takes, it is impossible to recreate all the factors so as to repeat an event in exactly the same way.
Consequently, it is futile to study history and learn from it how to hurt someone because this would set you up for a defeat at the hand of that someone considering that he too will have learned the same lesson and would have anticipated your every move.
Rather, you study history to learn how to avoid hurting someone because this will make your opponent realize you have come with good intentions and will therefore consider you a wise person and a trustworthy guest. In either case, the event that is recreated will never look exactly the same as the original event.
To understand a historical event is to understand all that went into it. To be able to do that, you have to be trained to think in concepts rather than in words. And this is precisely where - sad to say - young Jews are handicapped by their elders. Modern Jewish upbringing and Jewish studies done here and now are not conducive to the sort of thinking that is necessary to understand history.
What goes on today is learning in the style of Rabbinical Judaism. It consists of learning about humanity by learning words said to be sacred and carrying the meaning assigned to them beforehand. In effect then, rather than observe life and derive the truth from your observation as do the empiricists, you are told that the truth is encapsulated in the word and you interpret life’s events exclusively through the meaning of that word.
This makes the word define the event rather than the other way around. For example, regardless of what happened, if we call someone anti-Semitic it follows that this person’s life and their career must be ruined. Regardless of what happened, if we call an event a genocide it follows that country A is governed by a failing regime and we must attack it. Regardless of what goes on in country B, if we say it does not adhere to democratic principles, it must be the reason why frogs in America do not reproduce as much as they used to. And it can get even more absurd than this.
When you keep all this in mind as you watch those characters defend their position in a debate, you realize that you are looking at clowns doing their thing. The grand daddy of those clowns as far as I can determine is Norman Podhoretz. Read his writings or better yet watch him debate someone on television and look for those moments when he feels he has been defeated in an argument. This is when he will pull the historical analogy and you will be forgiven for having a bellyful of laughs before you change the channel.
It is laughable, yes but it is also sickening because lives are ruined as a result, people are killed, countries are devastated and humanity is set back hundreds if not thousands of years.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Sunday, October 28, 2007
The Zionist Threat To Civilization
There is no end to the examples that one can cite about the fact that Zionism has been allowed to run wild in the English speaking countries but once in a while you get one of those examples which by its nature exposes the reality that Zionism poses a greater threat to Western Civilization than anything seen previously or anything conceivable in the future. The following is one such example.
There was a time in the Nineteen Nineties when the Federal Minister of Justice in Canada was Alan Rock. Being a lawyer and the Minister of Justice, you would expect him to know the fundamental principles upon which the system of justice is based. He may or may not have learned about those principles in high school but he must have learned about them in college or law school.
The two legs upon which the system of justice rests in a democracy are the Doctrine and the Jurisprudence. The first is a collection of opinions expressed by the notables in the field over the ages. For example, the notables may have written about the role of Justice or about its influence on society, or they may have written about a specific subject such as Human Rights. As for Jurisprudence, it is a collection of the cases that were adjudicated in the past.
Thus, when the Court is seized with a case and there is a trial, the lawyers on both sides of the dispute look for passages in the doctrine that agree with their point of view, and for cases in the jurisprudence that support the outcome they advocate for their client. They present all of that to the presiding judge and hope to influence his or her decision. The judge will take these presentations seriously and will be influenced by them because Justice is supposed to be handed down uniformly. That is, if someone was jailed one day for threatening his neighbor in Town A last week, the same sentence should be handed to someone who threatens his neighbor in Town B this week. Of course, if the law has changed in the interim or if a higher court has reversed the decision of the past, everyone is faced with a new ball game and they all return to square one.
Thus, something happening in real life and adjudicated in a Court of Law based on the evidence sets a precedent that enters the annals of Jurisprudence and serves as model to guide future cases. This principle is so sacred that to violate it is to make a mockery of the entire system of justice. Yet, while Minister of Justice, Alan Rock tried to violate it. Not only that, he announced triumphantly that he had a great idea he was going to implement. He was going to use the Executive Tribunals to rule in a certain way so as to set the precedent by which the Courts of Law will rule in the future.
But what is an Executive Tribunal? This is a creature not of the Constitution which would have made it independent of the other branches of government, but a creature of the Legislature which makes it much less independent. Such tribunals are set up because some cases are deemed to be so specialized, it is better to try them by judges who have extra training in the field. Also, the trial or the hearing as it is often called is done in a setting that is less formal and less adversarial than in a Court of Law. Human Rights and Workmen’s Compensation tribunals are two examples of an Executive Tribunal.
Despite the fact that judges of the regular system of justice despise these tribunals and make no secret of it, they cannot always ignore the precedents they set. And this is where Alan Rock comes into the picture. Pressured by the Canadian Jewish Congress, he wanted to make the tribunals sentence suspected Nazi collaborators living in Canada to be deported and thus set the precedent that will influence judges in the regular Courts of Law. And here is where this idea is asinine, instead of having a real trial where all the evidence is brought to light under an adversarial setting and adjudicated on the merit of the case, Alan Rock was going to take the idea fantasized by someone at the Canadian Jewish Congress and make it the model to guide future judges.
This was such a grotesque manifestation of a level of ignorance that is so profound, someone had to speak up. My Jewish friends in Montreal, some of whom were layers, and one being old enough to remember what contributed to the resentment of the Jews in Europe decades earlier, spoke to me about it saying how fearful they were at what was happening. But they dared not speak publicly because Jews and Gentiles alike feared the power of the Canadian Jewish Congress. And so, I spoke out publicly for me and for my friends. Luckily for everyone concerned and for the sake of the system, Alan Rock backed off.
Since that time the Zionists have continued to attack the system upon which rest the tenets of Western Civilization such as academic freedom, the assumption of innocence until one is proven guilt, freedom of speech, equality before the law, the right to be represented by counsel and so on and so on and so on.
Ironically, these same Zionists win many of the battles they engage in by threatening to go to court where they would use to their advantage the very system they tear to shreds. In addition, having ample reasons to distrust what the system of justice has become, ordinary citizens often give in to the blackmail rather than test their cases in court.
But if a citizen decides to see the Zionists in Court as some do, they often come to regret the decision because they meet judges with an IQ that does not surpass that of Alan Rock. And if the citizen is lucky enough to meet a judge with an IQ that allows him or her to understand what is meant by all citizens are equal before the law and thus treat everyone equally, the Zionists drag the case in court for ever.
They do that by using the delaying tactics inserted into the procedure to give the lawyers time to adequately prepare for the cases they represent if and when they need time. But the aim of the Zionists in using the privilege would be to postpone the day of reckoning until such time that the judge they do not like is replaced or until their opponent is ruined by the legal expenses and quits before the end. The Zionists call this outcome making the opponent cry uncle.
One of the most notorious characters to abuse the system of justice for a long time in the United States of America is Alan Dershowitz whose claim to fame was earned by what he accomplished outside the courtroom than inside it, being endowed with a big mouth and plagued with low intelligence.
And so while people admire his audacity, they are dismayed by the stand of the Harvard Law School which Dershowitz uses as a ladder to take his profile from that of a nobody to that of a somebody. And ever since the man said you cannot blame Israel for doing to the Palestinians what someone else has done before, people have wondered how much longer Harvard will keep silent as Israel inflicts on the Palestinians what Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Pol Pot, the Serbian and Rwandan killers have inflicted on the innocent.
In the final analysis, Dershowitz and those like him represent a great threat to Western Civilization but not because they are smart enough to hurt it every time they so decide. They are a threat because Dershowitz and a few like him were made into the poster boys of intellectual achievement by the Harvards of America despite the fact that these characters could not carry the bag for say, an Idi Amin.
And this is what makes institutions like Harvard fall to depths of disrepute that were never imagined before the ascendance of Zionism in America. Sadly, these institutions are stuck with the present condition because of a provision in the rules that says they cannot discipline let alone get rid of a tenured character like Dershowitz no matter what the character has mutated into. Something will have to give sometime soon.
There was a time in the Nineteen Nineties when the Federal Minister of Justice in Canada was Alan Rock. Being a lawyer and the Minister of Justice, you would expect him to know the fundamental principles upon which the system of justice is based. He may or may not have learned about those principles in high school but he must have learned about them in college or law school.
The two legs upon which the system of justice rests in a democracy are the Doctrine and the Jurisprudence. The first is a collection of opinions expressed by the notables in the field over the ages. For example, the notables may have written about the role of Justice or about its influence on society, or they may have written about a specific subject such as Human Rights. As for Jurisprudence, it is a collection of the cases that were adjudicated in the past.
Thus, when the Court is seized with a case and there is a trial, the lawyers on both sides of the dispute look for passages in the doctrine that agree with their point of view, and for cases in the jurisprudence that support the outcome they advocate for their client. They present all of that to the presiding judge and hope to influence his or her decision. The judge will take these presentations seriously and will be influenced by them because Justice is supposed to be handed down uniformly. That is, if someone was jailed one day for threatening his neighbor in Town A last week, the same sentence should be handed to someone who threatens his neighbor in Town B this week. Of course, if the law has changed in the interim or if a higher court has reversed the decision of the past, everyone is faced with a new ball game and they all return to square one.
Thus, something happening in real life and adjudicated in a Court of Law based on the evidence sets a precedent that enters the annals of Jurisprudence and serves as model to guide future cases. This principle is so sacred that to violate it is to make a mockery of the entire system of justice. Yet, while Minister of Justice, Alan Rock tried to violate it. Not only that, he announced triumphantly that he had a great idea he was going to implement. He was going to use the Executive Tribunals to rule in a certain way so as to set the precedent by which the Courts of Law will rule in the future.
But what is an Executive Tribunal? This is a creature not of the Constitution which would have made it independent of the other branches of government, but a creature of the Legislature which makes it much less independent. Such tribunals are set up because some cases are deemed to be so specialized, it is better to try them by judges who have extra training in the field. Also, the trial or the hearing as it is often called is done in a setting that is less formal and less adversarial than in a Court of Law. Human Rights and Workmen’s Compensation tribunals are two examples of an Executive Tribunal.
Despite the fact that judges of the regular system of justice despise these tribunals and make no secret of it, they cannot always ignore the precedents they set. And this is where Alan Rock comes into the picture. Pressured by the Canadian Jewish Congress, he wanted to make the tribunals sentence suspected Nazi collaborators living in Canada to be deported and thus set the precedent that will influence judges in the regular Courts of Law. And here is where this idea is asinine, instead of having a real trial where all the evidence is brought to light under an adversarial setting and adjudicated on the merit of the case, Alan Rock was going to take the idea fantasized by someone at the Canadian Jewish Congress and make it the model to guide future judges.
This was such a grotesque manifestation of a level of ignorance that is so profound, someone had to speak up. My Jewish friends in Montreal, some of whom were layers, and one being old enough to remember what contributed to the resentment of the Jews in Europe decades earlier, spoke to me about it saying how fearful they were at what was happening. But they dared not speak publicly because Jews and Gentiles alike feared the power of the Canadian Jewish Congress. And so, I spoke out publicly for me and for my friends. Luckily for everyone concerned and for the sake of the system, Alan Rock backed off.
Since that time the Zionists have continued to attack the system upon which rest the tenets of Western Civilization such as academic freedom, the assumption of innocence until one is proven guilt, freedom of speech, equality before the law, the right to be represented by counsel and so on and so on and so on.
Ironically, these same Zionists win many of the battles they engage in by threatening to go to court where they would use to their advantage the very system they tear to shreds. In addition, having ample reasons to distrust what the system of justice has become, ordinary citizens often give in to the blackmail rather than test their cases in court.
But if a citizen decides to see the Zionists in Court as some do, they often come to regret the decision because they meet judges with an IQ that does not surpass that of Alan Rock. And if the citizen is lucky enough to meet a judge with an IQ that allows him or her to understand what is meant by all citizens are equal before the law and thus treat everyone equally, the Zionists drag the case in court for ever.
They do that by using the delaying tactics inserted into the procedure to give the lawyers time to adequately prepare for the cases they represent if and when they need time. But the aim of the Zionists in using the privilege would be to postpone the day of reckoning until such time that the judge they do not like is replaced or until their opponent is ruined by the legal expenses and quits before the end. The Zionists call this outcome making the opponent cry uncle.
One of the most notorious characters to abuse the system of justice for a long time in the United States of America is Alan Dershowitz whose claim to fame was earned by what he accomplished outside the courtroom than inside it, being endowed with a big mouth and plagued with low intelligence.
And so while people admire his audacity, they are dismayed by the stand of the Harvard Law School which Dershowitz uses as a ladder to take his profile from that of a nobody to that of a somebody. And ever since the man said you cannot blame Israel for doing to the Palestinians what someone else has done before, people have wondered how much longer Harvard will keep silent as Israel inflicts on the Palestinians what Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Pol Pot, the Serbian and Rwandan killers have inflicted on the innocent.
In the final analysis, Dershowitz and those like him represent a great threat to Western Civilization but not because they are smart enough to hurt it every time they so decide. They are a threat because Dershowitz and a few like him were made into the poster boys of intellectual achievement by the Harvards of America despite the fact that these characters could not carry the bag for say, an Idi Amin.
And this is what makes institutions like Harvard fall to depths of disrepute that were never imagined before the ascendance of Zionism in America. Sadly, these institutions are stuck with the present condition because of a provision in the rules that says they cannot discipline let alone get rid of a tenured character like Dershowitz no matter what the character has mutated into. Something will have to give sometime soon.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Consequences Of Zionism Run Amuck
Words and actions have consequences but so do silence and inaction. And when you combine the wrong words and inaction where the right words and proper action are due, serious things can happen which will come back to haunt you. Nothing demonstrates the validity of these points more than the tragedy that is the war in Iraq today and the manner in which the United States of America was sucked into it.
We could say that future historians will have no trouble connecting the dots and draw a picture as to what caused the tragedy until we realize that we live in that future already because we now have the wherewithal to connect the dots. We have a machine called the electronic search engine and it will help us do just that.
The engine sifts through billions of bits of information in a flash, isolates what we tell it to look for and organizes the find in such a way as to make it easy to figure out what happened. When we do this a few times, we come to realize that people do not need to sit in a room and "breathe together" to have a conspiracy but that conspiracies can happen in cyberspace spontaneously whether or not a single mastermind stands behind it.
For example, America invaded Iraq because it was said repeatedly that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. Many people made this assertion but did they all conspire to create the illusion that such weapons existed in Iraq? Probably not because conspiracy means to breathe together which necessitates that those people be in the same room at the same time. Yet the indications are that the people lived in different cities and never knew or communicated with each other directly.
What happened was that true to their instinct, the people adopted an idea they had no way of ascertaining was correct simply because they wanted to be part of a trend. It seems that journalists and pundits more than anyone else want to be part of a surefire trend they can rely on to give them insights on the important issues of the day. Also, the trend gives them safety in numbers because when they are wrong which is often, they will have someone with whom to share the blame. This helps everyone advance their career and remain safe at the same time.
This being the reality of the thing, a would-be mastermind can deliberately get the rumor mill going by making one false assertion. Others will jump in and feed the mill until a critical mass is reached. A falsehood becomes a fact that no one can avoid or deny and pretty soon we have a cottage industry based on the original false rumor. Someone in power takes action based on the resulting body of falsehoods, now perceived as facts, and thus begins a series of events whose ultimate outcome can never be predicted.
Spin doctors, lobbyists and captains of propaganda machines are known to use that mechanism to advance the causes they pitch. They do not always succeed brilliantly because each one lacks a certain amount of credibility, which mercifully is something that tends to put the brakes on the more outlandish claims. But when you are a lobby like the Zionist lobby which stands on a pedestal that rises above criticism, you can accomplish anything you wish by simply wishing it.
And this is when we realize that we are facing a dictatorship by another name. It may not necessarily be the dictatorship of one person or that of one party but it is a dictatorship because those involved do not have to abide by the rules like everyone else. Couple this with the fact that there is no limit to the ambition of the Zionists and you get a clear picture as to the scope of the tyranny that is out there.
Consider just this one fact. The Zionists began by saying that all what they wanted was a homeland where Jews can live in peace like everyone else, no more than that. Fast forward two generations and they now speak of "fixing" the whole world to make it safe for themselves. And how do they do that? They do it by dragging the remaining sole superpower into what was to be a small mission in Iraq and then mission-creep the superpower into what they now describe as a fifty year commitment to remain in the Arab Middle East and the Islamic World beyond it so as to democratize both, whatever that means.
At the moment, the Zionists have shelved their Marxist dream for a world full of harmony and brotherly love in favor of the neo-conservative model of a dog-eat-dog free market democracy or whatever model they will be championing at the hour you will be reading these words. And because they made it so that to criticize them automatically classifies you as anti-Semitic therefore a criminal, you know you are facing a dictatorship more base, more primitive and more savage than anything this planet has ever witnessed before.
This is Zionism run amuck. It is the reason why the war in Iraq happened, the careless manner in which it was decided upon and the nonchalant manner in which it was handled thereafter. This chain of events has developed despite the warning signs that a disaster was looming. And when we look at the events closely, we see the following:
Because those who planned and executed the war in Iraq knew that the war was the wish of the Zionists, they calculated that no one will dare criticize them. Therefore, they did not have to be careful given that the Zionist propaganda machine stood on guard for them, ready to bail them out every time they got into trouble.
That set-up was maintained for a long time and then the inevitable happened and reality caught up with them. The day of reckoning came knocking at their door but it was already too late to reverse the trend and the war could no longer be scaled down to avoid the tragedy that resulted. Everyone sane now agrees that Iraq has been a tragedy no matter what the ultimate outcome will look like.
