Dancing In Circles To Hide The Elephant

It is the God-given right of every leader to serenade the achievements of his country, and this is what Barack Obama, President of the United States of America and Commander-in-Chief of its armed forces, did on January 24, 2012 in his State of the Union Address to the Congress and the nation. He spoke of his country's glorious past and no one would argue with that; he identified the country's current difficulties and most people would say he was correct in that too; but when it came to painting a picture of the future, his performance was questionable. In fact, he said the following to buttress the points he was making: “...anyone who tells you that America is in decline or that our influence has waned, doesn't know what they're talking about.” And he went on to sing the praises of America, but a little of that sounded like playing Amazing Grace with a bagpipe that has a gaping hole at its side.

Actually, the basic notes of the serenade were tested early in the speech when he asserted that: “We gather tonight knowing that … the United States ... [is] more respected around the world.” What he tried here was heroic; what he achieved was little, and the reason is that he ignored a few realities of the times. Yes, he was correct when he described some achievements as “...a testament to the courage, selflessness and teamwork of America's Armed Forces.” And yes, he was imaginative when he used this reality to try and motivate members of the useless Congress to do likewise and work as a team for the good of the nation. But he failed when he did not take into account the reality that a common denominator exists which links the ineffectiveness of the Congress in domestic affairs with the foreign wars into which America was dragged. Disregarding this reality made it impossible for him to explain why America was disrespected in the world despite the sometimes exemplary performance of its soldiers. And this is what obligated him to assert a situation that does not exist in real life; one that is contrary to what the rest of the world knows.

Starting at this point, it became increasingly more difficult to see how America will be able to duplicate the achievements it made right after the Second World War; or how it will develop what he described as: “An economy built to last, where hard work pays off and responsibility is rewarded.” In fact, the more inspirational he became while describing what can be achieved in the America of the future, the more urgent became the question: But what about the elephant in the room? Unfortunately, he did not answer this question -- which he should have because it would have allowed him to describe a sound foundation upon which the future of his dream can be erected. Instead of doing this, however, he chose to remind the audience as to “how we got here”. He then went on to describe the symptoms of what ails America today rather than identify the underlying disease -- that proverbial elephant in the room.

Thus, it happened to him what happens to a reporter that tries to report on the reality of an issue while trying to avoid the core of that issue; he goes round and round in circles but sheds no light on the matter. And so, using the metaphor of the house of cards that collapsed in 2008, the President accurately stated that: “Long before the recession, jobs and manufacturing began leaving our shores.” But right after this sentence, he went on to say this: “Technology made business more efficient, but also made some jobs obsolete.” Whoa! Wait a minute, wait a minute. Explain this Mr. President: How is it that technology made some jobs so obsolete that they left America to go to distant shores where the same products were made and shipped back to America? Enough dancing around the truth and talk to us about the elephant in the room.

And as you think about all this, dear reader, you get hit with the next question: Without a job to earn the money, how did the Americans pay for the imported goods? But you did not have to go too far to find the answer for, here it is in the President's own address: “...mortgages had been sold to people who couldn't afford or understand them. Banks had made huge bets and bonuses with other people's money.” And what was the result of all this? you ask. Here is the answer in the President's own words: “Folks at the top saw their incomes rise … but also hardworking Americans struggled with … personal debt that kept piling up.” This is it, you say. It was debt where the money came from – debt from local sources and debt from foreign sources.

But you conclude that this is not the invisible elephant in the room because the empirical observations reported in the speech were but the symptoms of what has afflicted America since “long before the recession,” as he put it. This, in turn, motivates you to try and identify the ailment underlying those symptoms. But did the President try to do so? you ask. And the answer is no, he did not. What he did, however, was to prescribe a few cures that hint at the fact someone knows something about the nature of the ailment plaguing America but they are not fleshing it. Here is one thing the President said in this regard: “And we've put in place new rules to hold Wall Street accountable...” Here is another thing he said: “...I will work with anyone in this chamber [the Congress] to build … but I intend to fight obstruction with action, and I will oppose … return to the … policies that brought on this economic crisis...” Thus, we see that someone has identified both the Congress and Wall Street as two of the culprits that caused the ailment debilitating the Union today.

