The decade of the Nineteen Sixties was one of war on many fronts for the American people. Parallel to the external war that was Vietnam, the various races were battling it internally as were the genders, the economic classes and the different ideological groups. Now that four decades have passed, we continue to see that the forces which have shaped history then shape it still today. So pivotal were those years, it is not surprising to see thousands of books and articles being written on the subject from a multitude of angles, and natural to think that thousands more will be written in the years to come from angles yet to be fathomed.
The interest I acquired regarding this part of history was shaped by what I had to endure living in Canada next door to the United States. Like everyone else I developed an angle from which I viewed the subject and the point of view through which I now express it. Also, Canada has served as the soft underbelly of the United States where, at times, ideas that were potentially controversial were discussed before being transferred to the American marketplace of ideas. Once there, they were adapted to the American condition, were tackled with energy and debated with vigor. For this reason, Canada was chosen by the Jewish Establishment to be the place where they perfected an art that has a most unique nature about it. Indeed, it was here in Canada that they perfected the art of making a country transform itself into the proverbial suicide bomber. To earn this distinction, a country had to develop the will to ruin itself in one form or another to advance the causes of Israel and the Jews. As strange as this may seem, the Jewish Establishment succeeded in psyching the Americans into a state where such a feat was made possible. It took years of spinning the daily events to make the Americans believe that their causes were those of Israel therefore their military was created to serve Israel. The tendency for jovial self immolation then followed naturally.
Those who missed the genesis of this drive at the dawn of the Nineteen Sixties when John Kennedy first proposed the transfer of warplanes to Israel could not have missed it when his brother, Robert Kennedy advocated the same thing less than a decade later. And this was the time when the force of the Jewish drive to transform America was beginning to make itself felt. The drive intensified in 1967 when Israel launched the 6 year war with a Pearl Harbor style blitz on the Egyptian defense installations. After the dust of this attack settled, it gradually became clearer by the day that Israel had dug a grave for itself in the Sinai and was getting buried deeper into it as the war of attrition was packing fury. Indeed, time was Israel’s enemy and the worldwide Jewish Establishment became convinced that absent a massive help from the outside, Israel will perish with a bang or a whimper or both as the rabbis used to warn it will happen. Six years later, the Egyptian counterpunch of 1973 showed how astute that observation was.
While the war of attrition was taking its toll on the Israelis in the Sinai so was the Vietnam War on the Americans in Asia. And the rabbis had no choice but to advocate the end of the Vietnam War, something they called for not to save American or Vietnamese lives but to free America’s military of the burden and to redeploy the boys and girls to serve the needs of Israel which the rabbis knew will only expand with time.
Fast forward to the current situation where America is embroiled in two wars in the Middle East and where voices are demanding that she be readied to move against Iran, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Lebanon and a few more, all of which loom large in Israel’s fantasy. Here we see the extent to which the rabbis have succeeded in molding a suicidal America, one that is prepared to die a thousand deaths to serve the causes of Israel and to magnify her glory. If Usma Bin Laden could count on his boys as much as the Jewish Establishment can count on the American institutions, he could become king of the Universe in the blink of an eye. The sad fact is that the US Congress would cause America to commit suicide for the sake of Israel and the Jewish causes more readily than a naïve boy would die for a Bin Laden cause. If this is a sample of America’s exceptionalism then the people of America should stop singing God Bless America because even He could not save her now let alone bless her. Instead, the Americans would do themselves a favor to learn anew how to whistle Dixie.
Just think what it would take to make a diabolic scheme as substantial as that succeed. You would have to work on all levels at the same time because you must blur every distinction that may exist between America and Israel. To do this, you fashion the principle that the two entities stand as one but stand apart from the rest of the world. You argue that the resources of each one complement the resources of the other; and when the two get together, they fill the needs of each other so well they attain self sufficiency and need no one else. You speak passionately about them being above everyone and stress the point that they have the moral obligation to mend everyone else’s deficiency. To justify all of that and to explain it in a manner that cannot be challenged, the rabbis have come up with the idea that the Jews were chosen by God and the Americans were an exceptional lot to begin with. Now, given all of this, I ask if it is too far fetched to imagine that someday everyone will be asked to sing: God bless Israel and save America too but only to protect Israel. If and when things get this far, will there be someone left to push back with the refrain: Look Away! Sail Away! But No Way! Canaan Land.