What is left for us to do now is learn the lesson of this experience. The foremost lesson to keep in mind is that silence and inaction caused the Iraq tragedy. It happened because those in charge felt secure by the assumption that the Zionists who stood above criticism would protected them no matter what happened. They were correct to a point because no one challenged the set-up or took action against it for a long time, but they were wrong in believing that standing on a pedestal endowed the Zionists with miraculous powers capable of making them win a war that could never be won.
Thus, to avoid a repetition of the tragedy, the Zionists must be brought down the pedestal and never allowed to climb on it again. To this end, we invoke the old mantra and tell it like it is beginning with the now obvious reality that Zionism is the twin brother of Nazism. The two belong in the same coffin where Nazism was laid to rest a long time ago and this should be a project for all of humanity to work on until it is completed.
Also, we would save time and energy if we stopped going after the red herring that someone has called Islamofascism. Zionism has been the threat all along because it works quietly and by the whispers of the elderly. On the other hand Islam can be a threat only when it goes extreme which requires it to be young, disorganized and mostly on the fringes of society.
Comparing the perennial threat that emanates from Zionism and the potential threat that emanates from Islam is like comparing a division of tanks and helicopters that is facing a mob of angry stone throwing kids. The first believes that God gave it everything you have and wants it back, the second believes that you insulted them and want you out of their faces. Who would you fear the most?
We could say that future historians will have no trouble connecting the dots and draw a picture as to what caused the tragedy until we realize that we live in that future already because we now have the wherewithal to connect the dots. We have a machine called the electronic search engine and it will help us do just that.
The engine sifts through billions of bits of information in a flash, isolates what we tell it to look for and organizes the find in such a way as to make it easy to figure out what happened. When we do this a few times, we come to realize that people do not need to sit in a room and "breathe together" to have a conspiracy but that conspiracies can happen in cyberspace spontaneously whether or not a single mastermind stands behind it.
For example, America invaded Iraq because it was said repeatedly that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. Many people made this assertion but did they all conspire to create the illusion that such weapons existed in Iraq? Probably not because conspiracy means to breathe together which necessitates that those people be in the same room at the same time. Yet the indications are that the people lived in different cities and never knew or communicated with each other directly.
What happened was that true to their instinct, the people adopted an idea they had no way of ascertaining was correct simply because they wanted to be part of a trend. It seems that journalists and pundits more than anyone else want to be part of a surefire trend they can rely on to give them insights on the important issues of the day. Also, the trend gives them safety in numbers because when they are wrong which is often, they will have someone with whom to share the blame. This helps everyone advance their career and remain safe at the same time.
This being the reality of the thing, a would-be mastermind can deliberately get the rumor mill going by making one false assertion. Others will jump in and feed the mill until a critical mass is reached. A falsehood becomes a fact that no one can avoid or deny and pretty soon we have a cottage industry based on the original false rumor. Someone in power takes action based on the resulting body of falsehoods, now perceived as facts, and thus begins a series of events whose ultimate outcome can never be predicted.
Spin doctors, lobbyists and captains of propaganda machines are known to use that mechanism to advance the causes they pitch. They do not always succeed brilliantly because each one lacks a certain amount of credibility, which mercifully is something that tends to put the brakes on the more outlandish claims. But when you are a lobby like the Zionist lobby which stands on a pedestal that rises above criticism, you can accomplish anything you wish by simply wishing it.
And this is when we realize that we are facing a dictatorship by another name. It may not necessarily be the dictatorship of one person or that of one party but it is a dictatorship because those involved do not have to abide by the rules like everyone else. Couple this with the fact that there is no limit to the ambition of the Zionists and you get a clear picture as to the scope of the tyranny that is out there.
Consider just this one fact. The Zionists began by saying that all what they wanted was a homeland where Jews can live in peace like everyone else, no more than that. Fast forward two generations and they now speak of "fixing" the whole world to make it safe for themselves. And how do they do that? They do it by dragging the remaining sole superpower into what was to be a small mission in Iraq and then mission-creep the superpower into what they now describe as a fifty year commitment to remain in the Arab Middle East and the Islamic World beyond it so as to democratize both, whatever that means.
At the moment, the Zionists have shelved their Marxist dream for a world full of harmony and brotherly love in favor of the neo-conservative model of a dog-eat-dog free market democracy or whatever model they will be championing at the hour you will be reading these words. And because they made it so that to criticize them automatically classifies you as anti-Semitic therefore a criminal, you know you are facing a dictatorship more base, more primitive and more savage than anything this planet has ever witnessed before.
This is Zionism run amuck. It is the reason why the war in Iraq happened, the careless manner in which it was decided upon and the nonchalant manner in which it was handled thereafter. This chain of events has developed despite the warning signs that a disaster was looming. And when we look at the events closely, we see the following:
Because those who planned and executed the war in Iraq knew that the war was the wish of the Zionists, they calculated that no one will dare criticize them. Therefore, they did not have to be careful given that the Zionist propaganda machine stood on guard for them, ready to bail them out every time they got into trouble.
That set-up was maintained for a long time and then the inevitable happened and reality caught up with them. The day of reckoning came knocking at their door but it was already too late to reverse the trend and the war could no longer be scaled down to avoid the tragedy that resulted. Everyone sane now agrees that Iraq has been a tragedy no matter what the ultimate outcome will look like.
What is left for us to do now is learn the lesson of this experience. The foremost lesson to keep in mind is that silence and inaction caused the Iraq tragedy. It happened because those in charge felt secure by the assumption that the Zionists who stood above criticism would protected them no matter what happened. They were correct to a point because no one challenged the set-up or took action against it for a long time, but they were wrong in believing that standing on a pedestal endowed the Zionists with miraculous powers capable of making them win a war that could never be won.
Thus, to avoid a repetition of the tragedy, the Zionists must be brought down the pedestal and never allowed to climb on it again. To this end, we invoke the old mantra and tell it like it is beginning with the now obvious reality that Zionism is the twin brother of Nazism. The two belong in the same coffin where Nazism was laid to rest a long time ago and this should be a project for all of humanity to work on until it is completed.
Also, we would save time and energy if we stopped going after the red herring that someone has called Islamofascism. Zionism has been the threat all along because it works quietly and by the whispers of the elderly. On the other hand Islam can be a threat only when it goes extreme which requires it to be young, disorganized and mostly on the fringes of society.
Comparing the perennial threat that emanates from Zionism and the potential threat that emanates from Islam is like comparing a division of tanks and helicopters that is facing a mob of angry stone throwing kids. The first believes that God gave it everything you have and wants it back, the second believes that you insulted them and want you out of their faces. Who would you fear the most?
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Dershowitz Foaming At The Mouth Again
In an article written for FrontPageMagazine.com on October 19, 2007, Alan Dershowitz delivers a diatribe against the Oxford Union and a number of individuals because they decided to debate the situation in Palestine. Dershowitz himself was invited to participate in the discussion but he declined as he says: I turned down [the] invitation because of the "when did you stop beating your wife" terms of the debate and my proposed teammates.
The Oxford Union and the people that Dershowitz attacks are quite capable of defending themselves although I doubt they will bother to do that, and I shall not take up their causes myself. I shall not weigh in on the merits of the resolution to be debated either: (This house believes that One State is the Only Solution to the Israel-Palestine Conflict) because the debaters are eminently more qualified than me to do that. What I shall discuss are the image and the true essence of Alan Dershowitz as they emerge from his article, and the consequences thereof.
The man says he did not go to the debate because he does not like the terms of the debate or his proposed teammates. Let me begin with the teammate issue. Dershowitz says: "The resolution is simply another way of presenting an anti-Israel side (the one-state solution) and a pro-Israel side (the two-state solution)." He, Dershowitz, was invited to be on the team advocating the two-state solution but the organizers tagged him with teammates he does not like so he said no thank you.
In fact, the Oxford Union never meant to present the debate as pro Israel or anti Israel. It is just that Dershowitz sees the whole world in terms of pro Israel or anti Israel. His brain is so wired that you are either with Israel or you are against Israel. And this condition debilitates him so badly that he is incapable of looking at any issue without seeing it through that narrow prism.
Thus, when he looked at his proposed team through the prism, he was horrified to see who was on it. Things got worse when Norman Finkelstein was picked in his stead after he turned down the invitation. This is how Dershowitz puts it: Yet by the standards of the Oxford Union, Norman Finkelstein is regarded as a pro Israel "scholar" – at least in this debate. Just last May, the same Finkelstein was selected to debate the anti-Israel side of the proposition: "This House believes the pro-Israeli lobby has successfully stifled Western debate about Israel’s action."
Here again, the proposition to discuss whether or not the activities of the Israeli lobby stifled Western debate is seen by Dershowitz through the narrow prism of his mentality and he settles on an angle through which he seeks to determine whether the proposition is pro Israel or anti Israel.
It is worth recalling at this point that when Alan Dershowitz began to show signs of strangeness a while ago and was regarded as becoming too self contradictory to be taken seriously, his friends rushed to his defense to say that to hold two contradictory ideas at the same time was a mark of supreme intelligence, not strangeness.
Well, here apparently, is a supremely intelligent man who can hold two contradictory ideas at the same time but cannot reconcile two simple notions, one being that a two state solution for Israel may have merit and the other being that the pro-Israeli lobby may have stifled Western debate. Norman Finklestein entertained these two positions and Dershowitz cries foul.
It is amazing, therefore, to witness how supreme intelligence works with some people but then, who are we not to be amazed. So let me say on behalf of all how grateful we are that we now have a clear demonstration as to why the rest of us can never be as intelligent as Alan Dershowitz, and we accept our humble lot without envy.
Let us now cut this crap and get real. Alan Dershowitz has another problem which is contributing to his debilitation. To him, that which he regards as pro Israel represents the truth, and that which he regards as anti Israel represents the lie. And because everything is either pro Israel or anti Israel, it follows that everything is either true or false.
Even when a question is far from being a true or false proposition, Dershowitz will see it only in those terms. For example, to hold a debate is just that, hold a debate. The purpose of the debate may be one thing or another but it cannot be the debate itself nor can it be any of the possible outcomes of the debate. Not so with Dershowitz who will ask: in holding the debate, are they pro Israel or anti Israel?
And here is the evidence for this, the fact that the Oxford Union held the May debate leads Alan Dershowitz to conclude the following: "Considering the locus of the debate – and its sponsor (the Arab nation of Qatar) – it is not surprising that the proposition won overwhelmingly despite its demonstrable falsehood. Truth plays little role in Oxford Union debates." And then, to enforce the point still further, Dershowitz goes on to say: The Oxford Union: may it rest in peace, along side Pravda and other departed purveyors of "truths," Stalin-style.
Well, let us now take a deep breath and then ask: could this supremely intelligent man not have taken the challenge, gone to the debate to which he was invited and taken the truth to the lesser mortals who may well have appreciated his company? He is by all accounts capable of spreading truth and enlightenment with the sort of magic that leaves everyone breathless. Look, for example, how he persuaded people of his sincerity when he went around saying he was a friend of the Palestinians. Was there anyone in the world who doubted him? Of course not. Next time they elect a Palestinian Pope you know which Jew will be made saint.
Jokes aside, this forces us to conclude that no, it could not be that Alan Dershowitz declined the invitation because of his teammates. He is so high above everyone that to be teamed with this mate or that mate would have made no difference. But if not the teammates, then why did he not go to the debate? Well, we must admit we are at wit’s end and have no choice but to look at the other reason Dershowitz gave for not going to the debate: I turned down [the] invitation because of the "when did you stop beating your wife" terms of the debate.
Eureka! This must be it. Alan Dershowitz did not go to the debate because he would not bother with something so mundane as to set the record straight. That supremely intelligent man they call Dershowitz did not go to the debate because he was too busy doing something much more important than debate anti Israel resolutions, he was beating his wife.
So now we know why America is on top of the World, Harvard is on top of America and Dershowitz is on top of Harvard. Is this for real or what!
Is this what you have been reduced to, America? Is it possible that Alan Dershowitz has come to represent your crème de la crème? Is he the face of America that Europe and the rest of the World must see when they inquire as to the state of your legal system, the caliber of your culture and the force of your intellectual life? Is this what you have become?
You won the first World War, America, to save Europe from itself; you won the second World War to save the Planet from itself but now you are losing your self-respect as you allow everything to be reduced to the one trivial notion: either you are for Israel or you are against America.
Read the Dershowitz article, America, and you will realize what a low caliber document this is, and what a low caliber intellect has authored it. Yet when you look at it, you will be looking at yourself as if looking in the mirror. And when you see how ugly you have become, weep America. Weep at yourself and promise to get back to where you were because people of goodwill want to look at you again and feel cheerful not get sick to the stomach or feel sorry for you.
The Oxford Union and the people that Dershowitz attacks are quite capable of defending themselves although I doubt they will bother to do that, and I shall not take up their causes myself. I shall not weigh in on the merits of the resolution to be debated either: (This house believes that One State is the Only Solution to the Israel-Palestine Conflict) because the debaters are eminently more qualified than me to do that. What I shall discuss are the image and the true essence of Alan Dershowitz as they emerge from his article, and the consequences thereof.
The man says he did not go to the debate because he does not like the terms of the debate or his proposed teammates. Let me begin with the teammate issue. Dershowitz says: "The resolution is simply another way of presenting an anti-Israel side (the one-state solution) and a pro-Israel side (the two-state solution)." He, Dershowitz, was invited to be on the team advocating the two-state solution but the organizers tagged him with teammates he does not like so he said no thank you.
In fact, the Oxford Union never meant to present the debate as pro Israel or anti Israel. It is just that Dershowitz sees the whole world in terms of pro Israel or anti Israel. His brain is so wired that you are either with Israel or you are against Israel. And this condition debilitates him so badly that he is incapable of looking at any issue without seeing it through that narrow prism.
Thus, when he looked at his proposed team through the prism, he was horrified to see who was on it. Things got worse when Norman Finkelstein was picked in his stead after he turned down the invitation. This is how Dershowitz puts it: Yet by the standards of the Oxford Union, Norman Finkelstein is regarded as a pro Israel "scholar" – at least in this debate. Just last May, the same Finkelstein was selected to debate the anti-Israel side of the proposition: "This House believes the pro-Israeli lobby has successfully stifled Western debate about Israel’s action."
Here again, the proposition to discuss whether or not the activities of the Israeli lobby stifled Western debate is seen by Dershowitz through the narrow prism of his mentality and he settles on an angle through which he seeks to determine whether the proposition is pro Israel or anti Israel.
It is worth recalling at this point that when Alan Dershowitz began to show signs of strangeness a while ago and was regarded as becoming too self contradictory to be taken seriously, his friends rushed to his defense to say that to hold two contradictory ideas at the same time was a mark of supreme intelligence, not strangeness.
Well, here apparently, is a supremely intelligent man who can hold two contradictory ideas at the same time but cannot reconcile two simple notions, one being that a two state solution for Israel may have merit and the other being that the pro-Israeli lobby may have stifled Western debate. Norman Finklestein entertained these two positions and Dershowitz cries foul.
It is amazing, therefore, to witness how supreme intelligence works with some people but then, who are we not to be amazed. So let me say on behalf of all how grateful we are that we now have a clear demonstration as to why the rest of us can never be as intelligent as Alan Dershowitz, and we accept our humble lot without envy.
Let us now cut this crap and get real. Alan Dershowitz has another problem which is contributing to his debilitation. To him, that which he regards as pro Israel represents the truth, and that which he regards as anti Israel represents the lie. And because everything is either pro Israel or anti Israel, it follows that everything is either true or false.
Even when a question is far from being a true or false proposition, Dershowitz will see it only in those terms. For example, to hold a debate is just that, hold a debate. The purpose of the debate may be one thing or another but it cannot be the debate itself nor can it be any of the possible outcomes of the debate. Not so with Dershowitz who will ask: in holding the debate, are they pro Israel or anti Israel?
And here is the evidence for this, the fact that the Oxford Union held the May debate leads Alan Dershowitz to conclude the following: "Considering the locus of the debate – and its sponsor (the Arab nation of Qatar) – it is not surprising that the proposition won overwhelmingly despite its demonstrable falsehood. Truth plays little role in Oxford Union debates." And then, to enforce the point still further, Dershowitz goes on to say: The Oxford Union: may it rest in peace, along side Pravda and other departed purveyors of "truths," Stalin-style.
Well, let us now take a deep breath and then ask: could this supremely intelligent man not have taken the challenge, gone to the debate to which he was invited and taken the truth to the lesser mortals who may well have appreciated his company? He is by all accounts capable of spreading truth and enlightenment with the sort of magic that leaves everyone breathless. Look, for example, how he persuaded people of his sincerity when he went around saying he was a friend of the Palestinians. Was there anyone in the world who doubted him? Of course not. Next time they elect a Palestinian Pope you know which Jew will be made saint.
Jokes aside, this forces us to conclude that no, it could not be that Alan Dershowitz declined the invitation because of his teammates. He is so high above everyone that to be teamed with this mate or that mate would have made no difference. But if not the teammates, then why did he not go to the debate? Well, we must admit we are at wit’s end and have no choice but to look at the other reason Dershowitz gave for not going to the debate: I turned down [the] invitation because of the "when did you stop beating your wife" terms of the debate.
Eureka! This must be it. Alan Dershowitz did not go to the debate because he would not bother with something so mundane as to set the record straight. That supremely intelligent man they call Dershowitz did not go to the debate because he was too busy doing something much more important than debate anti Israel resolutions, he was beating his wife.
So now we know why America is on top of the World, Harvard is on top of America and Dershowitz is on top of Harvard. Is this for real or what!
Is this what you have been reduced to, America? Is it possible that Alan Dershowitz has come to represent your crème de la crème? Is he the face of America that Europe and the rest of the World must see when they inquire as to the state of your legal system, the caliber of your culture and the force of your intellectual life? Is this what you have become?