The President went on to say something that also proves he understands it is a canard to blame the loss of manufacturing jobs on the progress made by technology. Here is what he said in this regard: “No, we will not go back to an economy weakened by outsourcing … I want to … lay out a blueprint for an economy that's built … on American manufacturing … and a renewal of American values.” Look at that, dear reader; he cited the renewal of American values as a measure he intends to take to help solve America's problems. And this can only mean he has realized that the loss of those values was a contributing factor to the flight of American industries and American jobs to other jurisdictions.

Thus, we have all the relevant factors now; they are the three legs of the disease that ails America today. These are the Congress, Wall Street and a culture that is killing American values. So then, what did the President promise to do to turn things around? Well, the Congress being a coequal branch of government, he could only promise to cajole it, which he did. As to the finances of the nation, here is his answer: “...start with our tax code … companies [now] get tax breaks for moving … profits overseas … It makes no sense, and everyone knows it.” As to the culture, he said this: “Teachers matter. So instead of bashing them … let's ,,, reward the best ones.” And there is this: “When kids do graduate, the most daunting challenge can be the cost of college … Of course, it's not enough for us to increase student aid … Higher education [is] an economic imperative...” Thus, he sees education as being a component of American culture as well as a carrier of its values. And he must have concluded in his mind that when you influence education the wrong way, you affect the culture and hurt the nation.

This says that the problems of America can now be seen to having been generated by the congressmen and women who work for themselves and for special interest instead of working for the nation; by the Wall Street characters who work for themselves and their cronies at the expense of the national economy; and by the people who meddle with the culture of America, something they do by disrupting the educational setup for reasons of their own. And these would be the three horsemen of America's modern apocalypse.

But how do people meddle with the culture or disrupt the educational setup? They do it by pretending to “educate” the public as to their “sensitivities” when in fact, they would be working to ensnare the ruling classes, paralyze them and render them ineffective. This is an ancient game that some people have learned to play efficiently and play it ruthlessly. They play it gently at first as would a lamb grazing peacefully in a pasture; they do so till they gather the level of power that will allow them to commit murder and get away with it. When this happens, they quickly shed the sheep's clothing they have been wearing all along, and they switch to the beastly characteristics that have them murder all those who refuse to bow to their wishes. This is something they do by character assassination and by every method that would be available to them at the time of execution.

If this sounds like the sort of people we find at the helm of the Jewish organizations, it is because they are precisely these people. Their agenda has become the invisible elephant in the room; a reality that is danced around in the English speaking world but never confronted head on. As to how these people operate; well, there is the known history of their sabotaging the home front, something they did to cause America's defeat in Vietnam. They managed to accomplish this feat by using America's own media outlets and the other vehicles of popular culture. The trick they used was to accuse all potential rivals of being antisemitic; thus assassinated their character and banished them from the scene altogether. This done, they forced America to turn its attention away from Asia and toward the Middle East where it was forced to provide a protective umbrella to an Israel that was preparing to go on a rampage. Protected by America at all levels and supplied with food, fuel, finances and weapons, the Israelis put into effect what they had in mind. It was to infest a Middle East that was the image of the Garden of Eden and to spray it with their stink as would a family of skunks that had decided to desecrate a hallowed ground. And they succeeded beyond the widest dream of the forefathers who cooked up that demonic scheme.

This history was not without serious consequences. Seeing that the American military industrial complex had come under the control of world Jewry and of Israel; and realizing that their oil was fueling this complex, the Arabs instituted a temporary embargo on selling petroleum to America, an act that caused the rise in fuel prices and the switching to the use of smaller cars. Since America was not producing small cars, the Japanese and German manufacturers gained a huge share of the American market almost overnight. And since the car was the symbol of American industry, the loss of market share was the blow that broke the back of America's industrial might. Furthermore, it opened the way for America to be challenged not only by the Japanese and the Germans, and not only by car manufacturers but challenged by other jurisdictions as well, all of which raced to manufacture products they sold in America and elsewhere.

