Protect The World To feed It Well

Mr. Timothy Geithner who is U.S. Secretary of the Treasury and Mr. Bill Gates who is co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation jointly wrote an article under the title “A New Initiative to Feed the World” in the Wall Street Journal on April 21, 2010. They announced the launch on that day of a program called Global Agriculture and Food Security Program to help farmers in low-income countries grow more food. As of now, the program is a partnership between the United States, Canada, Spain, South Korea and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Placed in the hands of the World bank to host and to distribute its fund, the Program was proposed last year by the G-8 and G-20 nations. At the time, several wealthy nations pledged at least 22 billion dollars over the next three years for the fund, and the authors of the article took the opportunity to remind these nations of their pledges inviting them to begin making good on their promises.

The most Important feature of the program in my view is that it will partner with countries that have developed sound agricultural plans and that already use their own resources to invest in the most effective ways to boost crop production. Indeed, not too far from the African nations whose agriculture needs to be developed, there exist countries that have developed the best agricultural practices in the world and have thus achieved higher yields per acre than even India or China whose achievements the authors of the article are lauding. I am referring to the North African nations whose desert conditions have compelled them to make the most of the little arable land and the minimal water resources they have. For example, it was revealed not long ago that the yield in wheat per acre is almost 3 times as high in Egypt as it is in India. Thus, to partner with the North African countries and to make use of their helping hand to develop agriculture in the sub-Sahara is the best move that the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program can make.

Foremost among these North African nations is Egypt which has already begun to cooperate with many sub-Saharan countries to jointly develop some of the millions of acres that wait being turned into lush green fields. Not only that, but the Egyptians who have good relations and a myriad of cooperation agreements with their oil rich Arab neighbors have enlisted those neighbors into the effort. The latter are now contributing some of their surplus capital to develop not only sub-Saharan Africa but to further develop North Africa as well, including Egypt where private Emirati, Kuwaiti and Saudi capitals are at work in the massive Toshka project – dubbed the New Valley -- where the development of infrastructure, small, medium and large farms as well as other agribusinesses are in full swing turning the yellow sands of the Western Egyptian desert into a valley as green as the Nile Valley.

These efforts closely parallel what is envisaged for the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program where, as reported by the authors of the article, a private-sector account will be set up to achieve the same sort of success. And this is where I have views of my own to complement what the authors have articulated. But before I get into the details of what I would like to see happen, let me explain what I believe are the essential ingredients to making an endeavor such as this succeed not only initially but for the long run too.

For any project to start and to survive in Africa, three conditions must be fulfilled. First, there must be the capital. Second, there must be the know how. Third, there must be the lack of interference from destructive forces coming onto the scene from the outside. This last point is the most important of the three because if you have the first two and have interference from the outside, the capital will disappear and the know how will prove useless in the long run. Indeed, the scenario that played itself most often in sub-Saharan Africa has been that of something starting with great promise only to be sabotaged by outside forces. Billions of dollars were poured into that Continent over the decades but with time, the money ended up in the pocket of the outsiders who came to sabotage and plunder. And the African people were left with nothing but the legacy of that interference, a legacy of civil and cross border wars that ravaged the African homelands.

But how does interference happen? The answer is that interference never happens in an honest or open way. On the contrary, the evildoers who want to deceive other peoples and other nations always adopt the most devious of ways. In fact, the methods utilized to interfere in the progress of nations is becoming so sophisticated that the only way to detect them and stop them is to marshal the resources of the powerful nations because only they have the wherewithal to uncover the tricks of the well financed and well equipped evildoers; only they can put an end to them.

Contrast this reality with the aim of the Program and you will see the need to protect it as you implement it. Mr. Geithner and Mr. Gates say this: “The fund will provide … recipient countries and civil organizations, as well as donors, with a strong voice in determining where investments are made.” And this is where I see the problems originate because while the openness will be necessary, it will invite the evildoers to enter its wide open doors and do their destructive deeds unhindered. Consequently, what is needed is first, the awareness that danger will be lurking right from the start and second, strong measures to detect and fight the evildoers will need to be in place also at the start.

And while the methods used by evil are insidious, their aftermath is anything but hidden. Indeed, the modern history of Egypt has been fashioned by the struggle to combat such evil. The long held dream of the country having been to construct a dam at Aswan to save the waters of the Nile that used to flood it for a few weeks then disappear the rest of the year leaving the fields in near drought condition, the Egyptians asked the World Bank for a loan to finance the construction of the dam. America said no because someone -- most likely a little nobody – whispered in the ear of its Secretary of State that money was fungible and that the loan will only serve to free other monies which can be used to do bad things. Well, Egypt had no sizable source of money except the Suez Canal which was owned by foreign interests. And so the Egyptians nationalized the canal, a move that prompted the two former colonial powers, France and Britain to attack in an effort to retake it. And the rest is history, as they say.

The Egyptians started to build the dam and this prompted the evildoers and their allies in the media to pour rivers of ink to rival the flow of the Nile, portraying the project as a failure and predicting that it will crack and crumble before it is completed or that, if completed, will cause untold damage to Egypt, to the Mediterranean Sea and eventually to the whole world. This went on and on and on not for a year or two, not even for a decade or two but for fifty long years. And some people even now still see fit to denigrate the project while some others such as the foreign minister of Israel, Avigdor Lieberman express the wish to bomb the dam and flood the country causing damage to Egypt equal to the biblical plagues of antiquity.

Then Libya started its own project to make use of the waters sitting under the desert, and guess what happened! Yes, the same thing as with the Aswan dam happened here too. Some Anglophone prestigious magazines even went as far as to call the project the madman lake playing on its real name, the man-made lake. And while this sort of childish behavior scared potential Western interests from participating in the billions of dollars worth of businesses that produced goods and services for the project, the Oriental companies feasted on them such as the Koreans who got the lion's share of the deals. Not only that but these companies established such a good name for themselves and for their countrymen in the Arab world that they helped other Korean companies win billions of dollars worth of deals in the oil rich Gulf states where the construction of nuclear power stations is a nascent preoccupation with a potential for growth that goes beyond anything you can imagine.

