The Politics Of Industrial Development

Two things have occurred on February 25, 2011 that motivate me to write this piece. The first is something I ran into personally and the second is something I was told about but did not see or hear in person. What I ran into was an article in the Wall Street Journal written by Mark J. Perry under the title “The Truth About U.S. Manufacturing” which, in my opinion, is an incomplete presentation of reality. What I was told was that someone who says he served as US ambassador to Saudi Arabia got on television that day and said a few things which I know are false. Worse, what was said appears to have been a deliberate fabrication aimed at serving an end so vile, it borders on the criminal. Otherwise, the thread that connects the two happenings is that they relate to the subjects of education, industrial strategy and industry. For the two happenings to have occurred on the same day gives us (who are interested in these subjects) a golden opportunity to discuss these matters from opposite angles which is something that will prove to be enlightening.

What makes Mark Perry's presentation weak is that he relies on the dollar value of the manufactured goods to make the following point about America: “...the empirical evidence tells of a ... country that remains by far the world's largest manufacturer.” Yes, comparing the dollar value of the output of countries is how things are done ordinarily – like he did when he used the UN data. But this is precisely where professors of economics such as himself should employ critical thinking and mention, at least in passing, the negative side of the method. But he shows no inclination to doing so in the article. Instead, he goes on to mention that the American manufacturing output (including mining and utilities) has reached the value of 2.155 trillion dollars which he says is 45% higher than that of China.

And so we look at the numbers in more detail to verify that claim. America's manufacturing being generated by 12 million workers means that each worker produces about 180,000 dollars worth of goods per year as he points out. Now, given that there are on average 2,000 working hours in a year, it means that each worker produces about 90 dollars worth of goods per hour. This is a lot even if everyone is in the business of producing million dollar toilet seats for the military, but they better be producing this much in America since some of the industrial workers, if not the majority of them, cost their employers 40 dollars an hour or more. Thus, when we look at the subject matter in its entirety through this lens, we see more than the bankruptcy in Mr. Perry's approach; we see how and why America has priced itself out of the world markets in the industries that have gone bankrupt with the promise of more bankruptcies to come. To put it in cruel terms, bankruptcy in thinking has led to the bankruptcy of American industries.

For Mark Perry to say that America's manufacturing output is 45% higher than that of China is for him to say that he values China's manufacturing output at 1.486 trillion dollars. This is fine as long as he speaks only in terms of dollars and yuans. But to go from here and deduce that the same proportion exists in the amount of physical goods produced by the two countries, he would have to show that the average Chinese manufacturing worker makes 45% less than his American counterpart. That is, the Chinese worker would have to earn an average of 27.59 dollars an hour for the comparison to make sense and be valid. But we know that this is false. In fact, we know that in China, the workers make less than one tenth that amount when things are measured by the current rate of exchange. And this means that if all the goods produced in China were produced in America, they would be given the value of 15 trillion dollars which is larger than the entire American GDP. Obviously then, there is something wrong with this method of comparison and it should be discarded lest it lead to more bankruptcies in America. And professors of economics should lead the way in rejecting these useless methods, not participate in the generation of more bankrupt thinking.

Another mistake Mr. Perry makes is that he suggests American manufacturing ought to emulate the evolution of US agriculture. To this end, he makes this argument: “The U.S. produces more agricultural output today – with only 2.6% of our work force involved in farming – than we did 100 years ago, when farming jobs represented almost 40% of the labor force.” But this approach is so imbued with distortions it is completely worthless. What is wrong with it is that the author looks at the number of people who are directly employed in farming while neglecting those who indirectly participate in the process of growing food. The truth is that backing the farmers in the field is an army of workers that makes the farm implements used by the farmers; another army that refines the fuels used by the implements; another army that produces the fertilizers which help the plants grow; another army that produces the insecticides which protect the plants from their natural enemies; yet another army that produces the electricity which is used everywhere else -- and so on and so forth. In addition to all this, there are 12 million people who are illegally in America, many of whom work in farming without showing in the statistics. And then, there is the fact that huge subsidies are paid to farmers without which they could not stay in the business.

The reality is that today's farmer does not produce (40/2.6) 15.38 times as much as his counterpart of 100 years ago by working alone; he produces this much because there are as many as 23 other people helping him do it. And this is why it takes close to a 50% participation in the workforce to put food on the tables of the nation as opposed to the 32% participation that it used to be in the old days. And this is also the reason why the average breadwinner today cannot alone feed a family containing as many as 3 children whereas they used to feed 10 children or more just a few generations ago.

All in all, despite its good fortune, America does not have an evolution in farming that begs to be emulated; it has a story that leaves much to be desired. Yet, the following is what Mark Perry says about it: “...yesterday's farmhands and plant workers can become today's computer engineers, medical doctors and financial managers.” Did he say financial managers? Don't these people ever learn from the calamities they inflict on their countries and on the world? What will it take to wake them up?

If Mr. Perry had bothered to look more deeply at the evolution he is fond of, he would have seen that America is still a power to be reckoned with in manufacturing because it has a comparative advantage in several areas that were given to it by nature, by circumstance and by luck. If not careful, some of these advantages can be squandered and made to disappear in no time at all which would leave America in a situation much worse than it is today. The following four examples show where America still has an advantage and where it may become vulnerable as time passes.

First, every country that has a natural resource in abundance automatically has an advantage when it comes to processing this resource. America is blessed with a moderate climate, an abundance of water and a good arable land, all of which make it a giant in agriculture despite the mismanagement. When this is coupled with the fact that food is closely tied to the culture of a nation, you can see why America has an advantage in food processing that the competition will find hard to beat. Second, every country has a comparative advantage in construction (not to be confused with the manufacture of building material) because construction is an industry that is done locally and can neither be imported or exported. Third, because America has a strong food industry and a strong construction industry, it still has a respectable manufacturing base in farm machinery and in construction equipment. Fourth, because of history, America still has a massive military industrial complex that keeps alive the related heavy industries and a big petrochemical setup. What helps in this area as well is the fact that the automobile was first popularized in America which today maintains the country's love affair with the car. In turn, this keeps the oil refineries and the related petrochemicals in business.

Looking at these advantages, we can see that except for the agro-food and construction industries from which it will be hard to dislodge America, the country could still lose the competition in the remaining industries the way that it lost the competition in the textile, electronic, home appliance, furniture, toy and other industries. Clearly then, a new direction in thinking is required, and we can get an idea what this might be when we look at the other happening which occurred on February 25, 2011, and we come to understand what it's about.

The man who claimed to have been a US ambassador to Saudi Arabia said that the problem with the Saudi economy is that it has a bad system of education. He added that the Saudi system was modeled after the Egyptian system which itself was devised by the Muslim Brotherhood. If it is true that someone said this – and I have no reason to doubt it – then I must tell you that this man is a low life sick criminal who should be in jail or in a mental institution because he is inventing things to serve a cause he knows is a lost cause. What he is doing is inject in the American discourse the kind of noise that will help destroy America in the same slow manner that we see America's economy wilt before our eyes. Now that Mr. Mubarak is no longer in power to be used as excuse by those who want to attack Egypt and hurt America, the sickos of this world are developing the excuse of the Brotherhood to continue doing what they have been doing for decades. We see, in fact, that the same old disease is still with us; it is just mutating into a different form.