You won the first World War, America, to save Europe from itself; you won the second World War to save the Planet from itself but now you are losing your self-respect as you allow everything to be reduced to the one trivial notion: either you are for Israel or you are against America.
Read the Dershowitz article, America, and you will realize what a low caliber document this is, and what a low caliber intellect has authored it. Yet when you look at it, you will be looking at yourself as if looking in the mirror. And when you see how ugly you have become, weep America. Weep at yourself and promise to get back to where you were because people of goodwill want to look at you again and feel cheerful not get sick to the stomach or feel sorry for you.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Let Them Have Their Week Of Panic
There is apprehension in the air among people of goodwill about the proposed designation of a week by members of the Zionist Lobby, their lackeys and mouthpieces to draw attention to what someone has called Islamo-fascism. But I say don’t worry about it, let them have their week because the good which will come after that will be long lasting and will outweigh the possible short term negative effects. In fact, the only reason they are having this week is because they are panicking.
Let these people insult the intelligence of the public and let the public see them for what they are because what is at play now is nothing less than the survival of the Zionist movement. The time has come for Zionism to go rest in peace where his twin brother Nazism lay in infamy, and we have the opportunity to help him do just that. So let us seize the moment.
There can be no fear among the general public about Islamo-fascism more than there is about Judeo-fascism, Christiano-fascism, Hindo-fascism or any religio-fascism you can think of. The people know that fear should not be about the misuse of something because misuse is a part of our human character as much as DNA is a part of our biology. The fear can only be about who is doing the mischief and how much chance they have to succeed in their endeavor.
A week like the one proposed will give us the chance to explain some things about which the people have asked a few questions but no one gave any answer. The first and most obvious question was this: Who are these Islamo-fascists supposed to be, anyway? Well, even though it is not up to us to answer this question because we are not the ones who made the accusation, we cannot avoid giving a tentative answer as to who, we believe, the finger is pointed at. And this should be our response:
No one spoke of Islamo-fascism before September 11, 2001 even though Islam has been around for a long time. But those who committed the 9/11 act were Muslim youngsters who were previously organized, armed and financed by the United States of America to fight the Soviet army in Afghanistan precisely because they were known to be religious zealots.
These kids had a name. It was Mujahedeen which in Arabic means those who practice the Jihad. During the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, Mujahedeen was a glorious name loved by many people, among them President Ronald Reagan. But now, a new word has entered the English lexicon to stand as the official translation for Mujahedeen. That word is Jahadist to which I say: fine by me, have it your way. Mujahedeen or Jihadist, what’s in a name!
Anyway, after these Jihadists won the war against the Soviet Army on behalf of America and its allies, they were abandoned, double-crossed and betrayed by the United States. So they retaliated the only way they knew how which was the 9/11 way, an act that is entirely consistent with the training that the Americans gave those kids. They were not given anything else to go by and they did not know any better, so who do you blame in a situation like this?
In a similar fashion, the Israeli government organized a group to fight Yasser Arafat’s Fatah movement in Palestine. That was the Hamas group which the Israel-Zionist Lobby now says is Islamo-fascist. By the way, the word hamas in Arabic means zeal as in religious zealots because this is what the government of Israel was tapping into. Maybe now they will want to have an official translation for the name in English, Yiddish or Hebrew. May I suggest Hamasist or Zealotist? No, I’m not good at this so I leave it to someone else.
And then there is the Hezbollah movement in Lebanon which did not exist before Israel invaded that country under the pretext that Yasser Arafat’s Fatah organization was getting too powerful in Lebanon. The result was that Fatah which never had a political wing in the Lebanese Parliament or a military wing equipped with modern weapons was chased out of the country and was replaced by Hezbollah which has both wings and has proved to be a potent force against the Israeli army.
By the way, Hezbollah in Arabic means Party of God. Anyone cares to find another translated version for that? I won’t even try to suggest anything this time because I don’t see the humor in it anymore. It is getting too repetitive and too stale.
In effect then to the extent that there is an Islamo-fascist tendency in those movements, the tendency was created, nurtured, equipped, abandoned, doubled-crossed and betrayed by the United States and by Israel. And more than the United States or Israel, it is the Arabs and the Muslims who now suffer the aftermath of those creations because some Arabs and some Muslims are thought to be too friendly to the US and to Israel. See how things go round and round in a dizzying fashion when the Zionist finger stirs the pot?
It is clear from the brief history of those movements that the small minority of extremists within them take after their creators. In short, if Islamo-fascism exists at all, it is both the son and the reflection of the Judeo-American fascism that made it. The movement was supposed to be a tool in the hand of the creators but then, as it always happens, the tool has turned against the hand that fashioned it. Sometimes they call this phenomenon creating one’s own Frankenstein.
But now the Arab and Muslim governments and their masses find themselves fighting extremism tooth and nail because they know that the armed forces of the United States and Israel will never defeat them for the simple reason that those two entities are the fuel by which the extremist zeal is fired up and kept alive. The more of them you kill, the more of them come to join the movement.
Thus, the Arabs and the Muslims have no choice but to keep on fighting alone until they defeat the extremists or be defeated by them. But as long as America will want to fight them in its own clumsy and idiotic way, those kids will get stronger not weaker. The question now boils down to this: What do the Americans want and what do the Zionists want from all this?
The answer is that America wants to see the defeat of extremism because America itself is on the verge of bankruptcy fighting its own creation. But the Zionists don’t want any of that because without something by which to scare their base and keep on sucking life, limb and treasure from the Americans, the Zionist movement itself will cease to exist.
The trick used by the Lobby to keep extremism alive is to have America fight the Arabs and the Muslims under the pretext of fighting the Islomo-fascists. In so doing, the Zionists accomplish two things; they weaken the enemies of extremism and they inspire more recruits to join the Jihad. And here is where the proposed Islamo-fascist week comes into play.
The purpose of that week is to mobilize the Zionist Fifth column in America to psychologically prepare the youth on the campuses of that nation for a long drawn out war against the Arabs and the Muslims. The length of time they quote these days is 50 years or more. This then is the new hidden agenda of the Zionists and it is slowly unmasking itself.
The reason for the apparent change of tactic is that the Zionists are panicking by the reports which suggest extremism is weakening in Iraq and Afghanistan. Thus, the Lobby is trying to make America’s commitment a long term one to insure its own survival. However, when the public understands what is happening, it will also realize that the Zionists have the clout to succeed in their Machiavellian endeavor. The people will not be very pleased and we should welcome such a development because it will be an important step in ending the current insanity.
In short, it is better for our side to let the Zionists, their lackeys and mouthpieces organize an Islamo-fascist awareness week because we can take up the challenge and defeat the enemy we see rather than deal with an enemy we cannot see but who whisper his way through the corridors of power to infest the feeble minds of those who hold mighty responsibilities.
This may be an existential challenge for the Zionist movement but it could also be existential for America, and we have been handed the task to save this once fair nation from that perennial evil. Who knows, we may succeed brilliantly.
For now, I say let them smoke themselves out in the open and let us wipe them out fair and square. Our cause is just and this puts us way ahead of them. I may even say it’s unfair that we have all the chips and they have none. But then, they have been unfair to us for half a century so let us savor the moment as we beat them at their own game.
Let these people insult the intelligence of the public and let the public see them for what they are because what is at play now is nothing less than the survival of the Zionist movement. The time has come for Zionism to go rest in peace where his twin brother Nazism lay in infamy, and we have the opportunity to help him do just that. So let us seize the moment.
There can be no fear among the general public about Islamo-fascism more than there is about Judeo-fascism, Christiano-fascism, Hindo-fascism or any religio-fascism you can think of. The people know that fear should not be about the misuse of something because misuse is a part of our human character as much as DNA is a part of our biology. The fear can only be about who is doing the mischief and how much chance they have to succeed in their endeavor.
A week like the one proposed will give us the chance to explain some things about which the people have asked a few questions but no one gave any answer. The first and most obvious question was this: Who are these Islamo-fascists supposed to be, anyway? Well, even though it is not up to us to answer this question because we are not the ones who made the accusation, we cannot avoid giving a tentative answer as to who, we believe, the finger is pointed at. And this should be our response:
No one spoke of Islamo-fascism before September 11, 2001 even though Islam has been around for a long time. But those who committed the 9/11 act were Muslim youngsters who were previously organized, armed and financed by the United States of America to fight the Soviet army in Afghanistan precisely because they were known to be religious zealots.
These kids had a name. It was Mujahedeen which in Arabic means those who practice the Jihad. During the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, Mujahedeen was a glorious name loved by many people, among them President Ronald Reagan. But now, a new word has entered the English lexicon to stand as the official translation for Mujahedeen. That word is Jahadist to which I say: fine by me, have it your way. Mujahedeen or Jihadist, what’s in a name!
Anyway, after these Jihadists won the war against the Soviet Army on behalf of America and its allies, they were abandoned, double-crossed and betrayed by the United States. So they retaliated the only way they knew how which was the 9/11 way, an act that is entirely consistent with the training that the Americans gave those kids. They were not given anything else to go by and they did not know any better, so who do you blame in a situation like this?
In a similar fashion, the Israeli government organized a group to fight Yasser Arafat’s Fatah movement in Palestine. That was the Hamas group which the Israel-Zionist Lobby now says is Islamo-fascist. By the way, the word hamas in Arabic means zeal as in religious zealots because this is what the government of Israel was tapping into. Maybe now they will want to have an official translation for the name in English, Yiddish or Hebrew. May I suggest Hamasist or Zealotist? No, I’m not good at this so I leave it to someone else.
And then there is the Hezbollah movement in Lebanon which did not exist before Israel invaded that country under the pretext that Yasser Arafat’s Fatah organization was getting too powerful in Lebanon. The result was that Fatah which never had a political wing in the Lebanese Parliament or a military wing equipped with modern weapons was chased out of the country and was replaced by Hezbollah which has both wings and has proved to be a potent force against the Israeli army.
By the way, Hezbollah in Arabic means Party of God. Anyone cares to find another translated version for that? I won’t even try to suggest anything this time because I don’t see the humor in it anymore. It is getting too repetitive and too stale.
In effect then to the extent that there is an Islamo-fascist tendency in those movements, the tendency was created, nurtured, equipped, abandoned, doubled-crossed and betrayed by the United States and by Israel. And more than the United States or Israel, it is the Arabs and the Muslims who now suffer the aftermath of those creations because some Arabs and some Muslims are thought to be too friendly to the US and to Israel. See how things go round and round in a dizzying fashion when the Zionist finger stirs the pot?
It is clear from the brief history of those movements that the small minority of extremists within them take after their creators. In short, if Islamo-fascism exists at all, it is both the son and the reflection of the Judeo-American fascism that made it. The movement was supposed to be a tool in the hand of the creators but then, as it always happens, the tool has turned against the hand that fashioned it. Sometimes they call this phenomenon creating one’s own Frankenstein.
But now the Arab and Muslim governments and their masses find themselves fighting extremism tooth and nail because they know that the armed forces of the United States and Israel will never defeat them for the simple reason that those two entities are the fuel by which the extremist zeal is fired up and kept alive. The more of them you kill, the more of them come to join the movement.
Thus, the Arabs and the Muslims have no choice but to keep on fighting alone until they defeat the extremists or be defeated by them. But as long as America will want to fight them in its own clumsy and idiotic way, those kids will get stronger not weaker. The question now boils down to this: What do the Americans want and what do the Zionists want from all this?
The answer is that America wants to see the defeat of extremism because America itself is on the verge of bankruptcy fighting its own creation. But the Zionists don’t want any of that because without something by which to scare their base and keep on sucking life, limb and treasure from the Americans, the Zionist movement itself will cease to exist.
The trick used by the Lobby to keep extremism alive is to have America fight the Arabs and the Muslims under the pretext of fighting the Islomo-fascists. In so doing, the Zionists accomplish two things; they weaken the enemies of extremism and they inspire more recruits to join the Jihad. And here is where the proposed Islamo-fascist week comes into play.
The purpose of that week is to mobilize the Zionist Fifth column in America to psychologically prepare the youth on the campuses of that nation for a long drawn out war against the Arabs and the Muslims. The length of time they quote these days is 50 years or more. This then is the new hidden agenda of the Zionists and it is slowly unmasking itself.
The reason for the apparent change of tactic is that the Zionists are panicking by the reports which suggest extremism is weakening in Iraq and Afghanistan. Thus, the Lobby is trying to make America’s commitment a long term one to insure its own survival. However, when the public understands what is happening, it will also realize that the Zionists have the clout to succeed in their Machiavellian endeavor. The people will not be very pleased and we should welcome such a development because it will be an important step in ending the current insanity.
In short, it is better for our side to let the Zionists, their lackeys and mouthpieces organize an Islamo-fascist awareness week because we can take up the challenge and defeat the enemy we see rather than deal with an enemy we cannot see but who whisper his way through the corridors of power to infest the feeble minds of those who hold mighty responsibilities.
This may be an existential challenge for the Zionist movement but it could also be existential for America, and we have been handed the task to save this once fair nation from that perennial evil. Who knows, we may succeed brilliantly.
For now, I say let them smoke themselves out in the open and let us wipe them out fair and square. Our cause is just and this puts us way ahead of them. I may even say it’s unfair that we have all the chips and they have none. But then, they have been unfair to us for half a century so let us savor the moment as we beat them at their own game.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Smart Bombs, Dumb Leaders
Not long ago the American Administration proposed giving Israel billions of dollars worth of free weapons over the next ten years. As usual, these will include rockets, helicopters and fighter-bombers in addition to smart bombs, cluster bombs and what have you. Furthermore, we should expect that the US Congress will automatically agree to the donation if not mandate sweetening the pot even more. This is what the Congress was trained to do by the Zionist Lobby and this is what it will do without hesitation. And the whole world awaits the moment when the nation that is America finally moves on from merrily wallowing in the cesspool of her useless irrelevance to burying herself entirely in the cesspool.
But how did this country which once was loved by many and respected by all get pulled down to a sorry state that is so low, so cold and so dark? Well, it all began before the decade of the Nineteen Fifties but let’s pick up the story at the point when an important event occurred. Faced with a growing population and a river that has been unpredictable since biblical times, the government of Egypt asked the World Bank for a loan to build a dam at Aswan and bring the Nile river under control for the first time in history.
"What a great idea!" exclaimed the Americans at first but after the whispers that were discharged in the ear of then Secretary of State John Foster Dulles by the Zionist Lobby, the Americans had a change of heart and said no. They said no loan will go to Egypt, no dam will be built, no control of the Nile will be realized and no food security will be provided for the people of Egypt.
At that time Egypt was part of the non-aligned movement of nations which included such countries as India, Yugoslavia, Indonesia and Ghana. They were countries whose goal was to develop economically while staying clear of the hegemony offered by either the Soviet Block or the NATO countries. The non aligned leaders argued that they had no need for weapons beyond the immediate concern with such things as border patrol but the Zionist Lobby planted a devilish idea about armament in the head of the Americans. The naive Americans found the idea irresistible, adopted it at once and lived to see it linger on to this day with the disastrous consequences that came with it.
The Lobby’s idea was to the effect that the Americans must consider that those who are not with them are against them. And because the non-aligned nations were not buying American weapons, they were not with them therefore they were not only against them but also against the American way of life. This made the non-aligned nations enemies of America and they must be punished.
And so the Americans gave a reason as to why they would not let the Egyptians get a loan from the World Bank. They said that if Egypt were granted the loan to build the dam, this would free other moneys which will be used to buy weapons from somewhere else. This being contrary to American values - a statement that no one bothered to explain - America will not be a party to an act so evil as to let the Egyptians develop a plan for their food security. And the rest is history as they say, at least as far as the way that the politics of the Middle East have developed from that day on.
As for the story of the Zionist lobby in America, this is one that history has not yet come to grips with. The fact is, the lobbyists learned from the experience the lesson that America had no principles to speak of. To the lobbyists, this meant that America was not deserving of their respected. Thus, they lost all respect for America and worked to weaken her institutions by attacking them from within. All this happened despite the fact that after a resounding military victory in World War Two, America could do no wrong in the eyes of people everywhere.
At the same time, however, the Americans were groping for a role to play in a world that was becoming evermore confusing. Enter the Zionist lobbyists again to say they had the correct answer to every question the Americans may want to ask. In fact, those lobbyists had only one answer to all the questions and they whispered it on every occasion. "Starve these people," they repeatedly counseled, and the history of America ever since that time has been one of organizing an economic sanction against one helpless people after another.
But when sanctions fail to work and the people are not brought to their knees, American weapons are utilized to kill them whether they are friends or foes as we see things happen in Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan and the Horn of Africa today. Helicopters, fighter-bombers, and cluster bombs are used by the trigger happy Israelis to kill in Palestine and Lebanon while the Americans kill Afghan civilians and allied troops on a regular basis with their smart bombs. If only the leaders were half as smart. As for the Horn of Africa, this is another heart wrenching story that is still developing.
In addition, we now have the spectacle of an American Administration and a Congress coming together to give Israel additional weapons for free and with no strings attached. This, at a time when all sorts of strings are being attached to the proposed sale of weapons to Arab countries despite the fact that no American weapon in Arab hand ever killed someone innocent while those in Israeli hands are butchering innocent people day in and day out.
They are butchering people left and right while no American is allowed to question the practice lest he or she be called anti-Semitic and see their life turned into a living hell. And there is a lackey somewhere out there who will probably say: that’s okay because it would be a democratic hell anyway, this being America the magnificent democratic experiment everyone looks up to.