And now that Egypt, together with the other Arab countries and several Asian companies are beginning to work in Africa doing what the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program hopes to do, you have the Western media such as the BBC, PBS, CNN and several other networks talk about these projects in terms so negative, you cannot escape the conclusion that they are paving the way for evil to get in there and feed once again on the money donated by the rich which they will wash down with the blood of the Africans who will listen to them. These ill-advised Africans will fight other Africans to please the smiling reporters from the BBC, PBS, CNN and the other networks who will suggest to them, as they always do, that Black Africa was done in by the Arabs and the Asians. And the simple people of Africa will be motivated to antagonize the hand that came to help them rather than work with it, learn from it and take over when they are ready. And when the blood will start to flow on the African streets and start to flood the African fields, the producers at the headquarters of the BBC, PBS, CNN and the other networks will smile, rub their hands and sit to drink a tall glass of Bloody Mary to celebrate a job bloody well done.

So then what can the US government and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation do to ascertain fending off that evil before it grows roots inside the Program they have in mind for Africa? Well, part of what these two are saying in the article is this: “The fund ... will provide recipient countries and civil organizations, as well as donors, with a strong voice in determining where investments are made.” This is well and good except for one thing, the way that evil infiltrates a country it wants to destroy is through the foreign civil organizations that team up with the local civil societies. Evil infects the organs of the body it has infiltrated and metastasizes till it can debilitate the entire body like terminal cancer. This is how the religious nuts, the pedophiles and the Liebermans of this world have entered Africa on previous occasions and this is how they will do it again. They did it as easily as if they had walked through wide open and welcoming doors that did not suspected them. And once inside, these characters gained access to all that they needed to have to sabotage everything in sight. This is what they did with every project in Africa that started with great promise and ended in disaster.

Consequently, America, the Foundation and the other participating nations must put in place an effective system of intelligence to monitor the activities of the individuals who will join the Project to make sure that they are not engaged in activities beyond what the job requires them to do. As for the private organizations, anyone that volunteers to work in Africa must first register with any of the governments involved or with the Foundation. They will fill out an application revealing the names of the individuals they will send to Africa stating in detail what each of these people will do when, where and why. Any deviation from the stated purpose will disqualify not only the individuals but the organizations that sponsor them, and will cause them to be thrown out of Africa. This is what is asked of the United Nations peace keeping forces, and nothing less should be asked of those organizations. As for any freelancer who would go to Africa and pretend to work for the Program or who sets up a parallel operation locally, he or she should be viewed with suspicion and thus be monitored by the system of intelligence described above.

The Administration and the Foundation should also go to that useless thing they call the American Congress and ask it to do something good for a change. That is, to pass a law which will make it a criminal offense if not a crime against humanity for any unregistered foreign civil organization or individual to even try to contact an African civil organization under any pretense. Such act shall be considered an attempt to create the conditions that will lead to the eruption of a civil war or a cross-border one on the Continent. The culprits will be hunted down and brought to justice where the book will be thrown at them whether or not they managed to establish contact with an African organization or succeeded in creating a disturbance. The mere attempt to do any of this will be the crime, and the characters involved will pay dearly for that.

To conclude, the only way to succeed in Africa is to protect the Continent as you build it because evil is too hungry, too alert and too much out of other options, having been kicked out of Asia, Eastern Europe and Latin America already. And once you have the protective system in place, the rest will be as easy as planting a field in the Spring and harvesting it in the Fall.

Good luck to you all.

The Engine Of Nasty Surprises

It is one thing to be surprised because you neglected to follow the world events then got a dose of reality, and another to be surprised by something that turns out to be the opposite of what you were led to believe. The first is a bad surprise for which you may blame yourself, and the second can be so nasty you may not want to forgive those who misled you. Take for example the study conducted by the School of Public Health at the University of Washington in Seattle, a study that was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Basically what the study says is that maternal mortality has substantially decreased in China, Egypt, Ecuador, and Bolivia but has increased in the United States, Canada and Denmark. The study also found that six countries: India, Nigeria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, and the Congo accounted for more than half of all maternal deaths in the world.

The authors of the study were so excited about the discovery that the senior author Christopher Murray, MD said: "These findings are very encouraging and quite surprising … There are still too many mothers dying worldwide, but … finding out why a country such as Egypt has had such enormous success in driving down the number of women dying from pregnancy-related causes could enable us to export that success to countries that have been lagging behind."

Before this discovery, people were surprised by another one made at the World Health Organization where they conducted a study on nutrition. They found that the inhabitants of two islands: American Samoa and Kiribati ranked first and second on the list of the people who ate the most food in the world, with 93.5% and 81.5% respectively being considered overweight or obese. The Americans, the Germans and the Egyptians were almost tied in third place with 66.7%, 66.5% and 66% respectively being considered overweight or obese. It was the discovery about Egypt that surprised most observers who could not explain it as they had fallen victims of a lie propagated by the engine of nasty surprises known as contemporary media.

To be given a picture of a world that is different from the truth is evidence of a more serious malaise plaguing America and some parts of the world today. Sooner or later the Americans will discover that there is more to the story because they neglected to learn about the developments that led them to being challenged economically by opponents they underestimated; and they will blame themselves for this shortcoming. But they will also discover to their bitter surprise that they had the key to altering the situation but were made to give it up by the people in the media they paid to tell them the truth but told them lies. And this will be the surprise that will embitter the average Americans so much, they will never want to forgive those who misled them.

At this time, the Americans are making two mistakes. The first is that they consider relative decline to be more benign than absolute decline. They cannot get their heads around the idea that when in a race what counts is not the absolute distance you or your challenger maintains with regard to the starting point but what your position is relative to that of your challenger. Thus, if America stagnates or advances slowly while Asia advances at a high speed, America declines. The second mistake is that they believe Asia’s advancements are all due to Asia’s efforts, giving little credence to the notion that they are misled by the Jewish organizations now running that notorious contemporary media which keeps on sucking the life out of America to spent it on nurturing their Zionist dreams.