To give an ironic twist to this whole matter, those were the products that heretofore were made in America and sold to the other jurisdictions. The net result was a reversal made possible by Zion's hand meddling in the culture of America, and by the reeducation of its people. No, this was not a case of real teachers showing the people how to make things that will compete successfully in the new world that is shaping up; it was something else, something that will blow your mind. Get this now; the people were taught how to worship the Jew and ask no question in lessons that were blared to them electronically by pastors who wore the habit of Satan himself and who treated their congregations like sheep and silent lambs.

Despite all this, things started to get back to normal after a while, but sensing that they were conned and railroaded by the hijackers of their culture, the American people had their moment of sweet revenge when they reverted to the use of gas guzzling vehicles that came in all sorts of models and filled all sorts of needs. This new trend so alarmed the Jewish organizations that they fell back on their specialty to solve what they saw as a threat to their agenda. Thus, they invented another one of those “existential” menace which they said was threatening not only the Jews but all of humanity. The solution – about which they educated the public -- would require the participation of everyone on Earth, they said. And they argued for the institution of a strict program of Jewish style autocratic measures to banish from the scene all the “deniers” who will refuse to toe the line. This time, the line was to the effect that the planet was cooking because of the carbon dioxide emissions that come with the use of petroleum and the other hydrocarbons. Their recommendation was to stop using these products -- not to hurt the Arabs which they vehemently denied was their intention -- but to heal the Planet.

Then the myth exploded and was proven to be yet another Jewish quackery that was meant to put a distance between America and the Arab world. The result of this discovery was the taking of measures described by the President in these words: “...we've opened millions of new acres for oil and gas exploration … I'm directing my Administration to open more than 75 percent of our potential offshore oil and gas resources.” Once again, things are getting back to normal in America but there is still the matter of the nation being in the can because its housing market is still under water. What to do here? The President had an answer: “I'm sending this Congress a plan that gives every responsible homeowner the chance to save … by refinancing at historically low interest rates … Americans who work hard … deserve a Government and a financial system that do the same … No bailouts, no handouts, and no copouts.” There is here the promise that the Congress, the finances of the nation and the culture – the three dreaded horsemen -- are being dealt with to save America from a potential Apocalypse.

But will the Congress listen to their President when the Jewish organizations will have gone ahead of him to begin a campaign of threats, bribes and blackmail among the spineless characters in that assembly of good-for-nothing treasonous clowns? After all, the President said it clearly that he wants: “A return to American values of fair play and shared responsibility [that] will help us protect our people and our economy.” Where does he think he is? they ask. Does he really believe this is a free country? No, it's not. This is America, Mr. President; it is a Jewish colony that exists to protect Israel and support the fake economy installed there. The fear, you see, is that to do what the President wants will mean to reject the Israeli-Yiddish values because they and the American values are mutually exclusive. You can have one or you can have the other but you cannot have them both at the same time.

In fact, what we saw happen during the past few decades was the rise of a trend to replace the American values by the Israeli-Yiddish values. The most obvious example was the time when the Jewish organizations had argued that Israel was so advanced in everything, it was not living by the generosity of the American taxpayers but by the ingenuity of its people who invented all that is in existence, developed all that is worthy and improved on everything. The claim was to the effect that the Jews did all this in an Israel where there is no agriculture to speak of, no industry to rely on and no experimentation to matter even one iota. It was further explained that the people there simply thought things out, designed them in the mind, prototyped them in the imagination and produced them out of thin air. After all, Israel is the land of miracles, you see!

Thus – it was concluded -- America can strive to become a carbon copy of Israel by shedding its industries so as to produce wealth that will knock everyone's socks off. Unfortunately this sort of talk was bought by enough idiots whose common sense had been knocked off by a mysterious disease of unknown origin. And these people contributed mightily to the industrial decline of the superpower. As if this were not enough, something else happened; the Jewish organizations that instigated the whole goofy trend came up with another idea, that of profiling people in America the way they do in Israel. And the whole world is now waiting to see if enough clowns will be drawn to this new idea. You never know -- this is America, after all.

What is certain, however, is that the President's plan will be viewed by the Jewish organizations as another one of those existential threats; and they will want to fight it tooth and nail – there is no doubt about that. Thus, they will work to defeat the effort because they cannot imagine an American system of governance that works for America and the American people but not for Israel and the Jewish people. It would be like imagining a North Korea that is suddenly transformed into a Singapore; a nation that looks after its own people rather than leave them to wilt in the wilderness of a political and cultural wasteland.

