The Americans are fond of saying that their country is not at war with the Muslim Arabs, the Christian Arabs, Islam itself or anyone that has not declared war on them. And all indications are to the effect that this is a true statement. But the statement is true only in the sense that America is not at war with these people under American command. It can be demonstrated, however, that America is at war against all these people and against the Africans too under Jewish command.
When a factory producing pharmaceuticals is blown up in Sudan by an American cruise missile as ordered by an Israeli operative masquerading as an American national security adviser, America starts a war against the Arabs and the Africans. When the Iraqi people are shocked and awed into kingdom come by the hundreds of thousands with an attack that was pre-planned by Jews calling themselves children of Holocaust survivors, America continues its war against the Arabs. When America bankrolls Israel, arms it and protects it from the consequences of its criminal activities at the Security Council with the veto, America thumbs its nose at the Arabs, the Africans and the whole world. And the list of examples goes on endlessly.
Furthermore, these are only the hot wars inflicted on the individuals that they maim and murder. In reality, the range of methods utilized to wage war against the Arabs and the Muslims is much larger than those examples would suggest. The fact is that a hot war is always preceded by a propaganda war which is fought in a manner so insidious, it neither shocks nor awes the observers who lack the training to understand its significance. But when the hot war explodes at the end of the propaganda war, the pieces fall into place and the public begins to understand what it was being led into. And it has been the role of the Israeli agents and the Jewish organizations in America to manage the propaganda campaigns that led to each and every military intervention undertaken by that country in the Middle East.
An example in this vein is the cry that then Prime Minister of Israel, Yitzhak Shamir let out in his Yiddish accent two or three decades ago when he visited America and blurted out: “Zey know nossing about za damacracy.” This was the cry that launched America into a suicidal quest to turn the Arabs into client states of Israel, to go broke and to die in the sands of the Middle East under the guise of democratizing the Arabs and the Muslims. Shamir’s cry was picked up by Israel’s agents in the American Congress, the media, some of the institutions of higher learning and the septic tanks that masquerade as think tanks. And all these characters and institutions participated in the refrain that made America kill Arabs of the Christian and Muslim faiths to carry out the most absurd of missions as ordered by the Jewish gods of America. And this is but one example on a list that goes on endlessly.
One recent example to come to my attention showing how a propaganda war presages the hot war is an editorial published in the Washington Post on January 4, 2010 under the title: “Free to speak out” in Egypt. The editorial is part of the insidious war that Israel and the Jewish organizations are now waging against Egypt to get the American Congress all riled up and push for a hot war against that country. And this would only be the beginning because the intention is to lead to a wider war against the Arabs, the Muslims and the Africans who refuse to bow to Israel and worship the Jews in the manner that the American people were taught to worship them by the pastors of the televised ministries.
Let us analyze that editorial and see how evil works when it works insidiously. The editorial begins by citing a question posed by a student to the American ambassador in Cairo: “What is the U.S. position on democracy in Egypt?” to which the ambassador replied: “In my time in Egypt, I have noticed that many Egyptians are very free to speak out. The press debates so many things." These were the words of Ambassador Margaret Scobey who is fluent in classical Arabic and is making good progress mastering the Egyptian colloquial.
Needless to say that the editorial writers at the Washington Post did not like the answer of the ambassador, and so they undertook to set the record straight the way things are done in the Talmudic style. The writers told the good woman what she ought to have noticed which would have entailed that she reject what she actually noticed. Then, in a typically cowardly manner, these same characters hid behind the young to make another point. The method they used here was to speculate, which they did like this: “The assembled students must have wondered if Ms. Scobey was talking about some other country.” Obviously, the Post had no one in Cairo to ask the students what they were thinking but this did not deter its editors from speculating that the students were puzzled as to which country the ambassador meant.
This mentality makes me wonder if the Washington Post characters gave themselves the right to ascribe thoughts to the students as much as they gave themselves the right to tell the ambassador what she ought to have noticed just because they worked for the causes of the godly Jews. If this is the case, I have news for the Post: I knew a Jew who feared and hated this mentality because it led to the misery and horror that Jews have suffered throughout the ages. The man used to say that the road to hell is paved with good intentions but the road to the incinerator is paved with the grand illusions of the little ignoramuses.
The editors at the Post go on to cite a few things about Egypt that do not amount to a hill of beans. For example, it happens everywhere that politicians would launch a lawsuit from time to time against the people who defame them. Even the royal family in Britain is forced to resort to this method so as to throw the chill factor at the sickly journalistic habit when things go too far. It happens in Egypt also that politicians launch a law suit at times against the practitioners of yellow journalism who defame them. And like everywhere else, the courts in Egypt usually rule in favor of the defendants. But to the editors of the Washington Post, the very fact that the suits are launched in Egypt is a sign that freedom of speech is curtailed there.