There are literally millions of examples to choose from that would illustrate these notions but the Wall Street Journal has a knack for concentrating a number of them in each edition so I choose the October 18, 2009 edition from where I pick two examples. The first is an article written by John Bolton under the title: “Israel, the U.S. and the Goldstone Report” and the subtitle: “Joining the U.N. Human Rights Council was a mistake Obama should correct.” Now, when it comes to giving someone like me what I look for, John Bolton has no rival because he has a superior ability to lay platinum eggs studded with diamonds like you won’t believe. Look how the following jewel, taken from his article, blurs the distinction between America and Israel and blends their interests as if they were one and the same entity:
“The Goldstone Report has important implications for America. In the U.N., Israel frequently serves as a surrogate target in lieu of the U.S., particularly concerning the use of military force pre-emptively or in self-defense. Accordingly, U.N. decisions on ostensibly Israel-specific issues can lay a predicate for subsequent action against, or efforts to constrain, the U.S. Mr. Goldstone's recommendation to convoke the International Criminal Court is like putting a loaded pistol to Israel's head—or, in the future, to America's … the Goldstone Report will merely be the beginning, next time perhaps with Washington as its unmistakable target.”
Need I say more on this point? I don’t think so but there is more to the article because the subtitle comes next and it carries within it plenty of juice. Here, Bolton tells Obama to correct the mistake that America made when she joined the Human Rights Council. But this is not the first time that Bolton has labored to “correct” a mistake. He did it when the world saw fit to equate zionism with racism so he labored to have the decision reversed. The thing is that he did so because he believed that zionism was not as bad as racism when people of good will everywhere knew that zionism was worse than racism, worse even than Nazi-like racism.
And here is this argument: Zionism being the supremacy of a race called for by God, it is an absolute that cannot be challenged by another race whose claim to supremacy could only be derived from earthly accomplishments which, sooner or later, will be surpassed by the accomplishments of another race. Thus, if racial supremacy is considered to be evil then zionism must be the most absolute of all evils, and to call it racism is to whitewash it. In effect then, while not realizing the consequences of what he was doing, John Bolton was doing the world a favor as he labored to get the decision reversed. John Bolton did something good despite himself because the zionist ideology must be labeled what it is: the wellspring from which gushes every evil inflicted on mankind. It is a continuous crime against humanity that shows no sign of mellowing … and this is a far cry from the simple racism it was thought to be.
Time now for the second article in the Wall Street Journal. It was written by Emanuele Ottolehghi and titled: “Rename the Streets for Nada”. This was the name of a young woman shot during a demonstration in Iran. The writer is suggesting that the government of Teheran was responsible for her death and that the world should exploit the tragedy to embarrass Iran. And how does he propose to do that? He wants the streets on which there is an Iranian embassy to be renamed Nada.
But there is a problem with this idea because it is a moral hazard that even a child would find too childish to toy with. If implemented by one party, the idea will give everyone the right to use it to their own end, something that will reduce the civility in diplomatic relations. In fact, Israel has an embassy in several countries, among them Arab and Muslim ones that view Israel’s behavior in Palestine as being far worse than anything the Iranian regime has done. What if the people in these countries decided to call the streets on which stands an Israeli embassy by the name of a Palestinian “martyr” murdered by the Israelis? What if every country in the world began to use this game as an instrument of dialogue or use it as a tool with which to exert pressure on other countries? The list of unanswered questions goes on.
Furthermore, this is not an original idea. It was suggested during the years when Anatoli Sharansky was jailed in the former Soviet Union that the street in Washington where stood the Soviet embassy be renamed Sharansky. The man in question lives in Israel now and he is advocating a form of ethnic cleansing which he says will advance the cause of human rights. I do not know if the suggestion to rename the street was implemented in Washington or anywhere else but I know that several places in New York were renamed Sharansky this or Sharansky that. Now I ask what will happen if someone powerful in New York became so riled by Sharansky’s inferior grasp of the concept of Human Rights, he or she decides to reverse the situation and rename those places for Palestinian martyrs? Will the Jewish organizations then bellyache the anti-Semitism refrain and demand a reversal of the reversal?
Of course, no one but a Jew would think up a scheme like the one suggested by Emanuele Ottolehghi and there is a reason why. It is that no one else would come up with such an idea and stop there without reflecting on the possible consequences. And the consequences in this case are that the Golden Rule will be triggered because people will want to respond in kind. Everyone on Planet Earth knows that when you give yourself a right to do something, you give that same right to everyone else. Everyone knows it, that is, except the Jew who believes he has a special relationship with God, one that exempts him from the Golden Rule. And this is where the journey to the next holocaust begins as it has begun again and again and again. Four thousand years of this kind of nonsense and they are still at it. When will they learn to say never again and mean it for once?