Let us now move to a saner discussion. What the Chinese did that the Arabs did not do is restrict by law the growth of their population when they instituted a policy of one child per family. This has forced the Chinese population to save its money which is what contributed to the high rate of growth in the GDP. Going like this for 30 years or more made it possible for China to catch up to the Egyptian per capita income, something it did last year and then surpassed it this year. In the meantime, the Egyptian economy has done well despite being overshadowed by the stellar performance of the Chinese. It is now experiencing some pain but this is a growing pain that every economy goes through when it embarks on a policy of rapid industrialization. The main problem is that such economies develop a shortage of skilled labor during the period of transition. If the country does not take in immigrants (as do the immigrant welcoming countries when faced with the same problem) it takes other measures that may not relieve the pain right away but will be good for the country in the long run.

What these countries do is open vocational and technical schools where they start teaching the kids the skills they will need in the industrial economy that is shaping up. This is a good thing in itself but think of the time that is required for this approach to work. You will need 2 or 3 years to teach the kid a trade and will need another 5 years to give him or her 5 years of experience. Compare this with the method of taking in immigrants who already have a skill at the tip of their fingers and 5 or 10 years of experience under their belts. There is a big difference here, and this is what the Arab countries whose population already grows at a high rate and do not need immigrants, are struggling with. No one doubts that things will work out in the long run when those kids will have come out of the trade schools by the tens of thousands and have acquired some experience. And all that the Arab countries can do in the meantime is muddle through in the best way that they can. This is what is happening in the Arab world at this time, not what is frothed at the mouth by the sick running dogs that work for the treasonous organizations betraying America on behalf of the little fart of a country half a world away.

As far as Egypt is concerned, the planners there are mindful of the fact that another problem facing the country at this point is the mass migration of people from the farm to the city. These people are not of an age that they can be trained to acquire a journeyman's skill and be good at it. Therefore, what needs to be done to take care of them is to encourage the start of low tech, labor intensive industries that can employ them after a short period of training. This is the best solution that can be found to an immediate problem but what is salutary about it in the long run is that those industries will still be here and still employing people when the world will have realized that it is a bad idea to do what Mark Perry is suggesting, mainly that: “...yesterday's farmhands and plant workers can become today's computer engineers, medical doctors and financial managers.”

Please, make no more financial managers because one calamity a century is one too many, and we already had one this century. It is better to have young people off the streets producing goods in low tech factories such as textile, electronics, home appliances, furniture, toys and other items than have them on the street causing mischief or worse out of boredom while their elders sit in prestigious offices scheming to make this year the few million dollars in bonuses that will exceed what they made last year.

As for the sicko who came out of nowhere and blamed Saudi Arabia's difficulties on Egypt's system of education, this shows that the organizations which tried in the past to drive the wedge between America and Egypt using the Mubarak excuse are exploiting the new situation to hurt Egypt even if they must hurt America in the process. Consequently, my advice is that instead of wasting air time or publishing space by inviting the mental cases whose interest is to put old venom in new bottles, the American audio-visual and print media should invite the people who have something to say about economic and industrial development not in a context that is laden with politics and useless noise but one that is amenable to practical ideas.

Rape In The Name Of Virginity

In politics you often encounter instances when governments repeatedly make the same bad judgment and repeatedly take the same bad decisions after which they cover up for their mistakes by inventing flimsy excuses. This sort of performance has led to the observation that the cover up more than the original act is what dooms the governments in question because when you hear the excuses they put out you realize that what they do is condone rape in the name of virginity. A case in point is what Susan Rice did recently when she tried to justify vetoing a UN Security Council resolution that was to condemn Israel for looting Palestinian lands. Rice explained the veto by saying words that amount to this statement: America has vetoed the resolution because to let Israel continue the rape of Palestine is to aspire to a peace in the Middle East that is as clean as a virgin. And so we, in the new Administration, say let the Israelis continue to rape and let us continue to protect not the victims of the rape but the rapist of the victims. See how glorious it is when you turn something on its head? How much more inspired can the power of reasoning be!

In turn we, the citizens of the world are asking this question: Who are the people that have reduced the American superpower to a pimp who operates on the international stage carrying on the business of selling Israel to the world then protects it from the wrath of humanity? Also, what do all these people want, anyway? And we realize there are three main players in this sordid saga with a number of minor ones standing on the sideline. The main players are Israel, the American Jewish establishment and the American political establishment. To fully understand the situation and to answer the above questions, we need to probe into what the main players want and what they do to obtain it. To begin with, we recognize that what is involved here is a game of high stakes with the players who are engaged in it being as ruthless as a pack of hyenas out on a hunting expedition. And so we look to see what each player is going after and what each one does to influence the others.

We notice that the primary concern of the main players is the state of Israel which is an artificial construct that has turned colonial and has grabbed much of Palestine. When we look at the behavior of Israel itself, we learn about the people who live in it, what they want and how they go about obtaining it. We probe into what differentiates Israel from the old colonial powers and determine that the people who settle in that place have a motivation that is different from what motivated the colonial settlers that went to Africa or to Asia centuries ago. Whereas the settlers of olden days cherished the fact that they had a homeland to which they will return at the end of a stint in the “colonies”, those who go to Israel make the move on the basis that their decision will not be reversed. They know there will be no going back on their decision, a move that they and their descendants will have to live with for generations. Thus, regardless as to which corner of the world these people come from, their move to Israel is akin to burning the bridges after crossing them. And so we ask: What do these people expect in return for taking such a drastic decision?

For one thing, they ask for and receive a piece of Palestine which they do not regard as a colony but consider it their “ancestral homeland”. This view would have been sealed even before they traveled to Israel by the fact that a law exists which grants Israeli citizenship to the Jews of the world wherever they live even if they never set foot on Israeli soil and do not intend to ever do so. In addition, these people are motivated by a notion they grow up with to the effect that they have a divine right to the land of Palestine not because they inherited the thing but because God gave it to them. This last notion allows them to reject off hand any suggestion to the contrary under the pretext that no mortal is qualified to argue against the will of God. And this stance has also the effect of killing the chance of non-Jews who live in Israel to participate in the debate that relates to their status. Consequently, these people sit like ducks on the sideline and wait for a Jew who never got to know them and could not care less about them decide their fate. This happens even though these people have lived in that place since the beginning of time, and the Jew has just landed there coming from a hellhole where they would rather have a hole in the head than see a Jew in their midst.

All the while, those who are of the Jewish faith insist on being treated not only like the citizens of the state of Israel but also the favorite children of God. This makes them sovereigns in their own right which means they are granted the entire spectrum of rights enjoyed by everyone but have only the obligations that each individual chooses to shoulder. This approach has the corrosive effect of spoiling the population, and this is where a big problem has begun to take shape in that country. It is that when Israel had a small population it could live on the handouts it received from foreign governments and from the prosperous Jews who live abroad and do business there. But now, the population of Israel has grown large enough and the demand on the state has grown big enough to make the country consume more than what comes into it.