It is no wonder, therefore, that the world has come to view the leaders of America in the Administration and the Congress as burying their country in a cesspool of useless irrelevance to please the Jewish lobby while the American people are prevented from voicing their displeasure. And this makes it clear to an impartial observer that the political Establishment is only pretending America lives by values of freedom and democracy it no longer has, if indeed it ever had them.
Whatever the case, this puts us students of history in the privileged position of witnessing the fall of an empire having just witnessed its rise to the status of sole superpower, all of which happened in one generation. No generation before us was so rewarded by history, and all we should do now is sit back, watch the sordid saga unfold and wonder: what did we do right to merit being pampered like this?
But how did this country which once was loved by many and respected by all get pulled down to a sorry state that is so low, so cold and so dark? Well, it all began before the decade of the Nineteen Fifties but let’s pick up the story at the point when an important event occurred. Faced with a growing population and a river that has been unpredictable since biblical times, the government of Egypt asked the World Bank for a loan to build a dam at Aswan and bring the Nile river under control for the first time in history.
"What a great idea!" exclaimed the Americans at first but after the whispers that were discharged in the ear of then Secretary of State John Foster Dulles by the Zionist Lobby, the Americans had a change of heart and said no. They said no loan will go to Egypt, no dam will be built, no control of the Nile will be realized and no food security will be provided for the people of Egypt.
At that time Egypt was part of the non-aligned movement of nations which included such countries as India, Yugoslavia, Indonesia and Ghana. They were countries whose goal was to develop economically while staying clear of the hegemony offered by either the Soviet Block or the NATO countries. The non aligned leaders argued that they had no need for weapons beyond the immediate concern with such things as border patrol but the Zionist Lobby planted a devilish idea about armament in the head of the Americans. The naive Americans found the idea irresistible, adopted it at once and lived to see it linger on to this day with the disastrous consequences that came with it.
The Lobby’s idea was to the effect that the Americans must consider that those who are not with them are against them. And because the non-aligned nations were not buying American weapons, they were not with them therefore they were not only against them but also against the American way of life. This made the non-aligned nations enemies of America and they must be punished.
And so the Americans gave a reason as to why they would not let the Egyptians get a loan from the World Bank. They said that if Egypt were granted the loan to build the dam, this would free other moneys which will be used to buy weapons from somewhere else. This being contrary to American values - a statement that no one bothered to explain - America will not be a party to an act so evil as to let the Egyptians develop a plan for their food security. And the rest is history as they say, at least as far as the way that the politics of the Middle East have developed from that day on.
As for the story of the Zionist lobby in America, this is one that history has not yet come to grips with. The fact is, the lobbyists learned from the experience the lesson that America had no principles to speak of. To the lobbyists, this meant that America was not deserving of their respected. Thus, they lost all respect for America and worked to weaken her institutions by attacking them from within. All this happened despite the fact that after a resounding military victory in World War Two, America could do no wrong in the eyes of people everywhere.
At the same time, however, the Americans were groping for a role to play in a world that was becoming evermore confusing. Enter the Zionist lobbyists again to say they had the correct answer to every question the Americans may want to ask. In fact, those lobbyists had only one answer to all the questions and they whispered it on every occasion. "Starve these people," they repeatedly counseled, and the history of America ever since that time has been one of organizing an economic sanction against one helpless people after another.
But when sanctions fail to work and the people are not brought to their knees, American weapons are utilized to kill them whether they are friends or foes as we see things happen in Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan and the Horn of Africa today. Helicopters, fighter-bombers, and cluster bombs are used by the trigger happy Israelis to kill in Palestine and Lebanon while the Americans kill Afghan civilians and allied troops on a regular basis with their smart bombs. If only the leaders were half as smart. As for the Horn of Africa, this is another heart wrenching story that is still developing.
In addition, we now have the spectacle of an American Administration and a Congress coming together to give Israel additional weapons for free and with no strings attached. This, at a time when all sorts of strings are being attached to the proposed sale of weapons to Arab countries despite the fact that no American weapon in Arab hand ever killed someone innocent while those in Israeli hands are butchering innocent people day in and day out.
They are butchering people left and right while no American is allowed to question the practice lest he or she be called anti-Semitic and see their life turned into a living hell. And there is a lackey somewhere out there who will probably say: that’s okay because it would be a democratic hell anyway, this being America the magnificent democratic experiment everyone looks up to.
It is no wonder, therefore, that the world has come to view the leaders of America in the Administration and the Congress as burying their country in a cesspool of useless irrelevance to please the Jewish lobby while the American people are prevented from voicing their displeasure. And this makes it clear to an impartial observer that the political Establishment is only pretending America lives by values of freedom and democracy it no longer has, if indeed it ever had them.
Whatever the case, this puts us students of history in the privileged position of witnessing the fall of an empire having just witnessed its rise to the status of sole superpower, all of which happened in one generation. No generation before us was so rewarded by history, and all we should do now is sit back, watch the sordid saga unfold and wonder: what did we do right to merit being pampered like this?
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
American Veto Promotes Israeli Crimes
Late in September 2007, a number of Israeli army reservists were sentenced to prison terms In Israel. They were caught earlier in the year smuggling drugs and ammunition across Israel’s border with Egypt as they did business with the Sinai Bedouins, some of whom the Egyptian government had trouble with since the mid Nineteen Seventies. The trouble reached the boiling point after the terrorist attacks that hit the tourist installations in the peninsula, and the last thing that the Egyptians would tolerate was a criminal relationship flourishing between those outlaw Bedouins and the Israeli military.
Thus, in a manner that is both subtle and eloquent, the conviction of those reservists brought into sharp focus the struggle that is lived in the Middle East every day if not the issue of world peace itself. Given that every discussion about the region has heretofore been prefaced with: "Israel is the only country in the Middle East that is …" this one glorious thing or the other, an image of perfection was painted by the brush of the Zionist Lobby about an Israel that is divine by the virtues she possesses and saintly by the absence of sin from which it was claimed she remained as immaculate as a true virgin.
And based on this image more than anything else, did successive American Congresses and Administrations from both parties gamble America’s might and credibility to encourage and nurture Israel’s bad behavior in the region. And as if this were not enough, they went further and shielded her from the consequences of her actions on the world stage through the use and the abuse of the infamous veto at the Security Council of the United Nations.
But now, with the trial and the sentencing of those reservists coming on top of other similar incidents, we are made to realize that this is but the tip of the iceberg as to the reality that life in Israel is anything but paradise rediscovered. Bit by bit it comes out that Israel is a place where a culture of criminality has taken root and where any discussion on the subject must from now on begin like this: "Israel is the only country in the world whose every Prime Minister has been a terrorist, a thief or both and whose President has been an admitted rapist."
Imagine, just imagine for a moment if the President of an Arab country or any country for that matter had been denounced as a rapist by several women and forced to resign from office. But to whom did this happen? It happened to none other than Moshe Katsav.
Moshe who? you ask as most people would. Moshe Katsav is a name that almost no one in the English speaking world has ever heard of, yet he is the rapist President of Israel who was forced to resign a few months ago. He was not mentioned in the Anglo media or in any discussion over here because of one reason only which is that his crimes were Israeli crimes, therefore beyond mention. And this is the scenario that played itself out with every Prime Minister of Israel, even the well respected and venerated Yitzhak Rabin who was accused of corruption, not to mention Benjamin Netanyahu, Ariel Sharon and others who had brushes with the law as well.
However, with or without mention in the Anglophone media, those events prove that Israel is not populated by saints as portrayed by the Zionist Lobbyists but by common thieves, charlatans, terrorists and rapists. It has been so recognized everywhere in the world except in the English speaking part of it, but why complain when we know that someone will always be the last to catch the march of the enlightenment, and we just happened to be that unlucky one.
To be fair we, the Anglophones of the world were not the only people whom the Zionist propaganda machine managed to dupe. About ten years ago Israel was listed by the German group Transparency International among the top 10 most honest governments in the world at a time when corruption had infested every ministry and was rampant at the highest levels of the Israeli government. Only recently did the German group catch up with reality and downgraded Israel to number 34 on the list. Give it a little more time and they will take Israel down to dead last where it belonged all along.
Paradoxically, the ordinary citizens of Israel seem to be no less law abiding than most people anywhere else. To wit the crime rate in Israel is comparable to rates everywhere on Earth. It is just that when people join the army or the political crowed that they tend to lose their moral compass. They begin by stealing and embezzling at home, then they turn to smuggling drugs and arms across the border with their neighbors, then they graduate to smuggling people, and to trafficking in drugs, arms and body parts across the continents.
And this is what prompts fair people to ask what is it about the Israeli system which allows criminal behavior to take root and to flourish more than anywhere else? In trying to answer the question we realize that we are in effect asking why do people climb a mountain? Well, people do climb a mountain because the mountain is there and because the people calculate they will escape any possible consequence.
Yes, it happens because the risk of facing the consequences is small. In fact, it has been possible for Israelis to do crime outside of Israel than do them at home because it is easier to dupe people who do not know you than people who do. It is generally true that because people of the same culture understand each other, they check and balance one another more or less effectively. This makes them less prone to try and pull a fast one on each other, the result being that the bad guys behave well at home most of the time. But then they go look for prey elsewhere, especially among the people who are trusting by nature.
And when you have been painted a saint on the world stage like the Israelis have, you know you will get away with murder if not be praised for acts that someone will call courageous when you know in your heart they were acts of cowardice committed when no one was watching. In fact, one can be a hole in the ground filled with rotting garbage under a garden where flowers bloom, and people will come to enjoy the flowers they see on the surface, totally oblivious of what is feeding the flowers from below.
The question at the start was: What is it about the Israeli system which allows criminal behavior to take root and to flourish more than anywhere else? And the answer is now clear: It is the use of the American veto at the Security Council which keeps Israel and her luminaries from ever becoming civilized. This triggers a chain of events that leads to the nation becoming the hub of criminal behavior worldwide.
Thus, in a manner that is both subtle and eloquent, the conviction of those reservists brought into sharp focus the struggle that is lived in the Middle East every day if not the issue of world peace itself. Given that every discussion about the region has heretofore been prefaced with: "Israel is the only country in the Middle East that is …" this one glorious thing or the other, an image of perfection was painted by the brush of the Zionist Lobby about an Israel that is divine by the virtues she possesses and saintly by the absence of sin from which it was claimed she remained as immaculate as a true virgin.
And based on this image more than anything else, did successive American Congresses and Administrations from both parties gamble America’s might and credibility to encourage and nurture Israel’s bad behavior in the region. And as if this were not enough, they went further and shielded her from the consequences of her actions on the world stage through the use and the abuse of the infamous veto at the Security Council of the United Nations.
But now, with the trial and the sentencing of those reservists coming on top of other similar incidents, we are made to realize that this is but the tip of the iceberg as to the reality that life in Israel is anything but paradise rediscovered. Bit by bit it comes out that Israel is a place where a culture of criminality has taken root and where any discussion on the subject must from now on begin like this: "Israel is the only country in the world whose every Prime Minister has been a terrorist, a thief or both and whose President has been an admitted rapist."
Imagine, just imagine for a moment if the President of an Arab country or any country for that matter had been denounced as a rapist by several women and forced to resign from office. But to whom did this happen? It happened to none other than Moshe Katsav.
Moshe who? you ask as most people would. Moshe Katsav is a name that almost no one in the English speaking world has ever heard of, yet he is the rapist President of Israel who was forced to resign a few months ago. He was not mentioned in the Anglo media or in any discussion over here because of one reason only which is that his crimes were Israeli crimes, therefore beyond mention. And this is the scenario that played itself out with every Prime Minister of Israel, even the well respected and venerated Yitzhak Rabin who was accused of corruption, not to mention Benjamin Netanyahu, Ariel Sharon and others who had brushes with the law as well.
However, with or without mention in the Anglophone media, those events prove that Israel is not populated by saints as portrayed by the Zionist Lobbyists but by common thieves, charlatans, terrorists and rapists. It has been so recognized everywhere in the world except in the English speaking part of it, but why complain when we know that someone will always be the last to catch the march of the enlightenment, and we just happened to be that unlucky one.
To be fair we, the Anglophones of the world were not the only people whom the Zionist propaganda machine managed to dupe. About ten years ago Israel was listed by the German group Transparency International among the top 10 most honest governments in the world at a time when corruption had infested every ministry and was rampant at the highest levels of the Israeli government. Only recently did the German group catch up with reality and downgraded Israel to number 34 on the list. Give it a little more time and they will take Israel down to dead last where it belonged all along.
Paradoxically, the ordinary citizens of Israel seem to be no less law abiding than most people anywhere else. To wit the crime rate in Israel is comparable to rates everywhere on Earth. It is just that when people join the army or the political crowed that they tend to lose their moral compass. They begin by stealing and embezzling at home, then they turn to smuggling drugs and arms across the border with their neighbors, then they graduate to smuggling people, and to trafficking in drugs, arms and body parts across the continents.
And this is what prompts fair people to ask what is it about the Israeli system which allows criminal behavior to take root and to flourish more than anywhere else? In trying to answer the question we realize that we are in effect asking why do people climb a mountain? Well, people do climb a mountain because the mountain is there and because the people calculate they will escape any possible consequence.
Yes, it happens because the risk of facing the consequences is small. In fact, it has been possible for Israelis to do crime outside of Israel than do them at home because it is easier to dupe people who do not know you than people who do. It is generally true that because people of the same culture understand each other, they check and balance one another more or less effectively. This makes them less prone to try and pull a fast one on each other, the result being that the bad guys behave well at home most of the time. But then they go look for prey elsewhere, especially among the people who are trusting by nature.
And when you have been painted a saint on the world stage like the Israelis have, you know you will get away with murder if not be praised for acts that someone will call courageous when you know in your heart they were acts of cowardice committed when no one was watching. In fact, one can be a hole in the ground filled with rotting garbage under a garden where flowers bloom, and people will come to enjoy the flowers they see on the surface, totally oblivious of what is feeding the flowers from below.
The question at the start was: What is it about the Israeli system which allows criminal behavior to take root and to flourish more than anywhere else? And the answer is now clear: It is the use of the American veto at the Security Council which keeps Israel and her luminaries from ever becoming civilized. This triggers a chain of events that leads to the nation becoming the hub of criminal behavior worldwide.
Monday, October 15, 2007
Israel’s Bikini Economy (4 of 4)
Over the years Israel has received more than ten times the money it needs to develop a legitimate 150 billion dollar GDP which would have given her a First World economy. Yet Israel today has only a Third World economy which is made to look like a 150 billion when in reality it is nowhere near that.
What there is in Israel is a banana republic without the bananas and little else to eat. To feed a growing population, a great deal of food is imported into Israel and paid for by the American taxpayers. All the energy that the country uses is imported and paid for by the American taxpayers. Most of the other amenities are imported into Israel and paid for by the American taxpayers. No other country in the World is as poor as Israel in food, fuel and the other necessities of life.
What is called Israeli high-tech industries are offices, some of which are attached to a warehouse. These are branch plants to parent companies located in the US and owned by members of the Zionist Lobby in America. The parent companies make high-tech products inside of which are inserted parts and components which are bought in Europe and Asia.
However, instead of buying the parts and components directly from their sources, the parent company places the order with the branch plant in Israel which then orders them from the European and Asian sources. Sometimes the parts and components go to Israel to be redirected to America and sometimes they don’t even go to Israel but are shipped from their sources in Europe or Asia to America.
In either case, the branch plant in Israel bills the parent company in America a price so high that the parent shows little or no profit when it sells the finished products. As a result, it pays the American treasury little or no tax. On the other hand, the branch plant pays the European or Asian sources a fraction of what it receives from the parent company and thus registers a high profit. This value is added to the Israeli GDP and swells it beyond justification. A large tax is paid to the Israeli government and what is left is the net profit that goes to the shareholders, most of whom reside in America.
Being the Zionist Lobbyists in America and flush with easy money in their wallets, these shareholders use a fraction of the money to buy up the American Congress lock, stock and barrel. This is the same Congress which over time has quietly, methodically and deliberately set up that system of corruption, thievery, treason and now, it appears, institutionalized criminality to keep the incumbents in power and shut out aspiring new voices. And this is the same Congress which maintains the system through thick and thin with quiet consent from both sides of the isle.
The money that stays in Israel as tax is put through the multiplier mechanism and adds still more to the GDP. In addition, Israel receives an enormous amount of weapons for free from the United States, the value of which goes into the GDP. Some of these weapons are approved or mandated by the US Congress and divulged to the public while others are given "under the table" so to speak. These weapons don’t really need to be modified but they are modified anyway in Israel. A value added is attached to the modification and this too goes into the GDP.
Nothing better expresses what happens with these so-called modifications than the joke which came out of Israel not long ago. Undoubtedly the joke is a metaphor but it must have been based on some anecdotal evidence which points to a malaise that is making a few people in Israel uncomfortable with the current situation.
The joke goes this way: the warplanes that come from the United States do not have a rear view mirror. The Israelis add a mirror to them and the modification is considered to be as good as making two warplanes out of one. Since the plane was worth 50 million dollars before modification, it is now worth 100 million dollars. A value added equal to 50 million dollars for every plane received goes into the GDP and who can argue against that, especially when the issue of national security is invoked.
One thing that is neither an anecdote nor a metaphor is that every time there is a disturbance in the occupied territories, every time the Israelis build new settlements there, every time they add a section to the apartheid wall, they increase the economic activity in the country and this translates into a growth of the GDP. Thus, while the country becomes impoverished with every disturbance as the resources of the nation are used where they do not benefit the population, the GDP shows a growth and the country is falsely made to look like a First Wold country. This is called a war economy, and that’s what makes it a national security matter to be protected by secrecy and talked about in jokes, metaphors and code words.