What the Americans will discover when they begin to analyze what is happening to them is that their economic decline began in the year 1973 when, to retake the Sinai, Egypt launched the offensive it warned it will launch if Israel did not vacate the territory it invaded. Instead of stepping aside and letting things happen -- especially in view of the fact that the Egyptians said they had no intention of advancing into Israel proper -- the Americans participated in the Israeli war effort by re-supplying the Jewish state with weapons sent directly into the Sinai as the war raged, and by shooting at Egyptian targets to protect their supply lines. The response of the Arab nations, Egypt’s allies, was to deny the Americans the oil that fueled their war machine, now placed in the service of Israel, the self-declared enemy of all Arabs. This came to be known as the Arab oil embargo which, together with the subsequent rise in the price of oil broke the back of America’s industrial might and propelled Japan and the Asian nations into the lead as they were already producing the smaller and fuel efficient cars. Given the state of science and technology at the time, to have a healthy auto industry meant to have a healthy overall industrial economy, the reality that triggered America’s decline and Asia’s rise.

At the time, the Americans were buying the Israel-Jewish-Zionist argument that Israel and the Jews were so magnificent, it was a good thing to emasculate yourself to make them look potent. Thus, with one US congress after another acting like an assembly of low life weird idiots, the Americans emasculated themselves in an attempt to fool the world into believing that Israel and the Jews were magnificent things and that everybody should bow to them. The world did not respond to this call because it never responds to the call of traitors. What happened instead was that every congress after that believed in their own lies and they alone bowed to the Israeli-Jewish-Zionist demand by launching a never ending campaign to cut off slice after slice out of Uncle Sam’s testicles to please their master, the Jewish lobby.

Things have come full circle again and the Jewish lobby is now rerunning the old refrain but with a new ring to it. It is telling the new crop of American leaders that Israel and the Jews are so magnificent, America cannot do without them as to the development of its high-tech industries, the advancement of its financial industries, the organization of its governance set-up, the modernization of its military-industrial complex, the improvement of its agricultural and food processing industries and so on and so forth. In return, the lobbyists want America to continue to cut off slices of what is left of Uncle Sam’s testicles so as to endlessly promote the glory of Israel.

Take for example Tom Friedman’s article “Just Doing It” in the April 17, 2010 issue of the New York Times. He starts by reminding the readers of the old saying: As General Motors goes, so goes America -- and he goes on to say: “Thank goodness that is no longer true … my new motto is: As EndoStim goes, so goes America.” But what is this EndoStim? Well, let’s hear it from Friedman himself: “It’s a little start-up … company developing a … medical device. I have no idea if the product will succeed in the marketplace. EndoStim was inspired by Cuban and Indian immigrants to America. Its prototype is being manufactured in Uruguay, with the help of Israeli engineers.” And that’s the whole point of the article; to mention the help of Israeli engineers whether or not that help was substantial or was relevant at all.

Yet, for this alone, Tom Friedman says good riddance to General Motors and hello to a company whose product he admits he has no idea if it will or will not succeed in the marketplace. But it’s okay for America to go the way of this company (no matter what that way will turn out to be) because Israeli engineers are involved with it. Indeed, the worst that can happen is that America will go down a Jewish toilet which, come to think of it, is not an unusual place for America to be in given that it lives as it does with a Congress that stinks so horribly already. But seriously, why is the Jewish lobby doing this to America?

We search for the answer to that question in Friedman’s article and find that he says this: “Where innovation is sparked and capital is raised still matter.” And he quotes someone named Hogg who explains it this way: “In the aftermath of the banking crisis, access to public markets is off-limits to start-ups … [which now must be] much leaner, much more capital-efficient, much smarter in accessing worldwide talent and quicker to market in order to do more with less.” So then, how does it all come together for Israel? This is how it happened on this occasion, says Friedman: “Two Israelis … joined a Seattle-based engineering team led by an Australian … A company in Uruguay … is building the prototype … This kind of very lean start-up where the principals … access the best expertise and low-cost, high-quality manufacturing anywhere, is the latest in venture investing.”

Hidden in this scenario is a lesson to make future adventures work even better for Israel. But first, the Jewish organizations had to change one perception; they had to fuse the image of Israel with that of America so as to confuse the two in the eyes of the world. This way, the Israelis who take part in such ventures will not only help move things along but will get to own them as well on account on them being thought of as Americans. This done, what is left to do is to work on changing another perception. The Jewish organizations will have to give Africa and the Middle East a bad image in the eyes of the Americans by painting those regions as backward and hopeless places where no American should go alone without an Israeli taking them there by the hand. This way, the Middle East and Africa, which are the nearest places to Israel where low-cost and high-quality manufacturing already exist, will come under exclusive Israeli control and not under American control or even a shared one.

But how do you pull a trick like this in practice? To explain, I must recount an incident that came to my attention only lately. An Indian company called Jaipan decided to enter into a joint venture with an Egyptian company to manufacture a few items in Egypt for distribution in all of Africa. One of those items happened to be the pressure cooker. The local newspapers and the audio-visual media reported the news like ordinary civilized human beings report the news everywhere in the world everyday. But things fell into the proverbial Jewish toilet when it came to an interview conducted by CNBC-TV18. The Channel interviewed a big shot from Jaipan whose first words out of the mouth were to the effect that Egypt was a poor country. And because he refrained from throwing any more insults at Egypt during the rest of the interview, he was pressed to clarify a few things at the end of it to be reminded of his obligation. So he blurted out that they still do not have pressure cookers in Egypt.

This was not the first time I was informed that people in Asia, especially India, were told before being interviewed by the English media not to say something good about the Arabs, especially Egypt if they want to continue to appear on this network. I wrote about this bizarre manifestation previously in conjunction with America’s PBS network where denigrating the Arabs was and still is the obligatory thing to do. Some English reporters and producers across the globe even go as far as to urge the interviewees to say something bitingly denigrating, which seems to have been the case with the Jaipan spokesman talking to CNBC-TV18.