Consequently, the government of Israel finds itself obliged to borrow more money from abroad than it has the ability to pay it back. This activity helps to increase the size of the external debt, and the consequence will be that America will sooner or later be asked to pay where Israel is expected to default because America is the guarantor of Israel's borrowings. When this happens something will hit the fan and, America being in the fan's line of sight, it will be hit with a double whammy. It will be drenched so badly that it will come to look like a diaper worn by a diabetic astronaut who also suffers from diarrhea. Hold your noses and close your eyes.

As to what the American Jewish establishment does, it makes sure first and foremost that no one will dare to oppose the work it undertakes in America and elsewhere on behalf of Israel. To this end, its members abuse and exploit the law of the land making certain that anyone who questions their stance on any of the issues is quickly labeled an anti-Semite. The people who are targeted by this drive are then victimized in the cruelest of ways by the fact that they are placed on a blacklist that is distributed everywhere to make everyone aware of it. The reason for this move is to throw the victim to the hyenas. This act makes the victim fair game to those who wish to turn their life into a living hell. In fact, the victim becomes a completely defenseless target for the sociopaths and their sidekicks who hunger to practice their underdeveloped skills in the area of social and political marksmanship. This happens as surely as a hungry hyena will feast on a wounded prey. And the most discouraging part of the whole episode is that there exist people who view this performance as being the best that democracy stands for. And they devise all sorts of arguments to justify it the same way that Susan Rice has justified the rape of Palestine.

In the meantime, Israel's enablers also use the power and prestige of America to work on the rest of the world for the benefit of Israel. And since the Middle East is of crucial importance to Israel, this is where their attention is focused these days given that the international chessboard is being altered by forces affecting it on several fronts. But even as this is happening, you already see the Jewish organizations, their lobbies and cohorts position themselves to fully exploit and to take advantage of what they believe the new chessboard will look like. But don't kid yourself and believe for a moment that they will be more rational this time than they were the last time. That was the time when they were putting savage pressure on the American government to limit its relationship with the Egyptians, especially the military of that country, on the grounds that Egypt was ruled by a bad man.

And guess what happened during the three weeks that this man was under siege. What happened was that the Jewish organizations, their lobbies and cohorts cried their eyes out calling him an ally of Israel who should be kept in place to continue protecting Israel like he did for 30 years. And so we ask: what lesson is there to learn about these people? And we answer: We can learn many things, two of which are extremely important. First, these people are programmed to lie and they cannot stop lying anymore than a skunk can stop farting. Second, they will always bite the hand that feeds them because it is the most cowardly thing to do. These people are now farting everywhere in America and they are biting every hand that feeds them. Nevertheless, the American people are told to keep inhaling the foul air of Jewish democracy; and they are told to keep feeding those who call themselves Jewish with their bare hands. Why must it be so?

I do not know why it must be so but I know why it is so. It is so because of the role that is played by the American political establishment. The following ditty describes that role in capsule form: “Xaviera was the happy hooker from Holland; Steny is the male bimbo from Denmark.” The sad truth is that America has been turned into one giant political bordello where, at this point in time, Steny Hoyer is the male hooker that is cracking the whip of the dominatrix. It started a long time ago when he and Nancy Pelosi began their political careers at the same time, working in the same office of the same senator. The competition between them flared almost immediately and was never extinguished. Losing ground to Nancy at every turn, Steny concluded what every loser concludes which is that he needs to do two things. First, he needs to kiss Jewish asses and get them on his side. Second, when it comes to playing the game of power politics, women have the advantage because of their feminine demeanor. And so Steny Hoyer worked diligently to out-effeminate the woman while he prostituted himself to the Jewish lobbyists. It looks now to every observer that he believes he has turned himself into an object of desire in the eyes of other men. And so he behaves like the quintessential male bimbo he has aspired to be in order to do the things that no man can do when competing against someone of Nancy's caliber.

With the medal of Champion Bimbo hanging from his chest and with the Whip of the House of ill Repute firmly in his grip, Steny started to blackmail his president on behalf of the Jewish lobbyists for the benefit of Israel. He repeatedly warned that if things did not go the way that Israel wants them to go, he will not crack the whip on his democratic troops with the view of passing elements of the president's agenda. Instead, he will make sure that nothing works for his president or his party or his country. He did so again in January of this year when he teamed up with the House Republican Leader, Eric Cantor and fired a letter to the President of the United States demanding that America veto the upcoming UN resolution.

Susan Rice cast the veto as ordered, the new Administration lost its virginity and the world puked.

The Twelve Planets Of Israel

America has again used the veto at the Security Council of the United Nations to protect Israel from a resolution that would have condemned it for building settlements on occupied Palestinian lands. And so we ask what is this veto thing? Well, the idea behind giving themselves the right of the veto was that the five big winners of WWII (the US, China, Russia, Britain and France) wanted to avoid starting a conflict between them that can lead to a war as a result of a resolution that was backed by some members and rejected by others. The veto simply means that if one of the five powers decided it does not like a resolution, the others agree to consider it rejected by all and thus reduce the risk of triggering a war.

Consequently, whenever America casts a veto in favor of Israel, it says that it is prepared to go to war against the world if necessary to protect Israel's right to loot Palestinian land. Luckily, there is the mechanism of the veto by which to avoid such an outcome but there remains the principles of the rule of law, of world order and of legitimacy that America is championing everywhere yet brushes them aside when it comes to Israel. In effect, to make Israel an exception is so mind boggling that the people who think about these things throw their hands up in despair and stop thinking about the subject lest they go berserk. Well, I have been thinking about the subject for a long time and I believe I found something that will interest a few people. Let me first give you a brief introduction. The first time I encountered the infamous expression: “Ganging up on Israel” was in the decade of the 1960s. I saw it a few more times after that and saw it again very recently when It was used by someone who anticipated this latest Security Council resolution and wrote to call on America to defeated it with the veto. What the infamous expression means is that the UN resolutions being the solemn will of the world, the rule of law obliges every nation to abide by them. But when it comes to Israel, America considers the world to be a gang of thugs who band together for one reason only: to hurt or embarrass Israel. Consequently, America will abuse the right of the veto granted under another set of circumstances and will protect Israel every time the little criminal entity goes on a rampage and shocks all of humanity.

Like everyone else, I have been asking myself: How can a superpower be so stripped of self-respect that it bends to the will of the little nothing that is Israel yet look at itself degenerate and not be revolted by its own conducted? The answer to the question came to me when I remembered something I heard as a child. What I heard was that the snake hunters in some tribes inject themselves with snake poison on a regular basis. They increase the amount of the poison every so often as their body gets used to it. After a while, the hunters would have built up enough immunity against the poison that they can start hunting the valuable snakes without fearing the effect of the poison if and when they got bitten. In a similar fashion, the Jewish Lobby first injected the expression “Ganging up on Israel” more than 40 years ago in the bloodstream of the American consciousness and has been injecting the same sort of venomous concepts at higher rates ever since. This is how the Americans got used to the idea of Israel being above the law, and this is why evangelists like John Haggee and others were motivated to call on the American people to worship the Jews as Gods equal in rank to Jesus.