Yes, code words. No two words have ever been abused as much as the words: Israel’s security. Everything ranging from the simple request for a donation to the most horrendous criminal acts have been justified by these two words. The people of Palestine who suffer the most because of them have proven that they will survive their effect. What is in doubt is the ability of the American political system to avoid being viewed with contempt at the thought that the two words have become a code word to mean: let the criminal congressional corruption continue. Try to curtail the blind and slavish support for Israel that the US Congress manifests and the words Israel’s security are invoked at which point the Congress genuflects and responds yes master.
As I have shown in this series, Israel’s economy is made up mainly of American cash donations, the donated American weapons, the modifications thereof, the transfer to Israel of taxes that should have gone to the American treasury, the borrowed money that is guaranteed by America which America will end up paying for, and the value added which is generated by the multiplier effect on all these moneys. Mask America out of the picture for a moment and you clearly see that Israel’s economy is an empty shell sitting on the doorsteps of a sadomasochistic massage parlor.
The parlor is run by the dominatrix Madam Israel who has one client only, the old, tired and slumbering Uncle Sam. The parlor is in effect the Zionist institution which stands on the shoulder of the sadistic ideologies that dominated the first part of the Twentieth Century and reared their heads in Europe under names like Nazism, Fascism and Communism.
But these ideologies have all been defeated and what remains is their spirit, now adopted, codified and institutionalized in Israel. The spirit lingers on because that’s what institutions do after the reason for their coming into being has vanished. And it is hard to estimate how long it will take the Zionist ideology to die a natural death or be defeated by the voices of reason. Time will tell.
What is mystifying, however, is why Uncle Sam who played a big role in defeating the evil ideologies of the past keeps on being the political, economic and military masochist to the sadistic Madam Israel. Perhaps the Administration and the Congress of the United States ought to make a sincere effort and tell the World why this is happening. Why America, why?
This is the end of the series but not the debate.
What there is in Israel is a banana republic without the bananas and little else to eat. To feed a growing population, a great deal of food is imported into Israel and paid for by the American taxpayers. All the energy that the country uses is imported and paid for by the American taxpayers. Most of the other amenities are imported into Israel and paid for by the American taxpayers. No other country in the World is as poor as Israel in food, fuel and the other necessities of life.
What is called Israeli high-tech industries are offices, some of which are attached to a warehouse. These are branch plants to parent companies located in the US and owned by members of the Zionist Lobby in America. The parent companies make high-tech products inside of which are inserted parts and components which are bought in Europe and Asia.
However, instead of buying the parts and components directly from their sources, the parent company places the order with the branch plant in Israel which then orders them from the European and Asian sources. Sometimes the parts and components go to Israel to be redirected to America and sometimes they don’t even go to Israel but are shipped from their sources in Europe or Asia to America.
In either case, the branch plant in Israel bills the parent company in America a price so high that the parent shows little or no profit when it sells the finished products. As a result, it pays the American treasury little or no tax. On the other hand, the branch plant pays the European or Asian sources a fraction of what it receives from the parent company and thus registers a high profit. This value is added to the Israeli GDP and swells it beyond justification. A large tax is paid to the Israeli government and what is left is the net profit that goes to the shareholders, most of whom reside in America.
Being the Zionist Lobbyists in America and flush with easy money in their wallets, these shareholders use a fraction of the money to buy up the American Congress lock, stock and barrel. This is the same Congress which over time has quietly, methodically and deliberately set up that system of corruption, thievery, treason and now, it appears, institutionalized criminality to keep the incumbents in power and shut out aspiring new voices. And this is the same Congress which maintains the system through thick and thin with quiet consent from both sides of the isle.
The money that stays in Israel as tax is put through the multiplier mechanism and adds still more to the GDP. In addition, Israel receives an enormous amount of weapons for free from the United States, the value of which goes into the GDP. Some of these weapons are approved or mandated by the US Congress and divulged to the public while others are given "under the table" so to speak. These weapons don’t really need to be modified but they are modified anyway in Israel. A value added is attached to the modification and this too goes into the GDP.
Nothing better expresses what happens with these so-called modifications than the joke which came out of Israel not long ago. Undoubtedly the joke is a metaphor but it must have been based on some anecdotal evidence which points to a malaise that is making a few people in Israel uncomfortable with the current situation.
The joke goes this way: the warplanes that come from the United States do not have a rear view mirror. The Israelis add a mirror to them and the modification is considered to be as good as making two warplanes out of one. Since the plane was worth 50 million dollars before modification, it is now worth 100 million dollars. A value added equal to 50 million dollars for every plane received goes into the GDP and who can argue against that, especially when the issue of national security is invoked.
One thing that is neither an anecdote nor a metaphor is that every time there is a disturbance in the occupied territories, every time the Israelis build new settlements there, every time they add a section to the apartheid wall, they increase the economic activity in the country and this translates into a growth of the GDP. Thus, while the country becomes impoverished with every disturbance as the resources of the nation are used where they do not benefit the population, the GDP shows a growth and the country is falsely made to look like a First Wold country. This is called a war economy, and that’s what makes it a national security matter to be protected by secrecy and talked about in jokes, metaphors and code words.
Yes, code words. No two words have ever been abused as much as the words: Israel’s security. Everything ranging from the simple request for a donation to the most horrendous criminal acts have been justified by these two words. The people of Palestine who suffer the most because of them have proven that they will survive their effect. What is in doubt is the ability of the American political system to avoid being viewed with contempt at the thought that the two words have become a code word to mean: let the criminal congressional corruption continue. Try to curtail the blind and slavish support for Israel that the US Congress manifests and the words Israel’s security are invoked at which point the Congress genuflects and responds yes master.
As I have shown in this series, Israel’s economy is made up mainly of American cash donations, the donated American weapons, the modifications thereof, the transfer to Israel of taxes that should have gone to the American treasury, the borrowed money that is guaranteed by America which America will end up paying for, and the value added which is generated by the multiplier effect on all these moneys. Mask America out of the picture for a moment and you clearly see that Israel’s economy is an empty shell sitting on the doorsteps of a sadomasochistic massage parlor.
The parlor is run by the dominatrix Madam Israel who has one client only, the old, tired and slumbering Uncle Sam. The parlor is in effect the Zionist institution which stands on the shoulder of the sadistic ideologies that dominated the first part of the Twentieth Century and reared their heads in Europe under names like Nazism, Fascism and Communism.
But these ideologies have all been defeated and what remains is their spirit, now adopted, codified and institutionalized in Israel. The spirit lingers on because that’s what institutions do after the reason for their coming into being has vanished. And it is hard to estimate how long it will take the Zionist ideology to die a natural death or be defeated by the voices of reason. Time will tell.
What is mystifying, however, is why Uncle Sam who played a big role in defeating the evil ideologies of the past keeps on being the political, economic and military masochist to the sadistic Madam Israel. Perhaps the Administration and the Congress of the United States ought to make a sincere effort and tell the World why this is happening. Why America, why?
This is the end of the series but not the debate.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Israel’s Bikini Economy (3 of 4)
It has been established in the previous article that a country such as Israel can take foreign aid and by the magic of the multiplier effect make the aid look like a huge addition to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). But it can also happen that a country may borrow money, and by the same process exaggerate the value of its GDP. Two countries offer themselves as perfect case studies of this phenomenon.
Israel receives aid from America and from other sources, and she borrows money that is guaranteed by America. At the same time, America herself borrows from the Chinese, the Arabs and from the countries that supply her with goods then wait a long time to be paid thus lending her the value of the goods. The two recipients then channel the money into their respective economies and fluff up their perceived values, making the GDP look more impressive than it really is.
In general there are four ways by which a nation can use the multiplier device for legitimate and illegitimate purposes. The first way is to invest the donated or borrowed money in such a way as to widen the industrial base and give a tangible, real value to the money you print and circulate.
This would be the sensible thing to do for those countries that are still developing and those that were once industrialized but have lost their industrial edge to developing countries. The US would be a perfect candidate for this method but she is not seizing the opportunity.
The second way is to invest the money in such manner as to widen the service sector of the economy. This would be the sensible thing to do for those countries that began to industrialize but have not yet reached a level that adequately distributes the products to the emerging middle class and evenly distributes the social benefits to the needy. India would be a perfect candidate for this method and this is what she is doing.
The third way is to use the borrowed money to speculate with. This inflates the value of the economy by creating more money without producing something valuable to justify the increase. This is done mainly by greedy individuals and institutions who do not care about the country as a whole. In fact, enough Japanese individuals and institutions did it in the late Nineteen Eighties and early Nineteen Nineties to crash the economy and make the nation suffer for it. Sometimes a corrupt regime in power would resort to a similar method in order to line the pockets of the rulers and their cronies.
The fourth way is to use the borrowed money to buy from abroad the products and services you don’t make at home. This tendency is intertwined with the second way because the more you import to consume, the more you widen your service sectors, especially the merchandizing and financial ones. This is what is happening in the United States at this time in lieu of what should happen which is to use the borrowed money to repair the industrial sectors that were damaged by competition from the newly industrializing nations.
Let us now take a concrete example. A jacket made in Bangladesh from local raw material earns its maker 2 dollars. It goes to Singapore where it is "repackaged" and re-invoiced at 4 dollars. It is then sent to an importer in Los Angeles, from there to a wholesaler in New York and from there to retailers all over New England. By the time it is displayed in the widows, the jacket is carrying a price tag that says 100 dollars. The consumer buys it on credit, and by the time he pays off the loan at 30% interest, he would have dished out 300 dollars. In the meantime the folks in Bangladesh or Singapore would not yet have received their measly 2 or 4 dollars.
The GDP in Bangladesh rises by 2 dollars worth of added value for making the jacket. In Singapore it rises by 4 – 2 = 2 dollars worth of added value for handling the jacket. And in America it rises by 300 – 4 = 296 dollars worth of added value for handling, shipping, advertising, displaying and financing the sale of that same jacket.
What happened in effect is that in Bangladesh, they used the investment they received to widen their industrial base in a manner that is consistent with a large population, underdeveloped economy. In Singapore they used the investment to widen their industrial base in a manner that is consistent with a small population, advanced economy. In the United States they used the money in a manner that adds value to the GDP through merchandising which is undeniably a service but also through the lending at a high interest rate money that was borrowed at a much lower rate and calling this a financial service.
As we can see, the mere fact that they repackaged the jacket in Singapore makes them claim they created wealth for the country equal to that of the Bangladeshis who made the jacket. As for the United States, moving the jacket from the west coast to the east coast, merchandising it and financing its sale is said to have created wealth for the country equal to 148 times those who made the jacket. Horrendous. A similar scenario unfolds in Israel but this is small potato compared to what else happens there. However, this will be the subject of the next article.
For now, we ask what happened to the hundreds of billions of dollars that Israel has received from the Unites States and elsewhere, has borrowed with guarantees from the United States, and has received in the form of investments from abroad, including the United States?
To answer these questions we need to go back to the second article and recall that a 150 billion dollar GDP can be legitimately generated with a 22.5 billion dollars worth of manufactured goods. This would be equal to the production of 2.25 million cars or the equivalent thereof in appliances, electronics, chemicals, textiles, food processing, etcetera.
So, how much investment do you need to produce this much industrial products? The rule of thumb is dollar for dollar. That is, you will need approximately 22.5 billion dollars worth of investment in plant and equipment to produce that much goods which, aided by the multiplier effect will translate into a 150 billion dollar GDP.
You will also need an infrastructure to accomplish all this, however, and that can run into the tens of billions of dollars. But infrastructure is what you do locally with local currency over a long period of time. As for the 22.5 billion dollars, all or a substantial portion of it must be in foreign currency so that you may buy from abroad the equipment you do not produce at home.
Well, Israel received 10 times as much money as that, mostly from America but also from other places. In addition she always had the advantage that all immigrant welcoming countries have which is that people come into the country from everywhere in the World with skills and an education that could be worth as much as a quarter of a million dollars per head thus saving the local treasury a bundle in educational expenses and adult training.
Israel also had sympathy, contacts all over the World and markets galore for her products. And yet, Israel has but a thin industrial base that cannot stand on its own under any circumstance. If you cut the umbilical cord that feeds Israel at the expense of the American taxpayer today, the nation will be worse off than Liberia, Sierra Leon or Haiti overnight.
Acutely aware of all this, people everywhere look at the American Administration and the US Congress, shake their heads in disgust and exclaim: what monstrosity are they creating in the Middle East? They do not ask where the money went because they have a hunch what the answer will be. Rather, they reject the whole notion of implanting and nurturing a Zionist entity in the Middle East based solely on confrontation and deliberate antagonism which is what the US policy in the Middle East boils down to. And so the people of the World call for a two-state solution to the conflict there or a one-state solution that is based on the principle of one vote for every one man and every one woman.
Israel receives aid from America and from other sources, and she borrows money that is guaranteed by America. At the same time, America herself borrows from the Chinese, the Arabs and from the countries that supply her with goods then wait a long time to be paid thus lending her the value of the goods. The two recipients then channel the money into their respective economies and fluff up their perceived values, making the GDP look more impressive than it really is.
In general there are four ways by which a nation can use the multiplier device for legitimate and illegitimate purposes. The first way is to invest the donated or borrowed money in such a way as to widen the industrial base and give a tangible, real value to the money you print and circulate.
This would be the sensible thing to do for those countries that are still developing and those that were once industrialized but have lost their industrial edge to developing countries. The US would be a perfect candidate for this method but she is not seizing the opportunity.
The second way is to invest the money in such manner as to widen the service sector of the economy. This would be the sensible thing to do for those countries that began to industrialize but have not yet reached a level that adequately distributes the products to the emerging middle class and evenly distributes the social benefits to the needy. India would be a perfect candidate for this method and this is what she is doing.
The third way is to use the borrowed money to speculate with. This inflates the value of the economy by creating more money without producing something valuable to justify the increase. This is done mainly by greedy individuals and institutions who do not care about the country as a whole. In fact, enough Japanese individuals and institutions did it in the late Nineteen Eighties and early Nineteen Nineties to crash the economy and make the nation suffer for it. Sometimes a corrupt regime in power would resort to a similar method in order to line the pockets of the rulers and their cronies.
The fourth way is to use the borrowed money to buy from abroad the products and services you don’t make at home. This tendency is intertwined with the second way because the more you import to consume, the more you widen your service sectors, especially the merchandizing and financial ones. This is what is happening in the United States at this time in lieu of what should happen which is to use the borrowed money to repair the industrial sectors that were damaged by competition from the newly industrializing nations.
Let us now take a concrete example. A jacket made in Bangladesh from local raw material earns its maker 2 dollars. It goes to Singapore where it is "repackaged" and re-invoiced at 4 dollars. It is then sent to an importer in Los Angeles, from there to a wholesaler in New York and from there to retailers all over New England. By the time it is displayed in the widows, the jacket is carrying a price tag that says 100 dollars. The consumer buys it on credit, and by the time he pays off the loan at 30% interest, he would have dished out 300 dollars. In the meantime the folks in Bangladesh or Singapore would not yet have received their measly 2 or 4 dollars.
The GDP in Bangladesh rises by 2 dollars worth of added value for making the jacket. In Singapore it rises by 4 – 2 = 2 dollars worth of added value for handling the jacket. And in America it rises by 300 – 4 = 296 dollars worth of added value for handling, shipping, advertising, displaying and financing the sale of that same jacket.
What happened in effect is that in Bangladesh, they used the investment they received to widen their industrial base in a manner that is consistent with a large population, underdeveloped economy. In Singapore they used the investment to widen their industrial base in a manner that is consistent with a small population, advanced economy. In the United States they used the money in a manner that adds value to the GDP through merchandising which is undeniably a service but also through the lending at a high interest rate money that was borrowed at a much lower rate and calling this a financial service.
As we can see, the mere fact that they repackaged the jacket in Singapore makes them claim they created wealth for the country equal to that of the Bangladeshis who made the jacket. As for the United States, moving the jacket from the west coast to the east coast, merchandising it and financing its sale is said to have created wealth for the country equal to 148 times those who made the jacket. Horrendous. A similar scenario unfolds in Israel but this is small potato compared to what else happens there. However, this will be the subject of the next article.
For now, we ask what happened to the hundreds of billions of dollars that Israel has received from the Unites States and elsewhere, has borrowed with guarantees from the United States, and has received in the form of investments from abroad, including the United States?
To answer these questions we need to go back to the second article and recall that a 150 billion dollar GDP can be legitimately generated with a 22.5 billion dollars worth of manufactured goods. This would be equal to the production of 2.25 million cars or the equivalent thereof in appliances, electronics, chemicals, textiles, food processing, etcetera.
So, how much investment do you need to produce this much industrial products? The rule of thumb is dollar for dollar. That is, you will need approximately 22.5 billion dollars worth of investment in plant and equipment to produce that much goods which, aided by the multiplier effect will translate into a 150 billion dollar GDP.
You will also need an infrastructure to accomplish all this, however, and that can run into the tens of billions of dollars. But infrastructure is what you do locally with local currency over a long period of time. As for the 22.5 billion dollars, all or a substantial portion of it must be in foreign currency so that you may buy from abroad the equipment you do not produce at home.
Well, Israel received 10 times as much money as that, mostly from America but also from other places. In addition she always had the advantage that all immigrant welcoming countries have which is that people come into the country from everywhere in the World with skills and an education that could be worth as much as a quarter of a million dollars per head thus saving the local treasury a bundle in educational expenses and adult training.
Israel also had sympathy, contacts all over the World and markets galore for her products. And yet, Israel has but a thin industrial base that cannot stand on its own under any circumstance. If you cut the umbilical cord that feeds Israel at the expense of the American taxpayer today, the nation will be worse off than Liberia, Sierra Leon or Haiti overnight.