Now, having lived in sub-Saharan Africa in the late nineteen forties and early fifties, the pressure cooker played a role in the daily life of our family. We cooked either with coal or kerosene which were slow and inefficient methods. To cook faster while making better use of the available energy, we used the pressure cooker. When the family decided to go back to Egypt, we pondered if we should take the pressure cooker with us. Lucky for my parents who wanted to take only what was necessary but were unsure about the pressure cooker, we met someone who had just come from Egypt. He told my parents that in Egypt most people were using electric or butane stoves having done away with the pressure cooker years earlier.

Given that the planet is now running out of energy, I gather from the Jaipan interview that the pressure cooker, which is already in Asia, is slated to make a comeback in the Middle East and Africa if not Europe and the Americas too. Thus, the correct thing for that man to have said was not that they still do not have pressure cookers in Egypt but that they had them, they did away with them decades ago and they are about to have them again. As for Egypt being poor, that man better hurry up and help raise the standard of living in India before someone notices that India is still so much poorer than Egypt, the maternal mortality rate and the state of nutrition in the two countries stand at the extremes of the totem pole with Egypt being near the top and India near the bottom.

But how does that situation affect America? Well, the reason why there are business channels such as CNBC is to give potential investors an accurate picture of what is going on in a specific region of the globe which is what many people in the English speaking world rely on for first impression. By contrast, the Asians and a few others in the fast developing countries send teams of specialists and of professionals in the relevant fields to scout those places where they get an accurate picture of the situation on the ground. When they see the right opportunity, they make the deal on the spot and start the work. This puts the Americans at a disadvantage and when, on top of this, you have the Jewish organizations distort reality in the eyes of potential partners by infesting and manipulating such networks as PBS and CNBC from the inside, America forfeits the race to others and languishes far behind. But do not be sad because it is all done for the glory of Israel, says the contemporary media.

And there is here an irony so poignant, it blows your mind. It is that CNBC is owned by GE which is in the business of making power generation equipment. All the while, the Middle East and Africa have embarked on the construction of power generation projects worth a trillion dollars over the next ten or fifteen years. Yet, all what America's CNBC can do is send to the region a young cheerleader who gets excited about car races, horse races and camel races. She reports on these events and on women in veil, on petty corruption, on insignificant acts of piracy and the like. But not a word is said about the stunning growth in all sorts of industries, especially power generation, that these places are experiencing.

You then discover that the whole asinine package was put together, organized and produced by the hate-the-Arab division of the World Jewish Congress in collaboration with Israel's office of cheap propaganda. And you wonder: How much more of Uncle Sam's testicles are they going to slice off? And you want to scream: They gotta be kiddin' at CNBC!

No Credibility Wall Street Journal

If journalism were a wall, the Wall Street Journal would be the obscene graffiti staining it, and what the Journal has displayed during the first full week of the month of April this year makes this point more clearly than anything it published in the recent past. On April 6, the paper published a piece by Robert Bate under the title “Water Security in the Promised Land”. The next day it published a piece by Mia Farrow under the title “Sudan's Sham Election Has U.S. Support”. And the day after that it published a piece by Dorothy Rabinowitz under the title “What’s Not Happening to American Muslims”. And what all three articles have in common is that they were deliberately designed to distort reality to such an extent as to make the useless look useful and the good look bad.

The piece by Robert Bate is without a doubt an attempt to attenuate the stinging reality brought to light by Don Belt who demonstrated in the April issue of National Geographic the demonic character of the Israelis who use American weapons to steal Palestinian water then sell some of that water back to the Palestinians at exorbitant prices. Robert Bate accomplishes his satanic task by applying the lessons taught in the Talmud in that he begins by telling the American readers the Jews are better than them and better than everyone else on the planet. Here are the words as he wrote them in the Wall Street Journal: “Israel's lessons in combating water problems should prove useful in other arid locations, including the rest of the Middle East and the western United States.”

But Israel has a water problem which is what compelled him to write the article in the first place. So then, how does the Talmud say you get out of this apparent contradiction? Well, you do it this way: “Like nearly every country in the world, the farm lobby is strong in Israel”. As you can see, he blames the problem on politics which he says is a common occurrence plaguing the whole world. But he quickly goes on to explain that the problem is not as bad in Israel as anywhere else because the Jews are better than everyone else, remember? And here is the proof: “Israel's agricultural favoritism is less egregious than in other countries. Take the US where water … is squandered … Israeli farmers generally deploy the least wasteful irrigation techniques … I saw [in Israel] only one irrigation system which appeared to be even slightly wasteful.” There you are, folks, another proof as to who are the superior ones in the world. Close the books on this one and never again doubt that the Jews are head and shoulder above humanity, including the Americans.

Well then, you expect Robert Bate to recommend that politics be taken out of water management in Israel, right? No, says he because Israel's security hurdles justify political control over the water. And this, he goes on to say: “…inevitably means waste. Also, Israel's huge exports of citrus fruits … ships valuable water out of the country for a modest return to a politically favored group.” He calls huge Israel’s export of citrus fruits? This guy is badly misinformed or he is one heck of a bull you know what. And what about that other word he used: waste? Did he not say previously that there was no wasted water in Israel but now says the waste is inevitable? This guy is all screwed up in the head as you can see. And you’re telling me he was advising other nations about the use of water? What happened to this world; has everyone gone mad?

Yet, all of that, according to this screwed up guy means that the: “Israelis are skilled both in technology and governance”. But then he adds this: “If Israel's authorities care to look further afield -- to Chile and Australia, for instance -- they will find models for successful and popular water allocation … [and] the rest of the world can certainly learn from Israel.”

That’s it folks; I give up on this guy and the Wall Street Journal because I cannot take it anymore. Stop the planet and get these two off it or I get off. Until then I rest my case on this piece of journalistic graffiti and move on to the Mia Farrow piece.

Writing 4 days before the beginning of the election in Sudan she says this: “In Khartoum this past weekend, U.S. Envoy to Sudan Scott Gration expressed his confidence that the April 11 elections in that country … will be as free and fair as possible … [but] No one in Sudan believes the elections will be anything approaching free or fair.” So there you have it, dear reader, she begins by saying that the US envoy in Sudan is no one, meaning he is a nobody. And she claims to know what everyone else in Sudan believes. She is one heck of a mind reader, you see.