It is clear from all this that we must spend time probing into what these people want for themselves and for humanity lest we be surprised again and again by what they do. To this end, let me tell you what else is going on at this time so that you know what they are preparing for the future. As it happens, I have information to the effect that the Supreme Council of World Jewry -- whatever that is and wherever it sits -- has decided to go all out and work to impose on mankind the vision that there exist 12 planets in our solar system representing the 12 tribes of Israel. A directive to this effect has gone out to astronomers of the Jewish faith instructing them to inject in their work such notions, ideas and principles as to lead to the definition of the word planet in such a way as to show that the solar system contains 12 planets.

Such effort must be conducted in a stealthy and delicate fashion to avoid raising the suspicion on the part of gentiles, says the directive. It adds that individual gentiles who have been bribed, blackmailed or beaten psychologically into submission and who now sympathize with the Jewish causes must also be mobilized for the task even encouraged to take the lead at pushing the effort forward. When success is achieved, which the directive predicts will happen, it will be revealed to the world that this turn of events was inevitable because God had decided at the time of creation that there must be as many planets in the solar system as there will be Jewish tribes on Earth -- the planet that will forever be known as Planet of the Jews.

When you see something like this, my friend, you cannot help but ask the question: Has someone gone mad at the Council of World Jewry? And the answer is this: Not really. This has always been the way that these people have behaved except that they were running a tight ship in the past, the reason why no whistle blower was able to blow the whistle on them. But the dissatisfaction has now risen to such a level among the rank and file that some people are willing to leak information as to what goes on in secret at the highest levels of Jewish councils. In fact, I am aware of at least two other projects on which the Council started to work at an earlier time, projects that are now at an advanced stage of implementation. It is that the members of the Council and their researchers have looked into the archives in search of evidence to the effect that someone with Jewish blood may have worked with the great scientists that made a mark on history.

The aim was to use such evidence and fabricate around it a story by which they can demonstrate that the discoveries could not have been made without the Jewish contributors. In fact, the researchers believe they found such evidence and they are now in the process of working the modality by which they will announce that contrary to what the history books say, it was a Jew who split the atom and another Jew who discovered the helical shape of the DNA molecule. It is not clear at this time what they will do after that but it is not beyond them to start working on a project that will make it an anti-Semitic crime to deny that the Jews split the atom or that they discovered the DNA. You may not be jailed for asking questions about the Holocaust anymore but you will be for denying the achievements of the Jews however fake these claims may be.

As shocking as this is, we must not be surprised by the grotesque falsification of history that we see unfold before our eyes because these are the same people who ran around Europe for centuries telling everyone that they were the ones who built the pyramids of Egypt when in reality no Jew had yet existed at the time that the pyramids were built and none appeared on the planet for another 1,400 years. And to show how shameless these people are when it comes to lying about and falsifying history, they kept making the same claim in modern times; even made a Hollywood movie in which they depict Moses as supervising the building of the pyramids. In any case, judging that they have completed the Moses project with success, they started another project along the same line.

What they did this time was to claim that the pilot-less planes known as drones were invented in Israel. They went on to say that the Israelis “taught” the Americans how to build these planes after which the latter succeeded in producing a version that was of a lesser quality than that of Israel. But there is one troubling aspect to this story; it is that the brutal truth has intervened once again and has shown how disgustingly shameless these people are. The truth is that the Americans started to build drones at the beginning of the twentieth century which is four decades before Israel had come into existence and eight decades before it started getting parts from America to assemble into drones. The moral of the story is that when you're shameless, you're shameless; and when you're one of these people your middle name is disgusting.

But why are these people the way they are? Simply put, they are what they are because it is their culture. And since they are the first to admit they consider the culture and the religion to be one and the same, it follows that their religious duty is to remain the way they are for ever. In fact, to spin every event in a way that advances the cause of their religion is a duty to which they adhere religiously. This lesson is fed to them with their mothers' milk and they learn about it on a continuous basis for as long as they live. The better they become at spinning or distorting reality to promote the causes of their culture and their religion, the more they are appreciated by the community. The trick, however, is that the individual must be able to spin or distort reality while remaining believable throughout the performance.

Those among them who master the art get to be viewed as excellent material for a rabbinical position. If ordained, they are automatically given the opportunity to be mentioned in the Talmud, even publish in it. This means they get to interpret the scripture which makes of them the custodians of history. Since they also have the opportunity to write the contemporary history of the Jews as it evolves around them, they get to participate in current events while helping to shape the future of the Jewish people. All of these possibilities present the rabbi with the opportunity to rise to the level of the modern prophet, a distinction that is the equivalent of sainthood in Catholicism. And this entire scenario is made possible, as you can see, when someone demonstrates at a young age that he or she has the talent to spin the truth and lie about it without being caught.

In the past, some things were not done hush hush as they are now. There was a time, for example, when the rabbis were open about their superstitious beliefs. To them, the coincidental timing of events was a sign that announced an important current happening or presaged a big future happening. But the rabbis were forced to curtail discussing their superstitions openly after being criticized for it. One such moment came when they took advantage of the goodness of someone and tried to push forward their diabolic agenda. It happened when a nice man called Charles Kuralt used to host a Sunday morning show for the CBS television network. The rabbis got him to say something that was so over the top, it shocked many people. Apparently something had happened to a Jew somewhere in the old Soviet Union at a time when a “shooting star” was observed in the sky. This proved to the rabbis that a divine intervention had taken place, and they asked Charles Kuralt to make big hay about it on his show. He did and the people everywhere were disgusted.

What else do the Jewish organizations, their lobbies and cohorts do to consolidate their control over America? If you really want to know, pick up an almanac and look under Israel. You will find that the description about the Israeli economy begins with a preamble that says the same thing almost verbatim in all the almanacs written in English. The description, which evidently has one and the same source, begins by lauding the Israeli economy, something that does not happen in any almanac because these are books of reference that do not carry opinion. But this being part of the effort to inject the venom of spin and distortion in the books of history and of reference, could someone have predicted 40 years ago that such thing was going to happen? The answer is an emphatic yes. In fact, it used to be that books on the Middle East in the public and university libraries were vandalized by Jewish mobs of hooligans. To wit, anywhere something good or neutral was said about the Arabs, it was scratched and a comment written by hand in the margin giving a contrary opinion. And anywhere something bad or neutral was said about Israel, it was scratched and a comment written in the margin giving a contrary opinion. Indeed, the Jewish gangs vandalized what they did not control while working to gain the control and monopolize it. When they achieved their aim and they sat at the helm of the publishing industry, they made vandalizing history the normal way to write history. May God help the future historians of the English language for, they will be swimming in an ocean of raw sewage looking for iotas of truth.

The lesson for the world to draw from this is that America has gone past the point of no return. Something will happen violently and change things dramatically or nothing will happen and America will wither away like the empires that died in a whisper. Whether this scenario or that one will play itself out, the world must now proceed as if America did not exist.

The Flies That Buzz The Ether

There was a time when I worked for a newspaper in Northwestern Ontario, a vast expanse that is part of the Canadian North. Winter is extremely cold in that part of the country but Summer can also be a time of high heat and humidity. And when you have this kind of weather, you inevitably get the giant flies whose noisy flight is legendary among those who have encountered them. You realize how true the legend is when a swarm of the flies comes close enough to you and buzzes your ear. I'll come back to tell more about these flies but for now let me tell you about a singular fly whose story was told some twelve or fifteen generations ago.