Acutely aware of all this, people everywhere look at the American Administration and the US Congress, shake their heads in disgust and exclaim: what monstrosity are they creating in the Middle East? They do not ask where the money went because they have a hunch what the answer will be. Rather, they reject the whole notion of implanting and nurturing a Zionist entity in the Middle East based solely on confrontation and deliberate antagonism which is what the US policy in the Middle East boils down to. And so the people of the World call for a two-state solution to the conflict there or a one-state solution that is based on the principle of one vote for every one man and every one woman.
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Israel’s Bikini Economy (2 of 4)
To understand why a nation that shows a per capita income of more than 20,000 dollars cannot feed its poor and why a nation that receives reparation payments for its Holocaust victims cannot turn the money over to the survivors, we need to understand how modern economies are entered into the books and how they are reported on.
The per capita income in North America is about 40,000 dollars a year which is approximately 110 dollars a day. By contrast, it is said that in some places of the Third World they live on 1 or 2 dollars a day. Does this mean we are 55 to 110 times better off than the people in those places? No it does not mean that because in reality we live in North America on about 1 dollar a day as well.
To understand this part, we take a calculator and enter 365 which is the number of days there is in a year. We multiply by 300 million which is the number of inhabitants that reside in America. We get the approximate number of 110 billion. And guess what, 110 billion dollars is just about the value of America’s agricultural products at the farm gate. This means that every American pays the farmers of the country 1 dollar a day to be fed.
But while this is what the farmers receive in total, the food bill in America is about 20 times as high. How come? Well, a loaf of bread for which you pay 100 cents at the supermarket contains 5 cents worth of wheat which is what the farmers receive. This is a ratio of 20 to 1.
The other 95 cents go to pay for the layers between you and the farmers. These are the truckers, the fuel, the milling, the baking, the packaging, the advertising, the merchandizing, the wholesaling, the interest charges on borrowed money, the banking, the speculating, the profiteering and what have you. All the while, one or two dozen people make a living turning those 5 cents worth of wheat into a dollar’s worth of bread ready for you to pick off the shelf.
If you have a country that is still at a "primitive" level such as Liberia, for example, where people live on the land or close to it, they would be doing their own transport, milling, backing and what have you. The net result is that someone who eats a loaf of bread a day in Liberia is said to eat 5 cents worth of bread while someone who eats an identical loaf of bread in America is said to eat one dollar’s worth of bread. Nutritionally the two are the same but in the books, it is entered that an American eats 20 times as much bread as a Liberian, and this is a falsehood.
The point is that a higher per capita income does not always mean that someone has more than someone else. It could be that the second lives in an economy that is more multi-layered than the first. Let us now look at this other example. A beggar in America receiving a dollar can buy himself a loaf of bread and live for a day. A beggar in Liberia receiving a dollar can buy himself 20 loaves of bread and live for 20 days or he can feed an extended family of 20 people for a day.
Let us now suppose that the government or the people of America donate one million dollars to Liberia. The Liberians could use this money to buy bread from the supermarkets of America and feed a million people for a day or they could buy wheat from the farmers of America, make their own bread with it and feed a million people for 20 days. In the first instance, they will have added 1 million dollars to their Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In the second instance, the multiplier effect will have brought this up to between 8 million and 20 million dollars depending on how many layers they have in Liberia between receiving the wheat and baking the bread.
Therefore, given that money received from abroad as aid can be multiplied when channeled through the economy, the 5 billion dollars received by Israel in various forms of aid from the US and other sources every year have the potential to show up as a 100 billion dollar addition to the GDP. Of course, this is all fake because people could be starving in Israel more than in Liberia, which some people believe is the case, and yet the nation of Israel will show a per capita income of 20,000 dollars while in Liberia the figure is 150 dollars.
This multiplier effect is called value added. That is, when you have 5 cents worth of wheat, you keep adding value to it every step of the way as you grind the wheat, bake it, transport it etcetera until it becomes bread worth a dollar. The same thing happens to all kinds of resources. For example, iron may be turned into a refrigerator, wood into a desk and crude oil into gasoline or plastics or something else.
To have a robust industrial economy you must have the various infrastructures which will allow you to produce enough of the manufactured goods that your population needs. And to have that, you must either have a manufacturing base which is varied enough to respond to several needs or have a source of national income that will earn you enough foreign exchange to import what you do not make at home.
To understand that point we look at this scenario. To have a 150 billion dollar GDP which is about what Israel says it has, you need a manufacturing base that represents at least 15% of that amount as it was shown in the first article. This will be 22.5 billion dollars worth of industrial products. Well, a medium car that is produced locally in full adds a value to the GDP worth about 10,000 dollars. This means that the country will have to produce 2.25 million cars or the equivalent thereof in industrial products to have a 150 billion dollar GDP.
Given that a car is made of parts, you need to mass produce these parts in order to make this many cars. This is a good thing because mass production will make you competitive. When the cars are assembled, you will sell some of them locally and export the rest. You will use the money earned from export to buy from abroad the raw material you need to make the cars. And you will also buy the products that you don’t make at home because a nation does not live by cars alone. It needs TV sets and washing machines and clothes etcetera, etcetera.
If you are a planner in charge of putting down an industrial strategy for your country, you will be ill advised to plan for 2.25 million cars a year and nothing else because the economy will be at the mercy of the car market. This is not healthy given that you depend on earnings from the sale of these cars to buy other things. A better choice would be to diversify your manufacturing base and make cars as well as appliances, electronics, textiles, food processing, chemical products and so on and so forth. This means you will have a smaller scale production line for each item where you will lose some competitive advantage but you will not be affected by the vagaries of a market that tends to bounce around.
Obviously then, you must make a trade-off between having a product-rich economy with security on one hand versus a more competitive but narrowly based economy. The first choice will guarantee a moderate but steady income in foreign exchange regardless of the mood of the market, the second choice will guarantee a higher income when there is demand for your product but a lower income when the demand slows down. It is a hard choice to have to make in some countries, especially those that have a small population where they may have an obvious competitive advantage in one area but disadvantages in other areas.
Is there an alternative to this dilemma? That is, can you have it both ways? Say, have a steady high income no matter what the market does. Yes, there is an alternative. In fact, there are two ways but let’s begin with the first. You get someone to donate to you 5 billion dollars in foreign currency every year. And if possible, you borrow some more money especially if you can get the same donor to guarantee your loans as well.
This is how Israel has been living for decades with only a thin industrial base. The most generous donor and the guarantor of her loans has been the United States of America which itself is now borrowing from the Chinese and the Arabs to pay for the products that the American people need but their country no longer produces.
The second alternative is this: a nation with a large population faces the hard choice between diversification and specialization less acutely than a nation with a small population because a large population has the manpower and the local market to specialize in one or two products yet diversify into other products at the same time. But a country like Singapore with a tiny population got around this dilemma by developing a good relationship with her neighbors who happen to have large populations. The result is that Singapore operates as if it had a population of a billion people or more when in fact, it has a population of less than 5 million. And it has been very successful indeed.
Israel could do the same with her populous Arab neighbors but the Zionist rulers of Israel prefer to act like a supremacist bunch who can call on the Americans to self immolate in order to maintain Israel’s image of the tough kid on the bloc. And the irony is that instead of being scared, the Arabs seem to love the spectacle and they keep bankrolling an America that is increasingly going bankrupt as it finances the black hole that is Israel. What a tragicomedy!
The per capita income in North America is about 40,000 dollars a year which is approximately 110 dollars a day. By contrast, it is said that in some places of the Third World they live on 1 or 2 dollars a day. Does this mean we are 55 to 110 times better off than the people in those places? No it does not mean that because in reality we live in North America on about 1 dollar a day as well.
To understand this part, we take a calculator and enter 365 which is the number of days there is in a year. We multiply by 300 million which is the number of inhabitants that reside in America. We get the approximate number of 110 billion. And guess what, 110 billion dollars is just about the value of America’s agricultural products at the farm gate. This means that every American pays the farmers of the country 1 dollar a day to be fed.
But while this is what the farmers receive in total, the food bill in America is about 20 times as high. How come? Well, a loaf of bread for which you pay 100 cents at the supermarket contains 5 cents worth of wheat which is what the farmers receive. This is a ratio of 20 to 1.
The other 95 cents go to pay for the layers between you and the farmers. These are the truckers, the fuel, the milling, the baking, the packaging, the advertising, the merchandizing, the wholesaling, the interest charges on borrowed money, the banking, the speculating, the profiteering and what have you. All the while, one or two dozen people make a living turning those 5 cents worth of wheat into a dollar’s worth of bread ready for you to pick off the shelf.
If you have a country that is still at a "primitive" level such as Liberia, for example, where people live on the land or close to it, they would be doing their own transport, milling, backing and what have you. The net result is that someone who eats a loaf of bread a day in Liberia is said to eat 5 cents worth of bread while someone who eats an identical loaf of bread in America is said to eat one dollar’s worth of bread. Nutritionally the two are the same but in the books, it is entered that an American eats 20 times as much bread as a Liberian, and this is a falsehood.
The point is that a higher per capita income does not always mean that someone has more than someone else. It could be that the second lives in an economy that is more multi-layered than the first. Let us now look at this other example. A beggar in America receiving a dollar can buy himself a loaf of bread and live for a day. A beggar in Liberia receiving a dollar can buy himself 20 loaves of bread and live for 20 days or he can feed an extended family of 20 people for a day.
Let us now suppose that the government or the people of America donate one million dollars to Liberia. The Liberians could use this money to buy bread from the supermarkets of America and feed a million people for a day or they could buy wheat from the farmers of America, make their own bread with it and feed a million people for 20 days. In the first instance, they will have added 1 million dollars to their Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In the second instance, the multiplier effect will have brought this up to between 8 million and 20 million dollars depending on how many layers they have in Liberia between receiving the wheat and baking the bread.
Therefore, given that money received from abroad as aid can be multiplied when channeled through the economy, the 5 billion dollars received by Israel in various forms of aid from the US and other sources every year have the potential to show up as a 100 billion dollar addition to the GDP. Of course, this is all fake because people could be starving in Israel more than in Liberia, which some people believe is the case, and yet the nation of Israel will show a per capita income of 20,000 dollars while in Liberia the figure is 150 dollars.
This multiplier effect is called value added. That is, when you have 5 cents worth of wheat, you keep adding value to it every step of the way as you grind the wheat, bake it, transport it etcetera until it becomes bread worth a dollar. The same thing happens to all kinds of resources. For example, iron may be turned into a refrigerator, wood into a desk and crude oil into gasoline or plastics or something else.
To have a robust industrial economy you must have the various infrastructures which will allow you to produce enough of the manufactured goods that your population needs. And to have that, you must either have a manufacturing base which is varied enough to respond to several needs or have a source of national income that will earn you enough foreign exchange to import what you do not make at home.
To understand that point we look at this scenario. To have a 150 billion dollar GDP which is about what Israel says it has, you need a manufacturing base that represents at least 15% of that amount as it was shown in the first article. This will be 22.5 billion dollars worth of industrial products. Well, a medium car that is produced locally in full adds a value to the GDP worth about 10,000 dollars. This means that the country will have to produce 2.25 million cars or the equivalent thereof in industrial products to have a 150 billion dollar GDP.
Given that a car is made of parts, you need to mass produce these parts in order to make this many cars. This is a good thing because mass production will make you competitive. When the cars are assembled, you will sell some of them locally and export the rest. You will use the money earned from export to buy from abroad the raw material you need to make the cars. And you will also buy the products that you don’t make at home because a nation does not live by cars alone. It needs TV sets and washing machines and clothes etcetera, etcetera.
If you are a planner in charge of putting down an industrial strategy for your country, you will be ill advised to plan for 2.25 million cars a year and nothing else because the economy will be at the mercy of the car market. This is not healthy given that you depend on earnings from the sale of these cars to buy other things. A better choice would be to diversify your manufacturing base and make cars as well as appliances, electronics, textiles, food processing, chemical products and so on and so forth. This means you will have a smaller scale production line for each item where you will lose some competitive advantage but you will not be affected by the vagaries of a market that tends to bounce around.
Obviously then, you must make a trade-off between having a product-rich economy with security on one hand versus a more competitive but narrowly based economy. The first choice will guarantee a moderate but steady income in foreign exchange regardless of the mood of the market, the second choice will guarantee a higher income when there is demand for your product but a lower income when the demand slows down. It is a hard choice to have to make in some countries, especially those that have a small population where they may have an obvious competitive advantage in one area but disadvantages in other areas.
Is there an alternative to this dilemma? That is, can you have it both ways? Say, have a steady high income no matter what the market does. Yes, there is an alternative. In fact, there are two ways but let’s begin with the first. You get someone to donate to you 5 billion dollars in foreign currency every year. And if possible, you borrow some more money especially if you can get the same donor to guarantee your loans as well.
This is how Israel has been living for decades with only a thin industrial base. The most generous donor and the guarantor of her loans has been the United States of America which itself is now borrowing from the Chinese and the Arabs to pay for the products that the American people need but their country no longer produces.
The second alternative is this: a nation with a large population faces the hard choice between diversification and specialization less acutely than a nation with a small population because a large population has the manpower and the local market to specialize in one or two products yet diversify into other products at the same time. But a country like Singapore with a tiny population got around this dilemma by developing a good relationship with her neighbors who happen to have large populations. The result is that Singapore operates as if it had a population of a billion people or more when in fact, it has a population of less than 5 million. And it has been very successful indeed.
Israel could do the same with her populous Arab neighbors but the Zionist rulers of Israel prefer to act like a supremacist bunch who can call on the Americans to self immolate in order to maintain Israel’s image of the tough kid on the bloc. And the irony is that instead of being scared, the Arabs seem to love the spectacle and they keep bankrolling an America that is increasingly going bankrupt as it finances the black hole that is Israel. What a tragicomedy!
Monday, October 8, 2007
Israel’s Bikini Economy (1 of 4)
Long before there was a company called Enron which cooked the books and made a liability look like an asset, there was a country called Israel which cooked the books and made a Third World economy look like a First World economy. Enron is gone now but Israel is around and her economy is still talked about in glowing terms despite the fact that many people know Israel has no economy worth talking about.
Politicians lie about their economies, and the economists they hire go along with the charade. What makes it possible for these two to have a charade in the first place is that a nation’s economy is complex, and ordinary people do not ask to be told how it works but ask to be told they are doing well or will be doing well soon.
It will not be possible to give a complete picture of a nation’s economy in one article and I shall try to do it in several. For now I must explain why I call Israel’s economy a bikini economy and that’s what this discussion is about.
I began to follow the economy of Israel decades ago and right off the bat I realized that something wasn’t kosher in the way that they reported on it. I did not give it a name then but later on when the Brazilian bikini became the craze, I saw the similarities it had with the Israeli economy and called the latter the bikini economy.
What distinguishes the Brazilian bikini is that a minimum amount of material goes into making it yet it sells at an extremely high price. The reason the Brazilians give for the high price is that a great deal of art and much ingenuity go into the design of the thing. To understand how this resembles the Israeli economy, we need to acquire an overall view of a national economy’s architecture.
There are many economies in the World and they are all different from one another. Therefore nothing that is said about one can be regarded as ideal. Still, we must begin somewhere and so I regard as ideal an economy that has the following characteristics: It is made of one third industry and two thirds service. To be varied and balanced, the industrial part is made of six roughly equal sectors. They are agribusiness, leather & textile, chemicals, transport & machinery, construction & utilities, metal & mineral mining.
About half of what goes into these industrial sectors is manufacturing. For example, agribusiness is both agriculture and food processing. The food processing part is manufacturing but not the agricultural part. The same principle applies to the other five sectors, and this means that an ideal economy must in theory have a manufacturing base that makes up at least 15% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Less than that and the economy must be viewed as a service economy.
The countries that have little or no natural resources depend on manufacturing more than others to export and earn the foreign currency they need to pay for the imported raw material. In countries like Singapore and Taiwan, for example, manufacturing makes up more than a quarter of the GDP.
You can have a country that is populated with first class bankers, lawyers, doctors, nurses, musicians, chefs, teachers, retailers and so on, all of whom belonging to the service part of the economy but if you don’t have the industrial base or the equivalent thereof in terms of foreign currency earner, your country will look like a Third World economy. This is because your ability to produce or to buy industrial products always determine the quality of your services.
What makes a First World economy and gives a high value to your services are the journeymen, technicians, engineers and scientists who design and produce the consumer goods that the public wants, and the machines that the service industries need. Without these people, a world class brain surgeon operating in an economy that is underdeveloped will not be paid more than say, a doctor in Sri Lanka if only because that economy cannot provide him with the modern equipment he needs or the foreign currency to buy the equipment from abroad.
Armed with this knowledge I looked at Israel’s economy which may be home to first class bankers, lawyers and violinists who emigrated to Israel from other countries, and I asked what about the industrial base? In the Nineteen Sixties and Seventies, they said that the backbone of Israel’s manufacturing was food processing.
I compiled what processed foods they produced in Israel and compared it to that of their neighbor, Egypt. I found that Israel’s production ranged between one part in fifteen to one part in twenty what the Egyptians were producing which meant that the contribution to Israel’s GDP in dollar terms should have been 5% to 6.5% what the Egyptians were showing. Instead, the Israelis had given a value to their manufacturing of processed foods equal to 80% that of Egypt. This was more than a twelve fold exaggeration.
I searched for a reason and found that the excuse they gave was that Israel processed kosher food which is something so unique, it has a value higher than anything else. Just like the Brazilian bikini, see. But wait a minute, the companies that produce the kosher foods in Israel are branch plants of those that produce the same products in New York. Yet the contribution of these to the American GDP is a fraction that of Israel. Oh yes, there is that too. Well, you may look at it the following way, producing kosher food in America is not like producing kosher food in Israel. Get it? Oh yes, I get it all right.