She reports on the speculation done by two characters (more about them in a moment) as to why the election in Sudan will not be free or fair and she quickly gets into what she is really after which is to try and motivate President Barack Obama. She reminds him of what he said about Darfur when he was a senator and later a candidate for the presidency of the United States. She goes on to say that based on his words, the Darfuris hoped and believed that he will appoint an envoy who would be an honest broker but that Mr. Gration turned out to be “spectacularly” naïve. Maybe she conducted a poll in Darfur but she is not telling us.

She also mentions former President Carter who is there to observe the elections with his team as he has done on many occasions in the past, and she quotes him as saying before the election that the process was “at risk on multiple fronts.” Well, the election has come and gone and nothing out of the ordinary has happened. We may, in fact, paraphrase Desiderata to describe what has transpired by saying that the universe has unfolded as it should. And Mr. Carter who was concerned before the election expressed during and after it that things were as ordinary as they can be. As for President Obama who expressed his views forcefully before he was in government, has expressed through the government he now heads that there were no serious breaches to what constitutes a normal election.

Should this be the end of the story? No it should not and the following quotes from the two speculators as reported in Mia Farrow’s article give the chilling reasons why we must not stop here: “…the Save Darfur Coalition is urging the U.S. and the international community not to legitimize Sudan's presidential election … says Robert Lawrence, the Coalition's director of policy: The last thing WE WANT (emphasis mine) is for the results to legitimize the rule of President al-Bashir." This shows how personal the fight has become to this speculator. As to the other speculator, Mia Farrow says this: “The Sudanese elections will move forward with what the International Crisis Group has labeled catastrophic consequences … [in Darfur] warns EJ Hogendoorn, the Crisis Group's Horn of Africa project director … many will look to rebel groups to fight…” This then is their aim; they want to see the fight resume. Motivated by the most evil of sentiments, these people started the fight; they incited the various factions in Sudan, they armed them and promised them power and riches at the end of the day. But now that the fight has stopped and the reconstruction has begun, they want the fight to resume and to go on for ever. But we must never let them realize their evil dreams.

And talking about President al-Bashir, Mia Farrow adds her own thoughts: “Following this Sunday's election, there is little doubt as to who will be the president of Sudan … His regime must not be granted the legitimacy he craves.” She too has made the fight a personal one. Well, no sane person doubts what the President of Sudan craves. He craves to develop a country in Africa that the sexual predators and the looters from Europe and America masquerading as latter day Tarzans want to see fail. In the old days, such characters craved the gold and the other treasures they saw in the lands of simple people. They went in with the cross and the musket to kill, conquer and loot those places. Nowadays, they go in with the cross of the televised church, a Star of David fashioned inside secret organizations and the penis of the pedophiles. They distribute the guns among the local gangs who fight each other while they conquer, loot and satisfy their weird sexual cravings as we saw them do in Thailand, Sri Lanka, Chad, Haiti and Uganda where the Lord’s Resistance Army shares in their satanic pleasures.

And what does Mia Farrow get out of all this? Well, she never raised an eyebrow about the activities of the Lord’s Resistance Army whose members murder, plunder and rape women and children but she gets apoplectic about Darfur now that peace has broken out by the signing of treaties with the central government and Chad, and now that the satellites circling the Earth have discovered water under its desert thus giving the Darfuris a new lease on life with African dignity. This stance is so perplexing that there can only be one explanation: Mia Farrow is an aging actress who is worried about finding a male to satisfy her desires in the years to come. Unlike Elizabeth Taylor who can, at any age, charm a virile male to perform the functions of a sex machine, Mia Farrow knows she could not charm a dog to even look at her. And so, she reckons that if she helps those Tarzan impersonators satisfy their deviant cravings in Africa, one of them will return the favor and answer the phone when she calls to have a romantic evening.

We must never let these creatures have it their way in Africa but must protect the Continent from the sick and the weird who go there to do what they cannot do here.

Let us now look at the piece by Dorothy Rabinowitz who is a member of the Wall Street Journal's editorial board. She says she is not surprised that Hollywood is perpetuating the myth of Muslim victimization and she laments that this trend encourages Americans to view themselves as oppressors and racists. And to justify what she is advocating -- however slyly she does it -- she takes cover in what has come to be known as the Alan Dershowitz doctrine. It is the idea that Israel (or in this case American Jews) can inflict on the Palestinians (or in this case Muslims of all races) an act of terror that someone has inflicted previously on someone else. This is how Rabinowitz puts it: “Ask the members of religious and racial minorities who served, say, in World War II, when it wasn't unusual to hear slurs like kike and such hurled at them.” Is this Jewish woman saying without realizing it that the Jews were not victimized then and that their current complaints are bogus?

She also says this: “Ask black Americans who had the incomparably worse experience of serving in a racially segregated military, where they were … made witness … to the sight of German POWs held in the U.S. eating in restaurants barred to black Americans in uniform … Still, there were no instances of those enduring this treatment undertaking mass murder of other American servicemen.” Well, I was two years old when that war ended, I don’t remember a thing about it and I know that the historical record is incomplete, thus I cannot say I am as certain as Rabinowitz of what she is reporting. But I am old enough to remember the Vietnam War and I suggest that she ask someone of my age what the word “fragging” meant then.

Be that as it may, I must say that it is a refreshing thing to see a Jew acknowledge that someone else in America had an experience that was at least as comparable to that of Jews, something that never happened before as far as I know without the Anti-Defamation League howling: “Horror of horrors, you can’t compare the two. Jews are over here, the others are over there and the two must never be mentioned in the same sentence.” And would Rabinowitz now call on the right wing media such as the Wall Street Journal to make the same acknowledgement without trying to use, as she did, the Black experience to denigrate the Muslim experience?