The fellow who told the story of this fly is Jean de la Fontaine. He was a French poet who wrote fables including one he called “Le Coche et la Mouche” which means “The Stagecoach and the Fly”. The story is about horses pulling a stagecoach up a steep hill on a hot sunny day. The passengers in the coach have come off it to lighten the burden on the horses who are tired, panting, sweaty and thirsty. A fly comes along and decides it must help drive that coach up the hill. It does it the only way it knows how which is to buzz and to bite the horses. But this makes the task even more difficult for the horses, a fact that the fly completely ignores. Yet despite the annoyances that the fly produces, the stagecoach reaches the top of the hill at which point the fly claims credit for the achievement. It makes the claim on the ground that no one has helped; from the coachman on whose nose it has landed to the monk who prayed throughout the ordeal to the woman who kept singing to herself to any of the other passengers who remained passive all along. La Fontaine ends the fable by telling the moral of the story which is that people who poke their noses in the affairs of others sincerely believe they do important work but, in fact, annoy everyone around and do nothing that is useful. And so La Fontaine recommends that you chase away these people like you would chase away a bothersome fly.

Now, my friend, imagine what you will get if you cross the fly of La Fontaine with a giant fly from the north country. I'll tell you what you will get. You will get the Flies of the Ether. These are flies no higher in worth than the flies of the north but they have an ego that is so puffed up, it requires an ether to contain it. In fact, these are not real flies with wings to fly them but are human beings who will buzz you through the ether like a fly. In truth, they are living and breathing human beings if you believe this story. They are the journalists and the pundits who sit in front of a camera in a television studio and pretend to become instant experts on every subject that is thrown at them. Believe it or not, they become the great big experts in the time that it takes to ask a single question. But the truth is that these people go to the studio knowing about the subject they are asked to discuss as much as the northern fly knows about rocket science. And they end up knowing even less after they say what they have to say and hear themselves and all those like them buzz the rubbish that they come to buzz.

Still, they sit comfortably in the studio of the television station and throw darts at the good people who are out in the real world doing hard work in a difficult environment. Yet, despite what they think they can achieve, the Flies of the Ether are not good enough to even compare to ordinary gadflies because all that they do is create commentary that is as helpful to society as the buzzing that is done by the fly of La Fontaine; nothing more useful than that. Worse, when all the words are said and all the buzzing is done, these creatures attribute to themselves the achievements that were made; the achievements that would have been made in a more tidy fashion and a faster rate without their miserable contribution.

It can also happen that the Flies of the Ether are invited to talk on the air about far away places and the people who live in them. These are the places where the people know very little or know nothing at all about the Flies of the Ether; and they care even less about them or their useless opinions. Still, the flies with the big ego cannot help but secretly desire to influence and to control these far away places and all the people who live in them. But how do they extend their influence that far? Well, the flies believe that they have found the answer and so they use a method that has rarely worked but has produced a bad result if and when it did work. Knowing that America has some leverage over a few of those places, the flies modulate their buzzing not to spin the people in them but to spin America and the American people. The flies play this ritual to get America and its people to see the situation the way that they see it. They manage by this trick to put pressure on the country, on its people and its government. This has the effect of forcing the country, which is a superpower, to use the power and the influence it has to nudge the people in the far away places and move them in the direction that the flies have envisaged for that part of the world. And you can see why this method is at once regarded like a satanic trick and a dangerously ill advised one.

Why is that? Well, what is wrong with committing this sort of mischief is that it does very little or does nothing at all to change the world in any positive way. It only affects America in a negative way and threatens the world in an indirect way. Indeed, the effect it has on America is the same as would be that of a monkey who is asked to teach rocket science to a class of students. The primate will damage the mind of those attending and do nothing more useful than that. Like someone once said, you don't know what you don't know. And to see how true this is, imagine a pundit who is labeled an expert going on television and saying that Canada was full of snow, of igloos and nothing else. Well, those who never saw Canada will take the words at face value and believe that they are true. But guess what. Many in America already believe these falsehoods not because someone has said the words openly and without equivocation but because it is the image that is transmitted to Americans through their television networks in many subtle ways. What these Americans see about Canada is mainly snow and igloos; what they retain about Canada is that it is full of snow, of igloos and little else.

Now imagine what the people who never saw far away Egypt will believe when they are told day in and day out openly and forcefully that there is nothing in that country but the slums and the garbage whose images they see every now and then, and see nothing else that shows the rest of reality. The consequence of this fabricated falsehood is that when the American legislators and the government officials find themselves in a situation where they need to deal with the country of Egypt, they naturally want to deal in accordance with the images that were planted in their consciousness. When this happens, the Egyptian interlocutors who are at the other end of the give-and-take begin to sense that they are dealing with a jerk or dealing with someone educated by a monkey. And when this sort of exchange happens too often, the entire people of Egypt come to believe, as would anyone, that too many Americans suffer from an incurable disease called Artificial Ignorance – not to be confused with Artificial Intelligence.

Now, given the recent events in the Middle East and the revolution that took place in Egypt, it is incumbent upon us to set the record straight with regard to a few facts concerning that magnificent country. It is important to take this step lest America be maintained in the Judaic pool of Artificial Ignorance where it has been swimming for too long already. The danger inherent to leaving America in this place of dishonor is that the country will once again miss the opportunity to rectify the disastrous policies it has pursued in that part of the world for too long already. If this situation is maintained for much longer, the effect on the world will be small or will be large but will be reversible because the people of the world are a resilient lot and they will find a way out of their predicament. On the other hand, the effect on America will be a massive one and will be irreversible because it will have the same effect as if the genetic code of the nation had been forced to mutate in a direction that is absolutely the wrong one to take.

So then, what should the American legislators and the officials of the executive branch know about Egypt that they do not know now? They should know that there are similarities and also differences between America and Egypt. One similarity is that the two countries have had a glorious past. The difference is that the Egyptian past is measured in millenniums while the American past is measured in centuries. In the past of each country, babies were born, were nurtured and educated by the parents and the community till the time when they were big enough to contribute to society. Nowadays, the people of Egypt still do the same thing where school attendance has reached the rate of 98% which is one of the highest in the world. The country even produces a surplus of learned people who decide to make a contribution elsewhere in the world. They go to countries where things have gone badly and where the people can no longer afford the quarter of a million dollars that it takes to raise a child let alone send all the children of the nation to school.

Moreover, many of the children who make it to regular school end up dropping out before they reach college. This is why these countries -- America being one of them – desperately need educated children to come from abroad and fill the void that exists locally. Yet America is the only country among all these countries to refuse to call itself deficient but calls itself exceptional. It makes this claim because it says it has the ability to attract from abroad what it cannot produce locally. What the country seeks, in effect, are children from other places who can attend college, do well in their studies, graduate on time, go to work and keep America afloat even keep it competitive in the face of foreign competition. The implication here is that without the input from abroad, America could no longer exist as a superpower or even as a nation. What a glorious exception this is! Who in the world would not want to attain this level of exceptionalism?