Sitting in their chairs in Washington DC, the people at the Post go on to mention an Egyptian dissident who is esteemed by them more than he is by the Egyptians who may have a cause in Egypt. For example, there is a problem in Egypt which exists everywhere else on the planet; it is called regional disparity. It is that when a country progresses, not all the regions progress at the same pace. The people who live in the regions that lag behind become dissatisfied with their situation and take their concerns to the politicians. If they fail to get satisfaction soon enough, they draw attention to their demands by going public.
It so happens that in Egypt parts of the South and parts of the Sinai have not developed as fast as the rest of the country. The people who live in those places organized themselves to make their concerns known to the government, the press and the rest of the country. All the while, to build a base for himself, the dissident mentioned by the Post tried to take up the cause of one group and then the other. When he got in touch with the organizing committees, the people welcomed him with open arms and invited him to speak at their gathering. Each time, however, something funny happened to the man. The moment he opened his mouth to discuss the cause he came to champion, the people judged him unfit to take it up or articulate it. And so, they politely told him what amounts to: “Hit the road Jack and don’t you come back no more.” These people must have been familiar with the hit songs of Ray Charles.
So, guess where the road took the guy after that. It took him somewhere in Europe where he associated himself with the likes of Anatoli Sharansky of Israel and George W. Bush of America to try and liberate Egypt the way that the Washington Post and the Jewish organizations want to liberate the Arabs, the Muslims and the parts of the world that do not yet worship the Jews the way they are worshiped in America. And to think that all these characters want to liberate the Egypt that has survived for 7000 years and has seen as many idiots come and go as there is sand in the Sahara Desert and defective neurons running the editorial board of the Washington post! This is so amazing I can only say: Get off your grand illusions, guys, and find something else to do because you were never meant to be in this line of work.
But what did the Bush people do after their man met with the Egyptian dissident? Well, we do not have to go too far to find the answer because it is right there in the infamous editorial we are discussing. This is how the writers of the pitiful rag put it: “…the Bush administration … pressed Arab governments for democratic change, and it made some headway in Egypt before retreating in its final years.” No reason was given as to why the Bush people retreated but I have news for the Post: Bush listened to the Jewish organizations and rushed to obey their command by sending people to Egypt to fix something that ain’t broke. When the people realized how idiotic their mission was, they reached the same conclusion that Ambassador Scobey did and they retreated, leaving it to the running dogs of Israel to bark their sorrows and shed their tears. By the way, running dogs is a holdover expression dating back to the cold war years and before.
The conclusion to draw here is not that there is a problem in Egypt because the country is governed by a sturdy, steady hand Egyptian but that there is a problem in America because the country is governed by weak traitors working for a foreign power that does not even amount to a hill of beans. And there is another serious point to be made here which is the following:
The Americans say they have the best system of governance because their founding fathers gave them the best constitution that the world has ever seen. And they assert that the glory of this constitution resides in the fact that it was instrumental in setting up a system of checks and balances which forbids anyone from abusing the political powers vested in them. Thus, bearing in mind that the United Nation is a super-structure that may someday seek to dominate the sovereign nations of the world including their country, the Americans resent that body and wish to see it disappear.
Indeed, the Americans point to the balancing act that goes on inside their own country which the Supreme Court is asked to deal with almost every year. The Court looks into the competing rights of the sovereign states as they regularly come into collision with the powers conferred on the federal government. And this preoccupation with the right to govern and to dominate the lives of people is what explains the antipathy that the Americans have for the European Union which they view as another super-structure already dominating the local jurisdictions of Europe. The Americans are just horrified by the thought that their country may someday be governed in the style of Europe.
But like they say, the proof is in the pudding. If it is true that an American style constitution is the best thing a country can have to defend it against domestic and foreign abusers of power, how come the Jewish organizations have in two generations succeeded in setting up a super-structure that has subjugated, indeed enslaved the American Congress, the Administration, the press, many of the institutions of higher learning and the two main political parties? Where have the aspiring liberators of the world gone when their own country is kept in shackles by a few Jewish organizations and a handful of individuals? Are the liberators so busy liberating the world that they have no time to liberate their own country? Or is it that they are using the pretext of liberation to bring the world to worship the Jews the way they do in America? Whose side are these liberators on, anyway?
Until the editors of the Washington Post can answer these questions without pouring out the usual nonsense, they should be reminded of one more thing. In view of the fact that America has not yet been around for 250 years while Egypt has been for 7000, they must not try to teach daddy how to make babies even if the godly Jews whisper in their ear that they have this obligation.