I am afraid this will never happen because I already see that she has fallen into the trap where every Talmudist ends up while trying to get more out of a story than the story can yield. This is what she says: “…we've seen the growth of a view that American Muslims became prime victims … President George W. Bush … [said] the nation's Muslims must be free to go about without fear or intimidation … [but] It had not … been necessary to remind Americans of who they were and were not … No menacing hordes … threatened American Muslims … [also] countless Americans had reached out to their Muslim neighbors to reassure them.” Undoubtedly the woman does not realize what she just did. She just revealed that the American President and the neighbors of Muslim Americans thought then as do some people now (both in Hollywood and elsewhere) that the Muslims are in danger of being victimized. Which prompts the question: If hordes of Americans are not going to victimize the Muslims, who will?

Again not realizing what she is doing, Dorothy Rabinowitz gives us a clue: “Every actual incident, every report of a nasty sign fitted the … theme taken up by large sectors of mainstream media … Each FBI … sting that went awry or seemed to, each wild goose chase … spurred a new portrait of besieged American Muslims … alienated American Muslims were forced to live in fear as second-class citizens.” My first reaction to this bewildering statement was this: Is Dorothy Rabinowitz talking about the McCarthy era? And will she now ask the Anti-Defamation League to stop reporting on acts of anti-Semitism, something that is done regularly to this day?

And there is more to American history than she cares to remember. For example, it was the institutions and not the hordes of Americans that hurt the Asian “aliens” during World War II. Thus, no one expected the hordes to hurt the Muslims this time either. What happened instead was the launch of a relentless attempt to alienate the Muslims; that is, to paint them as aliens and to make them feel like second class citizens. There were the incessant calls, such as the one voiced by Rabinowitz, to treat the Muslims harshly, to neglect protecting them or to do both. It was the American Jews and the New York branch of the FBI that engaged in such activities as they incited the other institutions to follow their lead. Thus, like Dorothy Rabinowitz is now doing, they worked on the media, the system of education, the legislative and executive branches of government at all levels to make life miserable for the Muslims by treating them like second class citizens if not criminals who committed the crime of being born. Dorothy Rabinowitz is one of the culprits she claims do not exist.

She also tells this story: “There are other faces of Muslim America … a cab driver from Pakistan remarked: "What would have happened if Americans had done this kind of attack in my country? Every American -- every Christian, every non Muslim -- would have been slaughtered…" And she concludes with this: “Countless American Muslims would … say the same. Theirs, of course, is not the face of Muslim America suitable for the continuing chronicle of the victimized American Muslim.” Is Rabinowitz saying that because she mentioned the victimization of Jews who were called kike and such long ago, and because the Anti-Defamation League is chronicling the victimization of contemporary Jews, these people should not be considered the face of America? Please explain, Dorothy, I am getting confused.

In my view, Rabinowitz is making a mistake telling the story of the taxi driver. It is a difficult story to believe because you do not need a Pakistani living in America to speculate as to what would happen in a Muslim country if two buildings were shocked and awed out of existence, droned into oblivion or cruise-missiled into rubble by a foreign power. These things have happened and they continue to happen, yet no serious retribution was ever directed against foreigners or local Christians in those lands. In fact, we, Christians of Arab descent, have lived with Muslims for centuries during periods in which the Muslims were butchered by Christians like the Palestinians are now butchered by the Jews, and nothing of the sort happened then or is happening now. And this is because pogroms and holocausts happen in places like Europe and may well happen in America but they never happened in Arab or Muslim lands. And the expectation is that despite the scheming and the provocations that come from the outside, this exemplary conduct shall remain the hallmark of Arab culture and Civilization.

Buzz Netanyahu The TV Programmer

The buzz word these days is normalization. North Korea wants to have normal relations with America, so does Iran with Europe, and Israel with the Arabs. This quest for normalcy is a deeply ingrained human trait but while the young of each species establish normal relations among themselves with ease, such is not the case among grownups or between the nations. This is the reality of our modern world because while the young respond to a biological need to be in the company of their kind, grownups and nations respond to a host of exigencies that run against that biological need. And one of these exigencies is the fact that some people do not know how to live with others without making life unbearably venomous for everyone.

Let us take an example and discuss it to get a sense of what is involved here. Sometime in the Nineteen Fifties or early Sixties, a bomb exploded inside the American embassy in Cairo, Egypt. It took the Americans little time to find out that the culprits were Israeli agents sent by the government of Israel to commit a crime so horrible as to create a discord between Egypt and the United States of America thus cause a deterioration in the cordial relations that were budding between those two countries. The Israelis did what they did in response to the rapprochement between the US and Egypt that was beginning to develop as demonstrated by President Eisenhower’s order to the British and the French to get out of the Suez Canal Zone which they invaded in response to Egypt’s decision a few months earlier to nationalize the canal.

What must be noted here is that the Israelis committed a horrible act against the Americans in Cairo at the same time as they were mounting a massive effort in Washington to establish close relations with those same Americans. And what this says is that the image of the Jew as being someone who will flash a smile in your face while planting a dagger in your back is more a reality than it is a stereotype. And this prompts us to ask two hard questions: Can you attribute to a country the character traits you discern in its people? And can you attribute to a people the behavior of their country as you see it play out on the international stage? When it comes to Israel and the Jews, we do not have to rake our brains trying to answer these questions because the Jews themselves, everywhere they are, have made the point over and over that the Jews are Israel, and Israel is the Jews. You cannot separate the two, they insist, and you cannot speak of one without speaking of the other. So be it.

Thus the pertinent question: What do we see Israel do that we may consider to be Jewish behavior or see the Jews do that we may consider to be Israeli behavior? The answer is that we see the constant scheming to infect the neighborhood where they find themselves with negative influences through the use of lies, deception and the driving of wedges between peoples and between nations. Unlike the perpetual motion machine that does no more than perpetually move, these people form a perpetual pissing machine that keeps on pissing on top of your shoes, your rugs and your lawn. They never take a breather or give you one but keep burrowing into whatever hole they happen to be working till the edifice you both occupy comes crashing over their heads and yours too. And this is what prompted many people in the West for several centuries to proclaim that a good Jew was a dead Jew, and then shut the Jews out of many professions. In doing this, they gave themselves a few welcome moments during which they could breathe the fresh air of living without having to protect their backs from the Jewish dagger; and what a relief it must have been for them while these moments lasted!