If someone has what it takes to grasp these realities, he or she will understand the ramifications and consequences that flow from it; and there will be no reason for me to explain in detail the concepts that are involved in this matter. But if the American legislators and the officials of the executive branch don't have what it takes to grasp the thing, it will be a waste of time to try and drum it into their heads. For this reason, I shall leave it to them to work things out and come up with a posture that will make them look a little less like the jerks they have managed to look in the eyes of everyone else. If they can work this thing out and begin to impress the world, they should then turn their attention to putting together a set of policies that will pull them out of the Judaic pool of Artificial Ignorance where they have been immersed for too long already.

But if they fail to do any of this, they will have failed on something serious and there is nothing that we can do to change that. What is bound to happen will now happen and history will write itself as we all brace for the turbulent ride that is to come.

On Democratic Chicken And Colonial Eggs

Now that Egypt has had its revolution, to ask in which direction it should go is to ask a question along the line: “Which came first, the chicken or the egg?” There is a reason why someone has asked this question in the first place. It is because we have a situation where two objects are tied so inextricably together that each has become both the parent and the offspring of the other. It so happens that we have a similar situation in human behavior where the countries that call themselves benevolent democracies are inextricably tied to the practice of savage colonialism. It is, therefore, tempting to ask: “Which came first, the claim to democratic rule or the urge to dominate and loot?” Britain, France, Spain, Holland, Belgium, Portugal, Japan, Turkey, America and Israel have at one time or another bathed in the pool of blood which they caused their victims to shed. And while everyone of these countries has ended the savage practice, Israel which is a neighbor of Egypt, continues to act at the same old level of savagery. It is acting badly in Palestine, a country and a people it has occupied for several decades already. Unfortunately, this is the background against which Egypt has lived its recent history and the background against which it will live for the foreseeable future.

Consequently, it is important to take a close look at the relationship that exists between colonialism and democracy -- all the more so because the regimes that practice colonialism fiercely call themselves democratic, a name they have adopted to communicate the sense that they are helpful to others, not harmful to them. To prove their point, the people who run such regimes have argued that democracies do not fight each other; the criterion that they want you to believe is the most important to consider when evaluating the behavior of nations. Well, even if we do accept this reasoning, we should not be surprised that those nations would be reluctant to fight each other -- it is that they have other more lucrative alternatives. In fact, what the colonial powers did more often than not was to get together, fight those who could not defend themselves, colonize them and exploit them to the maximum degree under the guise of helping them develop. For example, after signing the Sykes-Picot Agreement to cut up the middle East and share it between them, Britain and France who used to fight each other viciously – something they did for centuries -- became the best of friends. But after they had grabbed the colonies they coveted for a long time, the two countries claimed to have turned democratic. In the meantime, when Germany tried to negotiate a share of the South African natural resources to supply its own growing industrial base with raw materials, Britain and France said no deal and a war ensued.

A history that runs along this same line has unfolded almost everywhere in Africa, in the Americas and in South Asia where the colonial powers made peace among themselves and launched wars of aggression against the indigenous people they occupied and looted. As to the Asia-Pacific theater, this is where America and Japan have clashed while competing to satisfy their national ambitions with regard to the natural riches of China, the Philippines and a few other places where they fought to colonize and exploit the indigenous people, not to democratize them or help them develop as was the original claim. Of course, we can ask a series of “what if” questions and come up with a number of scenarios as to what would have happened if Japan or Germany had won the war. One of the scenarios might show that having secured a steady feed of raw materials for their industries, the previously autocratic regimes were pressured by their own people to open up the system and democratize it. Another scenario might show that the defeated democracies have descended into an autocratic form of rule to cope with the harshness of life, having lost their colonies and being left with no one to exploit which made it necessary for them to live by the sweat of their foreheads not the foreheads of the people they said they came to help.

Yes, knowing what might have happened under one scenario or another would have gone a long way to answer the question: “Which came first, the claim to democracy or the urge to dominate and loot?” But since we cannot be certain of something that has not happened to events that have come and gone, we are left with only our intuition and our human logic to help us solve the riddle and come up with an answer. To this end, the first thing we do is look to see how democracies get into a war and how they exit the thing. Simply stated, the democratic regimes get into a war when they whip up enough popular appeal for it – a practice known as demagoguery -- and they exit the war when they begin to lose it or when a stalemate develops. When this happens, the long drawn combat begins to bore the public and goes on to erode its confidence. At this point, the war becomes a political liability and the politicians who used to promote it by demagoguing everyone and everything in sight now run away from it and disappear in thin air. Thus, it can be stated with confidence that the wars which the democracies launch begin with a solicitation that is based on a false premise and they end up in a stalemate or end up in the defeat of the democracy even if a few victories are scored by the forces of the latter at the beginning of the war.

At this juncture, we cannot help but note that Hitler was elected democratically, that he became one of the greatest demagogues of all time and that he was defeated in the war that he started. And while the American President Lyndon Johnson was not a demagogue, his administration had engineered the Gulf of Tonkin incident to escalate the American involvement in Vietnam and turn it into a full scale war where America was ultimately defeated. Also, whatever George W. Bush was, the people who ran the White House in his name have conspired with the Israelis to make it look like Iraq had weapons of mass destruction upon which the Bush people started a war in the Middle East with the view of serving the interest of the Israelis. But when America got caught in a military stalemate, the top brass mounted a piece of theater they called the “Surge” to save their own skins and the reputation of their military. They rode on the back of this surge to accede to the demands of the Iraqi insurgents without appearing to surrender to them. The Americans even declared victory and started to exit Iraq having accomplished nothing that would serve their own interest or the interest of the Israelis. All in all, the American adventure in Iraq turned out to be a horrendous waste of money and of the lives that were lost on both sides but no one in America bothered to grieve because having celebrated a false victory at an earlier time, they could not bring themselves to grieve the bitter defeat.

Thus, it can be seen that treachery is the hallmark of the relationship that a democracy maintains with the rest of the world. In fact, treachery is also the relationship that a democracy maintains with its people. This can be verified by the way that the subject of human right is treated in the democratic regimes as opposed to the way it is treated in the autocratic ones. In a nutshell, the autocracies will give you a list of the rules by which to play and a list of the punishments that go with the breaking of each rule. You break one rule and the state will punish you as promised; and will do so in the open to set an example for others to see and be warned. As to the democracies, they will give you a list of the rights they say are inalienable to you but then whisper in your ear what you must do to pay for the privilege of being granted each inalienable right. If you decide to test the sincerity of the system and agree to go along with this diabolic scheme by doing what they tell you to do, they will renege on their word and raise the price they ask you to pay. And they will keep raising the price for as long as you will agree to pay a higher one. This is why societies eventually clamor for someone like Hitler to rise among them and put an end to a system gone mad.