A few years later, as they could no longer expand the food processing sector in Israel, they showed the expansion to the GDP as coming from the textiles. Here they showed a contribution to the GDP in dollar terms that was higher than Egypt’s even though their actual production was one twentieth that of their neighbor. The excuse they gave this time was that Israel produced and exported not textiles but fashion. Get it, f-a-s-h-i-o-n. Oh Yeah! I get it.
So I looked for Israeli fashion in North America and found none. I turned to a friend who was traveling to Israel, asked him to buy me something fashionable and gave him enough money to pay for a suit. He came back with a T-shirt made of material that looked like a fishnet. The whole thing weighed maybe an ounce or two, probably less than a Brazilian bikini. I never wore the darn thing, and so much for Israeli fashion.
In the Nineteen Eighties, Israel had a construction boom financed by the Americans to move settlers into Gaza and the West bank of Palestine. For this they needed cement which is a component of the chemical sector. At the same time they expanded the pharmaceutical and petrochemical subsectors. The net result was that they climbed from one tenth to about one fifth the level of Egypt’s production in these subsectors. However, the Israelis showed a contribution to the GDP in dollar terms that ranged between twice and three times that of the Egyptians, a twelve to fifteen fold exaggeration.
I looked for the excuse they gave here and found that they were saying they produced surgical gloves with latex so thin, the value added to crude petroleum was 30 times the price of the raw material. Given that everywhere else in the World the added value never exceeds 8 times the price of the raw material, they were better in Israel than everywhere else in the World. So I looked for bikinis made with Israeli latex but found none. Not even in Brazil they wore such things.
And now they say they are into the high-tech business. So, what is it that they make? Well, they don’t make many high-tech finished products that you can buy and read: "made in Israel" written on them. Instead, they say they fabricate custom-made, semi-finished products that go into someone else’s finished product or they assemble them into military equipment made mostly from parts that the Americans give them for free. And here, you have nothing with which to compare the value added, so you accept the value they attach to their products which you never get to see anyway because they are hidden. See how smart they are!
Well, you get the idea, it is a bikini economy made for a doll and sold at the price of a wedding gown for a princess. But who is buying?
Politicians lie about their economies, and the economists they hire go along with the charade. What makes it possible for these two to have a charade in the first place is that a nation’s economy is complex, and ordinary people do not ask to be told how it works but ask to be told they are doing well or will be doing well soon.
It will not be possible to give a complete picture of a nation’s economy in one article and I shall try to do it in several. For now I must explain why I call Israel’s economy a bikini economy and that’s what this discussion is about.
I began to follow the economy of Israel decades ago and right off the bat I realized that something wasn’t kosher in the way that they reported on it. I did not give it a name then but later on when the Brazilian bikini became the craze, I saw the similarities it had with the Israeli economy and called the latter the bikini economy.
What distinguishes the Brazilian bikini is that a minimum amount of material goes into making it yet it sells at an extremely high price. The reason the Brazilians give for the high price is that a great deal of art and much ingenuity go into the design of the thing. To understand how this resembles the Israeli economy, we need to acquire an overall view of a national economy’s architecture.
There are many economies in the World and they are all different from one another. Therefore nothing that is said about one can be regarded as ideal. Still, we must begin somewhere and so I regard as ideal an economy that has the following characteristics: It is made of one third industry and two thirds service. To be varied and balanced, the industrial part is made of six roughly equal sectors. They are agribusiness, leather & textile, chemicals, transport & machinery, construction & utilities, metal & mineral mining.
About half of what goes into these industrial sectors is manufacturing. For example, agribusiness is both agriculture and food processing. The food processing part is manufacturing but not the agricultural part. The same principle applies to the other five sectors, and this means that an ideal economy must in theory have a manufacturing base that makes up at least 15% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Less than that and the economy must be viewed as a service economy.
The countries that have little or no natural resources depend on manufacturing more than others to export and earn the foreign currency they need to pay for the imported raw material. In countries like Singapore and Taiwan, for example, manufacturing makes up more than a quarter of the GDP.
You can have a country that is populated with first class bankers, lawyers, doctors, nurses, musicians, chefs, teachers, retailers and so on, all of whom belonging to the service part of the economy but if you don’t have the industrial base or the equivalent thereof in terms of foreign currency earner, your country will look like a Third World economy. This is because your ability to produce or to buy industrial products always determine the quality of your services.
What makes a First World economy and gives a high value to your services are the journeymen, technicians, engineers and scientists who design and produce the consumer goods that the public wants, and the machines that the service industries need. Without these people, a world class brain surgeon operating in an economy that is underdeveloped will not be paid more than say, a doctor in Sri Lanka if only because that economy cannot provide him with the modern equipment he needs or the foreign currency to buy the equipment from abroad.
Armed with this knowledge I looked at Israel’s economy which may be home to first class bankers, lawyers and violinists who emigrated to Israel from other countries, and I asked what about the industrial base? In the Nineteen Sixties and Seventies, they said that the backbone of Israel’s manufacturing was food processing.
I compiled what processed foods they produced in Israel and compared it to that of their neighbor, Egypt. I found that Israel’s production ranged between one part in fifteen to one part in twenty what the Egyptians were producing which meant that the contribution to Israel’s GDP in dollar terms should have been 5% to 6.5% what the Egyptians were showing. Instead, the Israelis had given a value to their manufacturing of processed foods equal to 80% that of Egypt. This was more than a twelve fold exaggeration.
I searched for a reason and found that the excuse they gave was that Israel processed kosher food which is something so unique, it has a value higher than anything else. Just like the Brazilian bikini, see. But wait a minute, the companies that produce the kosher foods in Israel are branch plants of those that produce the same products in New York. Yet the contribution of these to the American GDP is a fraction that of Israel. Oh yes, there is that too. Well, you may look at it the following way, producing kosher food in America is not like producing kosher food in Israel. Get it? Oh yes, I get it all right.
A few years later, as they could no longer expand the food processing sector in Israel, they showed the expansion to the GDP as coming from the textiles. Here they showed a contribution to the GDP in dollar terms that was higher than Egypt’s even though their actual production was one twentieth that of their neighbor. The excuse they gave this time was that Israel produced and exported not textiles but fashion. Get it, f-a-s-h-i-o-n. Oh Yeah! I get it.
So I looked for Israeli fashion in North America and found none. I turned to a friend who was traveling to Israel, asked him to buy me something fashionable and gave him enough money to pay for a suit. He came back with a T-shirt made of material that looked like a fishnet. The whole thing weighed maybe an ounce or two, probably less than a Brazilian bikini. I never wore the darn thing, and so much for Israeli fashion.
In the Nineteen Eighties, Israel had a construction boom financed by the Americans to move settlers into Gaza and the West bank of Palestine. For this they needed cement which is a component of the chemical sector. At the same time they expanded the pharmaceutical and petrochemical subsectors. The net result was that they climbed from one tenth to about one fifth the level of Egypt’s production in these subsectors. However, the Israelis showed a contribution to the GDP in dollar terms that ranged between twice and three times that of the Egyptians, a twelve to fifteen fold exaggeration.
I looked for the excuse they gave here and found that they were saying they produced surgical gloves with latex so thin, the value added to crude petroleum was 30 times the price of the raw material. Given that everywhere else in the World the added value never exceeds 8 times the price of the raw material, they were better in Israel than everywhere else in the World. So I looked for bikinis made with Israeli latex but found none. Not even in Brazil they wore such things.
And now they say they are into the high-tech business. So, what is it that they make? Well, they don’t make many high-tech finished products that you can buy and read: "made in Israel" written on them. Instead, they say they fabricate custom-made, semi-finished products that go into someone else’s finished product or they assemble them into military equipment made mostly from parts that the Americans give them for free. And here, you have nothing with which to compare the value added, so you accept the value they attach to their products which you never get to see anyway because they are hidden. See how smart they are!
Well, you get the idea, it is a bikini economy made for a doll and sold at the price of a wedding gown for a princess. But who is buying?
Friday, October 5, 2007
Ignorant Of His Culture And Of Others
Once again we have the situation of someone who may be thought of as representing the Anglo-Saxon culture using the story of a non-Anglo as a springboard to discuss the difference between two cultures and show in the process that he understands neither. This time it is David Pryce-Jones who writes on October 4, 2007 in National Review Online under the title Diana’s Clash of Civilization about the inquest into the death of Princess Diana. This is an inquest that Mohamed Fayed, the father of Diana’s boyfriend Dodi has wanted for a long time.
In the paragraph second to last Pryce-Jones lays out his point as he concludes the following: "Mohamed Fayed’s conspiracy theory is a revealing illustration of how someone can misinterpret British culture in the light of his very own different culture. His vision of the world sounds demented but it’s conditioned by what’s familiar to him. In their culture, what the British actually do is set up inquests and Lord Justices to deal with issues through due procedure, something unknown in Egypt." In fact, Pryce-Jones is comparing Egypt where Mohamed Fayed was born with Britain where he now lives and works.
I put in bold type four words in the above paragraph because I believe there is a typo error around there. But this does not change the meaning of what the author is trying to say and so, let’s get on with the analysis of this piece of writing.
Pryce-Jones reaches this conclusion because he says that although the record shows people who got in the way of the powerful in Egypt were sometimes murdered, there is no record of the British secret service murdering anyone. He then backpedals a little and admits he knows of two attempts that were stopped by a higher authority. But he does not come right out and say he is absolutely certain the British secret service is not keeping secret an operation like say, the American attempt to murder Cuba’s Castro which failed or the actual murder of Chile’s Allende.
Still, the writer insists that to believe the British would do such a thing is a concept so far out, it is rather comic. It seems this man Pryce-Jones did not read his own piece after he wrote it because at the beginning of it he says this: "Lord Justice Scott Baker in charge of the inquest opened proceedings by saying that many members of the public are concerned that something sinister may have caused the collision, and suspicion is now to be either dispelled or substantiated."
Comic? Who is Pryce-Jones laughing at? Mohamed Fayed? Lord Justice Scott Baker or the many members of the British public who are concerned that something sinister may have caused the collision and are suspicious?
Still, the man wants to show how much he understands his own culture by first attacking someone else’s understanding of it then describing his own understanding of it. And so he writes the following: "Mohamed Fayed’s conspiracy theory is a revealing illustration of how someone can misinterpret British culture … what the British actually do is set up inquests and Lord Justices to deal with issues through due procedure."
It is unbelievable that a published author can be so backward. Following due procedure is what Mohamed Fayed has been doing for ten years. And what Pryce-Jones is describing as being what the British do is what Fayed has done. So where did the man go wrong when he did what he did, when he thought like "many members of the [British] public" or when he pursued the proper British procedure? David Pryce-Jones is not saying.
What is wrong is not with Mohamed Fayed but with a mediocre thinker called David Pryce-Jones who does not understand his own culture, is ignorant of the Egyptian culture and has no clue as to its legal set-up or procedure. If this man had learned about the Arabs, their language and their culture, and if he had acquired a knowledge about them equal to a tiny fraction what Mohamed Fayed knows about the British language and culture, he would not have made a fool of himself and be an embarrassment to his people and his profession.
Not only is this man devoid of the knowledge and the intellect to write about a subject that is obviously far above his head, he does not even suspect he is this ignorant and so he goes on to confidently speculate the following:
[If Diana and Dodi] had settled down together the whole Establishment would have gasped with relief at an example of a Muslim at last integrating."
If Pryce-Jones could get away saying that Mohamed Fayed had not fully integrated in British society, he could not get away saying that Dodi had not integrated or that he needed to marry a Princess to be integrated.
Pryce-Jones goes on to opine: "Fayed’s insistence that the mother of the future King couldn’t be allowed to marry a Muslim is evidence of the victim complex that runs through Islam - the poor man is simply not equipped to understand the British.
No one is poorer than Pryce-Jones for pretending he has the expertise on Islam to accuse it of having a victim complex. And let’s be honest, the writer is too small to have tackled this job but you cannot blame him for trying. If anyone is to blame, it is the editors who are as poor, who did not read what they were publishing, who red the article but did not care or who treated their readers with contempt.
In the paragraph second to last Pryce-Jones lays out his point as he concludes the following: "Mohamed Fayed’s conspiracy theory is a revealing illustration of how someone can misinterpret British culture in the light of his very own different culture. His vision of the world sounds demented but it’s conditioned by what’s familiar to him. In their culture, what the British actually do is set up inquests and Lord Justices to deal with issues through due procedure, something unknown in Egypt." In fact, Pryce-Jones is comparing Egypt where Mohamed Fayed was born with Britain where he now lives and works.
I put in bold type four words in the above paragraph because I believe there is a typo error around there. But this does not change the meaning of what the author is trying to say and so, let’s get on with the analysis of this piece of writing.
Pryce-Jones reaches this conclusion because he says that although the record shows people who got in the way of the powerful in Egypt were sometimes murdered, there is no record of the British secret service murdering anyone. He then backpedals a little and admits he knows of two attempts that were stopped by a higher authority. But he does not come right out and say he is absolutely certain the British secret service is not keeping secret an operation like say, the American attempt to murder Cuba’s Castro which failed or the actual murder of Chile’s Allende.
Still, the writer insists that to believe the British would do such a thing is a concept so far out, it is rather comic. It seems this man Pryce-Jones did not read his own piece after he wrote it because at the beginning of it he says this: "Lord Justice Scott Baker in charge of the inquest opened proceedings by saying that many members of the public are concerned that something sinister may have caused the collision, and suspicion is now to be either dispelled or substantiated."
Comic? Who is Pryce-Jones laughing at? Mohamed Fayed? Lord Justice Scott Baker or the many members of the British public who are concerned that something sinister may have caused the collision and are suspicious?
Still, the man wants to show how much he understands his own culture by first attacking someone else’s understanding of it then describing his own understanding of it. And so he writes the following: "Mohamed Fayed’s conspiracy theory is a revealing illustration of how someone can misinterpret British culture … what the British actually do is set up inquests and Lord Justices to deal with issues through due procedure."
It is unbelievable that a published author can be so backward. Following due procedure is what Mohamed Fayed has been doing for ten years. And what Pryce-Jones is describing as being what the British do is what Fayed has done. So where did the man go wrong when he did what he did, when he thought like "many members of the [British] public" or when he pursued the proper British procedure? David Pryce-Jones is not saying.
What is wrong is not with Mohamed Fayed but with a mediocre thinker called David Pryce-Jones who does not understand his own culture, is ignorant of the Egyptian culture and has no clue as to its legal set-up or procedure. If this man had learned about the Arabs, their language and their culture, and if he had acquired a knowledge about them equal to a tiny fraction what Mohamed Fayed knows about the British language and culture, he would not have made a fool of himself and be an embarrassment to his people and his profession.
Not only is this man devoid of the knowledge and the intellect to write about a subject that is obviously far above his head, he does not even suspect he is this ignorant and so he goes on to confidently speculate the following:
[If Diana and Dodi] had settled down together the whole Establishment would have gasped with relief at an example of a Muslim at last integrating."
If Pryce-Jones could get away saying that Mohamed Fayed had not fully integrated in British society, he could not get away saying that Dodi had not integrated or that he needed to marry a Princess to be integrated.
Pryce-Jones goes on to opine: "Fayed’s insistence that the mother of the future King couldn’t be allowed to marry a Muslim is evidence of the victim complex that runs through Islam - the poor man is simply not equipped to understand the British.
No one is poorer than Pryce-Jones for pretending he has the expertise on Islam to accuse it of having a victim complex. And let’s be honest, the writer is too small to have tackled this job but you cannot blame him for trying. If anyone is to blame, it is the editors who are as poor, who did not read what they were publishing, who red the article but did not care or who treated their readers with contempt.
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
The Tea, The Kettle And The Obnoxious Jew
On September 30, 2007 Richard Landau, host of the talk show Behind The Story which is broadcast on the CTS television station from Burlington, Ontario quoted a UN report which says that Islamophobia was causing Muslim youths to act violently. Landau responded viscerally blasting the report and calling it a canard. One must see the scene to get a sense of the flask of anti-Islamic acid that must have burst in the viscera of that man at the mere suggestion that Islam may not be as evil as he makes it to be week after week - relentlessly, mercilessly and in defiance of decency, professionalism and the value we call truth. He does that through the show he hosts and the shows he produces for the same station.
We can discuss race and religious relations to try and understand this attitude but we cannot discuss these subjects in Canada without putting things in the larger context of the North American continent. And to do this, we must begin the discussion in the United States, and so it is there that we go first.
Americans like to think of themselves as a social experiment and their country as a laboratory to which people come from all over the world to live in harmony, be fruitful and do wonderful things together. They point out that people go to great length, even take chances with their lives to reach America’s shores, a reality they say which proves that the social experiment is succeeding. Maybe so but the jury is still out as to how big that success is. And because we are talking about the life of a nation, the jury will be out for a long time before it can reach a decision.
What is certain, however, is that America has had a civil war and has never had an easy relationship with its Black population. And every ethnic group, from the Europeans to the Asians to the Middle Easterners have experienced a form of rejection when they first came to the country. Some argue that the initial rejection of newcomers is a normal human reaction, and people in general accept this argument. So be it.
What is not normal, however, is the attitude of the American majority towards its Black minority. To be fair, there is an ongoing debate on this subject and the expectation is that the issue will be resolved some day perhaps to the satisfaction of everyone. We all hope so.
Where there is not a debate yet is around the relationship between the Muslims, the Jews and the rest of society. To be more specific, the ethnicity of the Middle Easterners is of title concern to Americans given that these peoples are light brown or white skinned anyway. In fact, those of us who are Christian of Middle Eastern descent blend into the society in little time, intermarry with the other groups and quickly forget our roots. By the time the next generation comes of age, it cannot be distinguished from those who have been here several generations.