One profession in which the Jewish pissing machine is now burrowing actively is the media. I was told a story, most of which I was able to verify and thus vouch as to its veracity. While I could not check that 100% of the details in it were correct, I can ascertain that the gist of it is authentic. The story is that the Jewish organizations in charge of manipulating the North American media were congratulating themselves not long ago for a deceitful coup they were able to pull without leaving much of a trace that could lead to the discovery it was all an act of despicable treachery.

What happened was that the North American investors began to realize there are great opportunities beyond the BRIC nations; opportunities to be found in the group known as the Next Eleven which comprises Egypt. This happened at a time when one Jewish money man after another started to stream in and out of Israel to warn the folks down there that the Jews in the Diaspora were running out of money and that they will no longer be able to bankroll the current Israeli level of consumption. This caused the Jewish organizations that manipulate the media to apply their twisted logic to the situation, and so they decided to “balance” things out in the style of the Talmud by hitting at the Islamic Shariah Financing. To do this, they got their hands on a man who says he is a Muslim, they pumped gallons of flaming venom into his belly and they put him on a CTV business show in Toronto, Canada where he puked the venom with such forceful disgust that the host of the show predicted she will receive many requests from people who will want to refute what the man has said and that she will accommodate such requests.

This set off the alarm bells as far away as Israel where the order was issued from Netanyahu’s office who is the real programmer for North American television that such thing must not be allowed to happen. The Jewish organizations in Toronto got to work immediately, and they arranged for that segment of the show to be repeated the next day on a different program; one that was hosted by two of the most trusted women. However, the Jewish organizations which played the role of the editors did two important adjustments. First, they had one of the women say -- as if speaking in the name of CTV -- that this segment demonstrates the pitfalls of Shariah financing. And second, they cut out the part where the host of the previous day predicted that she will receive requests from people who will refute what the man has said and that she will accommodate such requests. And guess what; many requests came to the station but they were all denied as ordered by Netanyahu’s office.

So then how were the Jewish organizations able to pump so much venom into one man’s belly and have him puke it on television? This is where the information I possess was pieced together from many sources, information I can say is true on the whole because I could verify it from the congratulations that I saw circulate among members of the Jewish organizations. The story is that the man has a severely handicapped child whereby his Jewish handlers promised him long ago that the Christian miracle workers who make people walk (as seen on television) will make his child stand up, walk and play like a normal child if he did what they told him to do. He has been in their grip ever since without seeing any results but they told him that things will happen this time if he agreed to go on television with fire in the belly and slam Islam with all the vigor that he can muster. He did as they told him to do and he is now waiting for the delivery of the promised miracle which was delivered to him straight from the Promised Land.

These then are the people who want to establish a normal relation with other peoples and other nations. And the most deceitful thing about them is that to adapt to the changing realities as they find them throughout the ages and among the different cultures, the Jewish identity was made to morph by its leaders from being one thing into another much like the proverbial shape shifter. They are a tribe when it is convenient to be one or a religion when times change or a movement or a political force or anything that they want their identity to be when they have a scheme they want to implement at a specific time and a specific place.

But what remains constant in all of this is that they never lose sight of the ultimate goal which is to lead a parasitic life at the expense of everyone else as they get into a position to command the people on whose backs they feed. To verify this, the reader can ask anyone who has a relationship with Jewish friends or has Jewish close relatives or distant ones. Such reader will be told that the difference between the Jehovah Witnesses and the Jews is that the Witnesses will proselytize to convert you to their religion but the Jews will spin you to make of you a tool they can use to do the dirty work they need a sucker to do in their stead. Of course, not everyone has a handicapped child on whose back they can climb to make fake promises but everyone will develop a weak moment at some point in life, and this is when the Jewish organizations will jump in and take advantage of the situation under the guise of extending a hand of friendship. But what can be said under the circumstances is that having an extended hand of friendship like this one, no one needs to sample the kiss of death.

In the meantime that poor man is still waiting for the miracle to happen or he may turn against the Jewish organizations that deceived him. I suppose those organizations will have to think of something else with which to compensate him, and do so in a hurry. To this end they may have to give Netanyahu a buzz and get him to authorize something that is big enough to give the man a reward equal in value to his act of treachery. But what they will never be able to do is that neither they nor Israel will be able to do enough to win back the trust that humanity has lost in anything they stand for. The Jews were given this opportunity right after the Holocaust when they had the sympathy of the world but they squandered it, and not even another holocaust will restore it now.

The Orchestra That Never Stops

On March 29, 2010 Bret Stephens wrote a column in the Wall Street Journal under the title: “Lady Gaga Versus Mideast Peace” and the subtitle: “Are settlements more offensive than pop stars?” in which he responds to an article by Pat Buchanan written in Human Events. I shall let these gentlemen settle their argument among themselves and only comment on a number of assertions made by Stephens, assertions that caught my eyes but not my imagination.

Bret Stephens mentions an Egyptian writer called Sayyid Qutb whom he says: “is widely considered the intellectual godfather of al Qaeda.” And so I ask: When he says widely considered who does he include in the circle of considerers? Are they journalists like him? Or people who are about to join al Qaeda? Or people who have joined al Qaeda already? Or maybe it is the proverbial man in the street? Stephens does not specify but he says that American soldiers are dying in Arab and Muslim lands as a result of Qutb’s writings and not as a result of America’s support for Israel whose actions in occupied Palestine angers the Arabs and the Muslims, as Buchanan seems to suggest. But why is it that Stephens does not specify who the considerers are? Well, the search for an answer to this question is the subject of this essay.

To support his point of view, Stephens picks an essay written by Qutb and analyzes it to highlight the man’s puritanical views and his dislike for some aspects of American culture. He quotes him as saying this: "The American girl … knows seductiveness lies in the round breasts, the full buttocks, and in the shapely thighs, sleek legs and she shows all this and does not hide it." And Stephens draws this conclusion: “This, then, is the core complaint that the Islamists from Waziristan to Tehran to Gaza have lodged against the West.” Here we are told who the intellectual godchildren of Qutb are but not who makes this assumption besides Bret Stephens himself.