What this says is that the way the art of democracy is practiced nowadays is a bad one or that the concept of democracy itself is a false concept. Which is it? To answer the question we must begin by reminding ourselves that to join the civil service is to acquire the power to govern over the public and to serve at the pleasure of that same public. Thus, the politician of the democracy is by profession both the boss and the subordinate of the public. In other words he or she is the chicken and the egg rolled into one. This being the case, every politician learns that to last in this profession they must be of two faces and must learn to speak from both sides of the mouth. In short, they practice hypocrisy and call it politics. And when they move from the local arena to the international one, they take that lesson with them and deal with their foreign counterparts in the same double-faced way. This translates into the quest to dominate every situation in which they find themselves while pretending to adhere to the rules of openness and democracy. If and when they get to be the dominant player, they engage in such democratic practices as to facilitate the looting of the weaker jurisdictions. This is the modern form of democratic colonialism that is slowly replacing the gunboat diplomacy of olden days.

In the final analysis, what this means is that because the word democracy remains badly defined, every charlatan and his apprentice hides behind the word and uses it to characterize what they do when, in fact, they practice political Satanism of the most abhorrent kind.

Which brings us to the original question: In which direction should Egypt go now that it has had its revolution? The answer is simple: don't be chicken when it comes to trying something new but in the end make sure not lay an egg or get eggs all over your faces.

My Experience With Democracy

Every pundit and his cousin in North America seems to know what is good for Egypt these days, and they all want to give advice to the movement that began in Tahrir Square in Cairo, and is taking shape throughout the country. The trouble is that the entire American cacophony sounds like an echo chamber that keeps echoing the same word: “democracy.” And yet, something tells me that very few if any of what you may call the “cacophoners” of North America could write a decent essay explaining what democracy means to them.

This is not an opinion I have formulated recently. It is one that has been evolving at the back of my head for decades. It all started when, as a university student, I lived on campus in a building that was full of law students with whom I mingled so closely that a few thought I was a law student and treated me as one of them. There was a great deal I wanted to know about the system of law and so I asked many questions and participated in discussions they call moot court. Some of the discussions drifted to topics that relate to the governance of the ship of state and a few other grand principles such as democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and the like.

I cannot now rate the level of comprehension that those students had for the topics we discussed because my own level was not high enough at the time. But I had brought from Egypt (the country of my birth) one idea that never ceased to preoccupy me. I knew that the country adhered to the Civil Code which is also known as the Napoleonic Code. In fact, Egypt had adopted this system of law when the French were occupying it and did not relinquish it even after the British -- who adhere to the Common Law – had replaced the French as the new occupiers of the country. I always wanted to know what the difference was in everyday life between the two systems of law especially in view of the fact that Canada (my adopted country) is both French and English where the Civil Code is supposed to apply in one part of the country while the Common Law is clearly applied in the other part.

And this is where the discoveries began to astound me. Living in both parts of the country and fully conversant in the two official languages, I continued to mingle with lawyers as much as the other professions. And I always wanted to know from them the things that had preoccupied me for ever. Before long, I came out with the horrible discovery that not a single lawyer or anyone else in either part of the country could cite one example where the law was materially different in French Canada as opposed to English Canada. And then I tried to find out from these people what they thought of the big topics of the day such as democracy and the like but here too, no one seemed to have formulated an idea that would apply to us who live in this part of the world and where we believe we have all the answers. More often than not, the discussion drifted to engulf the “other” countries where my interlocutors asserted that the people over there were deprived of democracy, freedom of speech and the like. Thus, all that my North American compatriots could talk about was that we had something here which everyone else was deprived of but they could not describe in any coherent way what it was that we had. So unreal, so strange and so weird!

And when the time came for Canada to look once again in the matter of the Constitution with the view of bringing French speaking Quebec into the fold, having been left out at the start, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney was gracious enough to write to me ahead of time to ask that I participate in the upcoming debate. However, being blacklisted on order from the Jewish organizations, I was not to participate publicly under my name or any pseudonym. Instead, a committee of “Prominent Canadians” was formed and I was to supply these people with a daily stream of ideas, observations, commentaries and so on. I did my part discretely but a delegate from one of the negotiating Provinces out West got wind of the arrangement and complained publicly that he felt he was negotiating with a ghost. Yet, nothing was done to change the absurd situation because it was the wish of the Jews that I be kept blacklisted and hidden, and the obligation of the Globe and Mail to see to it that the Jewish wish was enforced tightly and effectively.

Our side did very well at the beginning of the debate and it looked for a time like we were going to score a landslide victory in the popular referendum on the Constitution. But then something happened that reversed the trend. The pundits and opinion makers nationwide who sympathized with me at the start because they were happy that I was finally given a recognizable role to play in the affairs of the nation, suddenly reversed their stance and made an issue of the absurdity of the situation that kept me hidden as I supplied the committee of Prominent Canadians with material they pretended was their own and took credit for it. Of course, the people who protested did not mention my name because the public would not have recognized it and would not have known what was being talked about. And so I was made into an avatar to represent something else.

To understand how this was done, you need to understand the psychology that was at play at the time. You need to know that there had always been in Canada something called “Western Alienation” because the people in Western Canada felt that while they were contributing to the generation of the wealth and the power in the country, only Central Canada enjoyed all the wealth and exercised all the power. And so, the pundits and the opinion makers of the West continued to sympathize with me but were now seeing me as the embodiment of the absurd situation in which they viewed themselves as Western Canadians. And so one day, one prominent media personality in Vancouver lit the fire and let it spread like wildfire all the way to Central and to Eastern Canada. And despite all of this, we only lost the referendum by a whisker.
To this day, I still feel we could have won the referendum regardless of the absurdity of the situation if only I was supplied early enough with the information that pertained to what was happening elsewhere in the country, information I had to have to respond quickly to the fast moving developments. One of those instances was the fact that even the high level captains of the ship of state were confused about the meaning of the word “distinct”. It was a word that the French Province of Quebec wanted to insert into the Constitution so as to be viewed as different from the other Provinces -- all of which are English -- thus be given jurisdiction over matters like language, culture and education that the English Provinces were not getting. Yes, the captains of the ship of state were confused about the word, and the pundits and the opinion makers -- especially those in the West -- seized on this fact to make it sound like the word distinct was meant to portray Quebec as being “distinguished” thus above all the others. They lit the fires of resentment and the polls that were saying we were going to score a landslide victory began to erode. Finally, I was told what was happening in the rest of the country and so I wrote to explain the difference between distinct and distinguished but it was too late because the momentum had gathered enough steam to carry the damage to the day of the vote and hand us a narrow defeat.

This has been the highlight of my experience with democracy in this part of the world. Much more has happened before and after that episode; instances I may or may not live long enough to tell about. But if there is one thing that I wish to tell to the Egyptian people in Tahrir Square and everywhere else in that magnificent land, it is this: Many dogs are barking at you, my friends, and they will continue to bark until they can bark no more and fall silent. Do not be bothered by them because despite the shackles you may have had around your wrists -- your hearts and your minds have remained free, the reason why you have been able to shake off the shackles and be physically and psychologically free again.

I only wish that my adopted compatriots in North America had a fraction of the authentic freedom which is powering you because if we had it here, we would not have captains of the ship of state bite each other in the back for the privilege of being first to prostitute themselves to the lowest of Jews who would be looking around in search of someone to kiss his rear end day in and day out. So unreal, so strange so weird and so frightening!

You'll come out of this okay, my friends, and we'll continue to live in the misery of our ignorant pomposity.