But this cannot be said about the Muslims even when they are white skinned and blue eyed. What is at issue here is the religion and what is stirring is the relationship between the Muslims, the Jews and the rest of society. People such as Landau who walk around with a flask of anti-Muslim acid in their viscera - not to forget the fire with which they spew it - make sure that the relationship never becomes normal, and there lies the problem.
Maybe Landau is too young to remember how it happened that he sits today in the privileged position of being one of a massive swarm of Jewish journalists on a continent that shuts out the Arabs from the profession. He and his colleagues sit there spewing Islamophobic propaganda without being challenged by someone who could offer an opposing view, oblivious of the history that brought them to this point.
Well then, here is what should come as news to that man and to those like him. While he was growing up and not watching the events of the day, his elders were being called obnoxious Jews by many others to which the elders responded that the name calling was a case of the tea calling the kettle black. They explained that the Jews were made obnoxious by the gentiles who left them with no choice but to be obnoxious and to act obnoxious.
And who were those gentiles? They were the ones who liberated the Jews from the concentration camps of the Nazis. The point that the elders were making was that the gentiles did not embrace the Jews as enthusiastically after the war as they did when they liberated them, and so the Jews turned obnoxious. The elders meant to say it was not the fault of the Jews that they turned obnoxious, and Landau seems to be saying this is no canard.
It may be true that the gentiles failed to embrace the Jews after the war but they did not spew Judeophobic acid week after week - relentlessly, mercilessly and in defiance of decency, professionalism and the value we call truth without someone being there to offer an opposing view, and yet the Jews turned obnoxious. By contrast, the Muslims are attacked culturally by a million media outlets, physically by the most lethal weapons ever devised, and they are killed by the tens of thousands every year … and what happens?
What happens is that a handful of youths who are deliberately cornered by the likes of Landau and never given a chance to come out of their predicament respond by committing not a huge amount of random violence as youngsters of every race and religion do all the time but by committing a minimum amount of violence designed specifically to tell society what the source of their discontent is and what solution they want to see implemented.
Given not a single chance to communicate the extent of the pain that is inflicted on them by the swarm of Zionists who control the media, Young Muslims use the only tool left at their disposal which is civil disobedience pushed to extreme. I know what these kids go through because even though I am Christian, I was mistaken for a Muslim 40 years ago and have been blacklisted ever since.
I was told point blank to write like they tell me to write which was to insult my race and to denigrate what they though was my religion or I shall stay on the blacklist until I do. I could have told them right there and then I was Christian, not Muslim and put an end to this savagery but I did not because I welcomed the chance to study what the acid of hate in the viscera of people like Landau does to them and to society. I tell you, folks, it’s ugly. It is just ugly.
To solve the problem of the obnoxious Jew, Landau’s elders offered the notion that once the Jews control the media, their discontent will abate, everything will get back to normal and they will cease to be obnoxious. But Landau and those like him are living proof that the more things change the more they remain the same.
We can discuss race and religious relations to try and understand this attitude but we cannot discuss these subjects in Canada without putting things in the larger context of the North American continent. And to do this, we must begin the discussion in the United States, and so it is there that we go first.
Americans like to think of themselves as a social experiment and their country as a laboratory to which people come from all over the world to live in harmony, be fruitful and do wonderful things together. They point out that people go to great length, even take chances with their lives to reach America’s shores, a reality they say which proves that the social experiment is succeeding. Maybe so but the jury is still out as to how big that success is. And because we are talking about the life of a nation, the jury will be out for a long time before it can reach a decision.
What is certain, however, is that America has had a civil war and has never had an easy relationship with its Black population. And every ethnic group, from the Europeans to the Asians to the Middle Easterners have experienced a form of rejection when they first came to the country. Some argue that the initial rejection of newcomers is a normal human reaction, and people in general accept this argument. So be it.
What is not normal, however, is the attitude of the American majority towards its Black minority. To be fair, there is an ongoing debate on this subject and the expectation is that the issue will be resolved some day perhaps to the satisfaction of everyone. We all hope so.
Where there is not a debate yet is around the relationship between the Muslims, the Jews and the rest of society. To be more specific, the ethnicity of the Middle Easterners is of title concern to Americans given that these peoples are light brown or white skinned anyway. In fact, those of us who are Christian of Middle Eastern descent blend into the society in little time, intermarry with the other groups and quickly forget our roots. By the time the next generation comes of age, it cannot be distinguished from those who have been here several generations.
But this cannot be said about the Muslims even when they are white skinned and blue eyed. What is at issue here is the religion and what is stirring is the relationship between the Muslims, the Jews and the rest of society. People such as Landau who walk around with a flask of anti-Muslim acid in their viscera - not to forget the fire with which they spew it - make sure that the relationship never becomes normal, and there lies the problem.
Maybe Landau is too young to remember how it happened that he sits today in the privileged position of being one of a massive swarm of Jewish journalists on a continent that shuts out the Arabs from the profession. He and his colleagues sit there spewing Islamophobic propaganda without being challenged by someone who could offer an opposing view, oblivious of the history that brought them to this point.
Well then, here is what should come as news to that man and to those like him. While he was growing up and not watching the events of the day, his elders were being called obnoxious Jews by many others to which the elders responded that the name calling was a case of the tea calling the kettle black. They explained that the Jews were made obnoxious by the gentiles who left them with no choice but to be obnoxious and to act obnoxious.
And who were those gentiles? They were the ones who liberated the Jews from the concentration camps of the Nazis. The point that the elders were making was that the gentiles did not embrace the Jews as enthusiastically after the war as they did when they liberated them, and so the Jews turned obnoxious. The elders meant to say it was not the fault of the Jews that they turned obnoxious, and Landau seems to be saying this is no canard.
It may be true that the gentiles failed to embrace the Jews after the war but they did not spew Judeophobic acid week after week - relentlessly, mercilessly and in defiance of decency, professionalism and the value we call truth without someone being there to offer an opposing view, and yet the Jews turned obnoxious. By contrast, the Muslims are attacked culturally by a million media outlets, physically by the most lethal weapons ever devised, and they are killed by the tens of thousands every year … and what happens?
What happens is that a handful of youths who are deliberately cornered by the likes of Landau and never given a chance to come out of their predicament respond by committing not a huge amount of random violence as youngsters of every race and religion do all the time but by committing a minimum amount of violence designed specifically to tell society what the source of their discontent is and what solution they want to see implemented.
Given not a single chance to communicate the extent of the pain that is inflicted on them by the swarm of Zionists who control the media, Young Muslims use the only tool left at their disposal which is civil disobedience pushed to extreme. I know what these kids go through because even though I am Christian, I was mistaken for a Muslim 40 years ago and have been blacklisted ever since.
I was told point blank to write like they tell me to write which was to insult my race and to denigrate what they though was my religion or I shall stay on the blacklist until I do. I could have told them right there and then I was Christian, not Muslim and put an end to this savagery but I did not because I welcomed the chance to study what the acid of hate in the viscera of people like Landau does to them and to society. I tell you, folks, it’s ugly. It is just ugly.
To solve the problem of the obnoxious Jew, Landau’s elders offered the notion that once the Jews control the media, their discontent will abate, everything will get back to normal and they will cease to be obnoxious. But Landau and those like him are living proof that the more things change the more they remain the same.
Monday, October 1, 2007
Shadow Puppetry In The Jet Age
On September 6, 2007 something happened that was as significant as it was banal. On that day Israel played the meaningless game of sending jets over Syria to cause a sonic boom over the head of the inhabitants below. Israel had been encouraged to play this game for a long time by the excited Anglo-Saxon media which falls into a frenzied mode of speculation as to how the people below might have reacted to the noise, especially the President of the country whose palace was once buzzed by the American built Israeli warplanes.
Unfortunately for Israel and perhaps fortunately for her adoring Anglo media, something a little more than banal happened on that September day but still, nobody celebrated, at least not right away. To understand what this is all about, we must go back in memory and recall an event that took place one Spring day a long time ago.
In the latter years of the Nineteen Fifties, the United States of America was flying U-2 spy planes over the Soviet Union. The Americans flew unimpeded for some time because the Soviets had no means to challenge them. Quietly though, the Russians were developing new systems for their air defense, among these a surface-to-air missile called SA–2. Once this system was fully developed, the Soviets used it in 1960 to shoot down an American U-2 piloted by Gary Powers. The worldwide reaction was significant because everyone realized that the balance of power and the politics of the time were about to experience a profound change.
More recently and in a manner that is not too different from the historical event, the Russians have developed an air defense system which is capable of intercepting warplanes that were heretofore protected by advanced devices for stealth and evasion developed in America and given to Israel. The Russians sold their system to Syria and to Iran.
To make light of this sale, the Israelis tried to prove they can still fly over Syria unimpeded and sonic-boom the nation out of its wits. But things did not happen as planned because the Israelis were challenged by the Syrian pilots and by the newly acquired surface to air missiles. The Syrians had deployed sooner and more effectively than it was thought possible, something that caught the Israeli pilots by surprise. All that the latter could do was to engage their after-burners and flee the scene as fast as they could.
Pursued by the Syrian jets, the Israelis dropped the Air-to-Air missiles they were carrying to flee even faster. But the Syrians still caught up with them and so, the Israelis entered Turkey’s airspace where they discharged most of their fuel to lighten up the planes and pick up more speed. They had calculated that the Syrians will not pursue them into Turkey and they were correct. In the end they escaped but only by the skin of their teeth.
The Syrian Government mentioned the incident giving it the importance that it deserved which was very little. The other Arabs were given little to talk about so they talked little. The Turks complained in a manner consistent with international protocols. At first, the Israelis preferred not to talk about the matter but then changed their mind. As for the Americans, they remembered their history and they are to this day mulling over the significance of the incident, especially the possible effect on the threatening posture they took towards Iran.
But the story refused to die because we live in an era when stories never die quietly. People keep asking questions, even embarrassing ones until someone gives them an answer. It happened this time as well and so, the Zionist propaganda machine woke up its sleeper cells in the Anglo-Saxon world to put on a play of shadow puppetry.
The cells in places like the NRO and TVO were ordered to get into their own after-burner mode and do what they have to do. They obeyed and went on a spin offensive to spread the disinformation and prevent the truth from coming out and to tell a different tale. As in the shadow plays of olden times, every scrap of half truth was distorted and made to look different from reality. In the end, the complete narrative of the fictitious scenes told a tale to keep alive the fantasy that Israel is an important player on the World stage, which was the intent of the play.
To create a sense of excitement and compensate the Anglo media for the lack of speculation as to how the inhabitants below may have reacted to the noise, the spin doctors began by saying that the Israelis are usually talkative about these matters because they like to show the videos they take when they attack and destroy enemy targets but this time a mystery has developed. So, get excited all of you lovers of mystery because you’re in for a treat.
The doctors went on to explain: this time the Israelis kept mum which goes to prove that they are sitting on a secret bigger than the possible bragging rights contained in the videos. Come to think of it, neither Syria nor the other Arabs talked about the matter either. And all this is proof that Israel is sitting on something big, maybe something very big, maybe even very, very big. Get it? A big and exciting mystery, as big as Israel’s many accomplishments.
And the doctors of the Zionist Lobby kept on spinning: and if this were not enough, even the Americans said little or nothing about it. In fact, the only complaint came from the Turks whose airspace was violated which goes to prove that the Turks knew beforehand the Israelis were going to bomb Syria and they gave their tacit approval.
Even more significant – think of it as more mystifying - is the fact that no one knows whether the okay to fly over Turkey came from the government of Turkey or from the army of Turkey. This is significant because it proves that the Turkish army is on the side of Israel against its own Islamic Government which must now swallow its pride and accept the humiliation. Ain’t this indicative of the importance of Israel, or what!
And why not! It happens in America all the time that the Congress sides with Israel against its own President. So why can this not be duplicated in Turkey. Like America, Turkey is a friend of Israel and if you’re not going to humiliate yourself in the eyes of your own people, what are you good for pretending to be a friend of Israel?
Well, let’s get back down to Earth. It is said that you know the sun is about to set on the empire when the little man casts a big shadow. The little Zionist lobbyist is casting a big shadow in America and you ought to know that the empire is about to walk into the sunset.
Unlike the stage of shadow puppetry there is here no wall upon which to catch the shadow and make it entertaining. Instead, it is hoped that the empire will walk into the sunset without fanfare, without blazing glory or blazing anything. A whimper will do just fine because someone else is about to take center stage and perhaps manage the affairs of humanity a little more maturely. In fact, that someone has more experience dealing with human beings and knows how to navigate the seas of half-truths, little realities and much fantasies. After all, it is there where they invented shadow puppetry.
Unfortunately for Israel and perhaps fortunately for her adoring Anglo media, something a little more than banal happened on that September day but still, nobody celebrated, at least not right away. To understand what this is all about, we must go back in memory and recall an event that took place one Spring day a long time ago.
In the latter years of the Nineteen Fifties, the United States of America was flying U-2 spy planes over the Soviet Union. The Americans flew unimpeded for some time because the Soviets had no means to challenge them. Quietly though, the Russians were developing new systems for their air defense, among these a surface-to-air missile called SA–2. Once this system was fully developed, the Soviets used it in 1960 to shoot down an American U-2 piloted by Gary Powers. The worldwide reaction was significant because everyone realized that the balance of power and the politics of the time were about to experience a profound change.
More recently and in a manner that is not too different from the historical event, the Russians have developed an air defense system which is capable of intercepting warplanes that were heretofore protected by advanced devices for stealth and evasion developed in America and given to Israel. The Russians sold their system to Syria and to Iran.
To make light of this sale, the Israelis tried to prove they can still fly over Syria unimpeded and sonic-boom the nation out of its wits. But things did not happen as planned because the Israelis were challenged by the Syrian pilots and by the newly acquired surface to air missiles. The Syrians had deployed sooner and more effectively than it was thought possible, something that caught the Israeli pilots by surprise. All that the latter could do was to engage their after-burners and flee the scene as fast as they could.
Pursued by the Syrian jets, the Israelis dropped the Air-to-Air missiles they were carrying to flee even faster. But the Syrians still caught up with them and so, the Israelis entered Turkey’s airspace where they discharged most of their fuel to lighten up the planes and pick up more speed. They had calculated that the Syrians will not pursue them into Turkey and they were correct. In the end they escaped but only by the skin of their teeth.
The Syrian Government mentioned the incident giving it the importance that it deserved which was very little. The other Arabs were given little to talk about so they talked little. The Turks complained in a manner consistent with international protocols. At first, the Israelis preferred not to talk about the matter but then changed their mind. As for the Americans, they remembered their history and they are to this day mulling over the significance of the incident, especially the possible effect on the threatening posture they took towards Iran.
But the story refused to die because we live in an era when stories never die quietly. People keep asking questions, even embarrassing ones until someone gives them an answer. It happened this time as well and so, the Zionist propaganda machine woke up its sleeper cells in the Anglo-Saxon world to put on a play of shadow puppetry.
The cells in places like the NRO and TVO were ordered to get into their own after-burner mode and do what they have to do. They obeyed and went on a spin offensive to spread the disinformation and prevent the truth from coming out and to tell a different tale. As in the shadow plays of olden times, every scrap of half truth was distorted and made to look different from reality. In the end, the complete narrative of the fictitious scenes told a tale to keep alive the fantasy that Israel is an important player on the World stage, which was the intent of the play.
To create a sense of excitement and compensate the Anglo media for the lack of speculation as to how the inhabitants below may have reacted to the noise, the spin doctors began by saying that the Israelis are usually talkative about these matters because they like to show the videos they take when they attack and destroy enemy targets but this time a mystery has developed. So, get excited all of you lovers of mystery because you’re in for a treat.
The doctors went on to explain: this time the Israelis kept mum which goes to prove that they are sitting on a secret bigger than the possible bragging rights contained in the videos. Come to think of it, neither Syria nor the other Arabs talked about the matter either. And all this is proof that Israel is sitting on something big, maybe something very big, maybe even very, very big. Get it? A big and exciting mystery, as big as Israel’s many accomplishments.
And the doctors of the Zionist Lobby kept on spinning: and if this were not enough, even the Americans said little or nothing about it. In fact, the only complaint came from the Turks whose airspace was violated which goes to prove that the Turks knew beforehand the Israelis were going to bomb Syria and they gave their tacit approval.
Even more significant – think of it as more mystifying - is the fact that no one knows whether the okay to fly over Turkey came from the government of Turkey or from the army of Turkey. This is significant because it proves that the Turkish army is on the side of Israel against its own Islamic Government which must now swallow its pride and accept the humiliation. Ain’t this indicative of the importance of Israel, or what!
And why not! It happens in America all the time that the Congress sides with Israel against its own President. So why can this not be duplicated in Turkey. Like America, Turkey is a friend of Israel and if you’re not going to humiliate yourself in the eyes of your own people, what are you good for pretending to be a friend of Israel?
Well, let’s get back down to Earth. It is said that you know the sun is about to set on the empire when the little man casts a big shadow. The little Zionist lobbyist is casting a big shadow in America and you ought to know that the empire is about to walk into the sunset.
Unlike the stage of shadow puppetry there is here no wall upon which to catch the shadow and make it entertaining. Instead, it is hoped that the empire will walk into the sunset without fanfare, without blazing glory or blazing anything. A whimper will do just fine because someone else is about to take center stage and perhaps manage the affairs of humanity a little more maturely. In fact, that someone has more experience dealing with human beings and knows how to navigate the seas of half-truths, little realities and much fantasies. After all, it is there where they invented shadow puppetry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)