Before we go any further with this, we should stop for a moment, look at what he has done stylistically and marvel. He took one quote from one essay written by one man concerning one country, he made that quote the sum total of that man’s attitude and he attributed the attitude to an entire movement. He then imagined a fictitious relationship between that movement and what he calls the West, not just America which was Qutb’s only concern. And Stephens did all this to say that the people who express their unhappiness with Israel’s behavior have all come under the influence of that one lone essayist. And so I ask: What kind of a debate is Bret Stephens having?

The reality, as we all have come to accept it, is that a debate is a competition between ideas. And when you get into a big debate, you tend to group a number of ideas together thus formulate a hypothesis. In the end, the competition among the debaters comes down to a probability as to which hypothesis is likely to be more correct than any other. Until recently the Jewish organizations and their representatives have been winning the debates because they were able to blacklist and thus silence their potential competitors by calling them anti-Semites. And so the Jews had no one to argue with or to argue against but themselves, and every hypothesis they formulated stood as the gospel truth. This went on until the internet came along and gave all those who had something to say the means to say it, and gave them a leveled playing field on which to play. These people pushed back against the Jewish arguments and, because it takes one truth to demolish a million lies, the Jewish hypotheses were shattered by the millions till the people that used to manufacture them ran out of false arguments to make and out of wobbly hypotheses to stitch into fake narratives.

To be fair to the individual Jewish debaters, it must be said that they come onto the leveled playing field with a handicap as they rely on their Talmudic training to stand against those who come onto the same field with a classical training under their belt. The difference between these two is that the Talmudic teaching says this: If a lie serves your purpose you consider it to be the truth. When the purpose for which you are lying changes, you invent another lie and treat it as the new truth. To most people, you will look like an intellectually dishonest person but you should not feel the shame because to us, you will have fulfilled your most sacred of religious duties. In our eyes, to lie and to cheat for the Jewish causes makes of you someone good enough to be a rabbi and that’s a high honor.

By contrast, the classic teaching says this: Most of the time the truth is made of an infinite number of parts. If you have already taken a position on the subject you’re about to debate, you will tend to choose the parts that support your position and stitch them into a complete narrative. Your opponent will choose the parts that support his or her position and stitch a different narrative. When the debate begins and the two narratives collide, you will each modify your respective positions to narrow the differences till you reach a shared compromise or you agree to disagree. If you remain intellectually honest throughout the debate you will not be embarrassed by a contradiction you make inadvertently because you will be happy to take the error into account and modify your position -- which is the original intent behind the holding of the debate in the first place.

But what happens when a classic debater that may or may not have been blacklisted on a previous occasion meets a Talmudic debater that has had the field to himself and to his kind for decades and thus had the time to plaster the landscape with layers upon layers of lies, fantasies and fabrications? Well, we have an example of that in the column by Bret Stephens where he erects a tower of absurdities that culminates in the saying that one essayist has managed to turn the whole world, including the West, against the Jews, America and the West itself. In this, Bret Stephens lays out the irony of all ironies for all to see and to marvel once again. Hungry to stitch a narrative that argues the existence of a war between Islam and the West, he bumps against another narrative made by his kind which says the following according to Netanyahu who recently spoke at an AIPAC meeting: “…we were subjected to unremitting savagery: the bloodletting of the Middle Ages, the expulsion of the Jews from England, Spain and Portugal, the wholesale slaughter of the Jews of the Ukraine, the pogroms in Russia, culminating in the greatest evil of all the Holocaust … The founding of Israel did not stop the attacks against the Jews.” Lo and behold, the world is lining up against Israel and the Jews, says this narrative, therefore it is lining up on the side of al Qaeda and the side of Sayyid Qutb. When you put all of these notions together, you hear Bret Stephens say that the whole world considers Qutb to be the intellectual godfather of al Qaeda and the godfather of the world. What a marvelous intellectual achievement by Bret Stephens! My dear friends, let us give credit where credit is due and admit that this young man is just about ready to be a rabbi but let us put in the proviso that he be careful not to get caught with his pants down again, pulled by someone of Netanyahu’s caliber.

This may be the answer to the question I posed earlier but it makes of Sayyid Qutb one mighty essayist. Therefore I wonder with green envy if I can grow up and become an essayist. Alas, I have bad news for me and what may be good news for someone out there; I don’t know who. I am a senior which makes me a grownup already and out of time. But I am also of Egyptian origin and I never heard of the man named Sayyid Qutb until last year when the Jewish organizations began to talk about him. I spent seven of my most formative years in Egypt, six of which were spent in private and public schools and one year working full time. I also did part-time work and some volunteering during the summer months. Yet, in all of these years and all the places where I went, I never heard of Sayyid Kutb because the debates that we held at the time concerned the economics of the Aswan dam and its hydroelectric station, the aquifers running under the desert, the reclamation of the land, the industrial policy of the country and so on. And I can assure Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal with absolute authority and infinite sincerity that he is better known to the Arabs and to the Muslims than Sayyid Qutb ever was then or is now. And if this is true of Egypt, it is more so everywhere else on the planet.

So why are the Jewish organizations dredging up that name at this time? The answer is that they ran out of arguments, ran out of hypotheses and ran out of luck. They are scouring the literature looking for something new to say because everything they said before contradicts everything they said before. It is a pathetic situation that ought to end here and now; and the way to achieve this is for everyone to tell these people they must keep quite and listen for a change. In the language of the back alley, they should shut up and sit quietly because they have caused enough damage to the world as it is.

To shut up and sit quietly -- which I ask them to do for at least as long as they have kept the opposition blacklisted and shut out of the debate, including yours truly -- will be good for them because it will prevent them from orchestrating another one of those moments when someone as wicked as their leaders will want to challenge them at their own game and trigger another pogrom or a holocaust. A second good reason for them to shut up and sit quietly is that it will save the lives of the American soldiers who find themselves in harm’s way, fighting most likely for the Jewish causes, far away from home.

I tell these people to stop the bands they have been orchestrating for millennia, feel the shame and they will feel the pain they are causing to the human race. They should then join humanity as equals not as jerks puffed up with hot air and a never ending quest to stand on the shoulder of everyone else. Enough is enough.