The Billion Bucks Boondoggle

A new saying has been coined around here. It goes like this: “If you want to detect truffles get a sniffing pig; if you want to follow someone's trail get a sniffing dog; if you want to detect Egyptian garbage get an American journalist.” The saying came about in response to something weird you will find only in the Judeo-Yiddish culture. It is that when the people of this culture make someone the target of their badmouthing machine, they rush to invent a lie with which to balance every piece of truth that comes into the public domain whether it comes by design or comes inadvertently. And so it happened that when Egypt was having an uprising at the end of January and the beginning of February in the year 2010, the citizens of Cairo took time to clean up after themselves because municipal work had come to a standstill.

Believe it or not, the image of young Egyptians being shown on American television in the act of cleaning after themselves was the trigger that set-off alarm bells in the Judeo-Yiddish centers of hate propaganda from New York to Tel Aviv and from Toronto to the District of Columbia. The result was that a panicky message was sent out to the masters of spin and distortion calling on them to gather together and design a plan that will ”balance out” this insidious expression of anti-Semitism. The masters of spin and distortion came together as requested and were given instructions as to what the plan was supposed to accomplish.

They raked their brains and came up with a plan that turned out to be nothing more than the same old plan they have been devising over and over for decades. It consisted of contacting every editor, publisher, director and producer in the print and the audio-visual media under their control and tell him or her to send someone to Egypt. Once there, that someone was instructed to find a pile of garbage that had not yet been collected and make it the main feature in the publication they worked for. This was it, folks, showing young Egyptians cleaning Cairo on American television was an insidious act of anti-Semitism that had to be balanced by showing on the same television screens garbage that had not yet been collected in Cairo. This is the Judeo-Israeli sense of balance that has been fueling creativity in the North American media during the past few decades. And when you have this much creativity why would someone want anything more?

And it was not too difficult for these people to find a pile of garbage this time around because they were well versed in the art of sniffing for Egyptian garbage and detecting it. They did so on more than one occasion previously when garbage was not collected in an Egyptian city due to a garbage strike or some such reason. And this is when they published their smelly articles in prestigious newspapers such as the New York Times. In fact, finding garbage in Cairo and writing or talking about it is something that has obsessed many a prestigious American media outlet. You may say these people have had a love affair with Egyptian garbage. And no one has exhibited a higher level of love than the PBS television network. They sent special correspondents, anchors and reporters on several occasions to bring back stories on garbage in Egypt; about those who recycle it, those who paint it, those who write about it and so on. And guess what, at PBS they found their stories to be so attractive that they shared them among the different programs -- from the nightly news to the weekly social and religious shows. But that was then and this is now. What happened this time was that the journalists who were sent to Cairo found a small pile of garbage that had been overlooked by the young citizens of that city. And while the revolution was exploding full blast around them, the crew of at least one audio-visual network managed to construct a big pile of propaganda around that small pile of garbage. How thoughtful, meaningful and useful to the audience! Are you not thrilled, my friend?

But not everyone in American journalism who seems preoccupied with Egyptian garbage is obsessed by the thing because (a) they have been ordered to exhibit signs of obsession by the Judeo-Israeli propaganda machine or (b) to adopt the subject as a pet project or (c) because they love the looks and the smell of garbage. In fact, some people adopt the subject on their own because they like to make a quick and easy buck exploiting it. There is a story to tell in this regard about what happened with a writer whose name escapes me at this moment. He wrote a remarkable piece that was published in one of those prestigious newspapers.

To help the reader understand the story I am about to tell, I must begin by explaining something about the Arabic language. Unlike most Latin languages, you do not stick a letter like an s at the end of a noun to transform it from the singular to the plural. It is more complicated than that in Arabic; and you can get an idea how complicated it is when you look at one exception to the rule which occurs in the English language. The plural of child, for example, is not childs but children. In a similar fashion, the plural of most nouns in Arabic is obtained by one of several irregular possibilities. Now to the story. What the writer did was to pretend that he went to Egypt where he says he met a garbageman, spent time with him and decided to write about him. As it turned out, however, the writer never went to Egypt and never met a garbageman. His story was a fabrication and this is how I discovered this reality. Throughout the time that the swine flu was menacing the world, the audio-visual media and the printed ones kept mentioning the “zabbaleen” of Egypt who also raised pigs and fed them garbage. And so the writer kept referring to his new found buddy as a zabbaleen. The thing is that zabbaleen is the plural of zabbal. That is, you can speak of a zabbal but not of a zabbaleen. It is like saying in English: I went to Egypt and met a children whose story I wish to tell you about.

Whether the writer spoke Arabic or had a translator helping him, he would have known about this peculiarity of the Arabic language and would have avoided making the mistake. But he was handicapped in that he had neither the knowledge nor the right sort of help. He went ahead and fabricated a phony story because many others were writing or talking about the zabbaleen of Egypt and the relationship these people had with the pigs they were raising. The situation gave all the lazy writers out there free material to plagiarize or be inspired by. The writer of our story could not resist jumping on the bandwagon and make an easy buck too. Unfortunately, it did not occur to him that his handicap could give away his dirty little secret. It happened and he was caught.

Something else was unfolding in the world during the early stages of the Egyptian revolution of 2011 and the news was released when everyone was preoccupied with Egypt. For this reason, the story of what happened to Intel, the American maker of computer chips, commanded minimal attention. In a nutshell the company lost a billion dollars or maybe more due the disastrous relationship it maintains with Israel. Despite the persistent reports that the non-Jewish executives at Intel have had it up to here with the relationship that the company has with Israel, the Israelis and their Jewish cohorts kept blanketing the world with spins to the effect that Intel would not survive or even exist without Israel. There were times when these people pointed to a work they claimed was done for an Intel product in Israel and bragged that without such work Intel would have become history.

The truth being the exact opposite of that became evident once more when yet another mistake was made at the Haifa facility where the Israelis were given a simple job to do for the Sandy Bridge Microprocessor but did it so badly they ended up costing the company an arm and a leg. The preliminary estimate is that the mistake will cost Intel a billion dollars immediately without counting the possible future costs or the loss in reputation, trust and goodwill. And it is worth noting that this is a cost which hits directly at the bottom line of the company's balance sheet. This means it will ultimately hit the accounts of the numerous Intel shareholders who are wondering by now when the company will do the right thing and pull out entirely from that calamity they call Israel. Some people have suggested that Intel should change its moniker from “Intel Inside” to “Israel Inside” to “Garbage Inside” to “Calamity Inside”.

But why do the Judeo-Yiddish characters go to such grotesque extremes as to speak of and show nothing but garbage and slums in the ancient city of Cairo while speaking of nothing but false and unrealistic achievements in Israel? Because they can. But why can they? Because the American journalists who like to think of themselves as being free are neither free nor do they have the necessary self-respect to realize that they are shackled. They just do what they are told and look forward to their next paycheck. In the meantime they will continue to be sent to Egypt to look for stories to spin and distort so as to warp the mind of their own people and play havoc with their emotions for the glory of a foreign country that never seems to rise above the level of the disgraceful.

The Egyptians are now having a revolution against what they perceive to be domestic tyranny. When will the American journalists discover that they are living under a foreign tyranny a thousand times worse than that in Egypt and rise up against it?