So then, what is there to do? Well, if you are serious about solving America's problems, you begin with the recognition that the uselessness of the Congress is linked to the wars in which America was dragged and by which it was ruined. The two are connected because they were authored by the same Jewish leaders. What these people did was to start a cultural battle in America. They did so first by assaulting and paralyzing a Congress that used to be the command and control center of the existing culture. Second, they planted the boots of their own people in every cultural outlet in the nation. Third, they augmented these boots by recruiting local foot soldiers and giving them the task of doing the dirty work their people would not do. Fourth, they mobilized the assets of America and started foreign wars to force the acceptance of Israel – their newly anointed home country – by a world that was not eager to accept in its midst a little fart known for its obnoxious behavior.

Thus, the solution to America's problems is to stop dancing around the truth, to describe the elephant in the room for what it is, to tell of the role it has played in the degradation of America, and to explain how it will be neutralized. In other words, it is time for the commander-in-chief to put on the hat of teacher-in-chief and take over from the disciples of Satan who have up to now “educated” the American public to the ultimate ruin of their country.

Through The Wrong End Of The Telescope

Ed Husain says this about himself: “I am not an American, but I firmly believe that, on balance, American power is a force for good in the world.” Husain is a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, and he wrote these words in an article that was published in the Wall Street Journal today, January 26, 2012 under the title: “Egypt's Revolt and the American Model”. The piece has a subtitle: “The Arab revolutionaries didn't look to China or Russia as examples of good government” which is a quote lifted from the article itself.

What makes this article by this writer at this time a seminal work is that it brings into focus what has been up to now a difficult point on which to focus the debate. The reason has been that the views we always discussed were looked at from the wrong end of the telescope. But lest I mislead you, dear reader, Husain did not turn the telescope around to help us see reality as it is. On the contrary, he exaggerated the distortion to a point where we got the sense that something was absurd. And it was this realization that prepared us to entertain the possibility of another way to look at things. Husain then did something inadvertently by which he made us conclude that looking through the wrong end of the telescope was an idea we ought to reject.

Let us begin at the beginning the way he did, by looking at the right end of the telescope. He starts the article like this: “Upon landing at Cairo … I see a billboard that quotes … Obama ... Across Egypt I find … books on how to pass entrance tests for American universities. It's a jarring contrast, then, to return to JFK airport and see … the fashionable tendency … to talk down American standing in the Middle East.” So far so good, at least as far as his effort goes to introduce us to empirical observations he made during the voyage. But where he goes wrong is when he neglects to look at the details of what he just observed, a stance he takes in favor of doing something else. What he does is look at a mirror in which he sees himself behind the telescope looking at the mirror. Here is this part: “Granted, it is necessary to analyze America's influence .. but … another matter to ... campaign for a less powerful America...”

This is where you realize that Ed Husain got caught in the same circular debate that will end up making his argument look like a dog chasing its tail. In fact, he goes on to rehash the worn out arguments that were formulated by the Jewish leaders and articulated by the neocons. To this end, he quotes Tony Blair who exalted America by comparison to Russia and China. And he chides what he calls American conventional wisdom concerning the weakening of American leverage in the Middle East which he says will become a self-fulfilling prophecy unless the US government stops leading from behind and finds its backbone.

And surprise, surprise, he finds the spot in the article where he can insert the obligatory bashing of Egypt's military. He does so and then relates an incident during which he stood up not to that military but to the American Embassy in Cairo that did not swagger in its face when it should have. It all happened via Twitter, he says, and his contribution as a British born citizen of Bangladeshi descent now living in America, was to challenge the American Embassy with the tweeted question: “Then what?” which presumably meant: And what are you going to do about it, suckers?

Lacking confidence in themselves, Embassy officials asked him what should be done, he says, and he replied that the US government should ask its military allies to return to their barracks, or else there is that small matter of 1.3 billion dollars annually. To bolster his argument, he quotes Joseph Nye of Harvard who defined soft power. But then Husain does something that ends up halting the dog from chasing its tail, at least for a short while. He begins by saying that the US government must believe in itself and project confidence. Okay, you say, this goes with what the Jewish leaders have BS(ed) about for ages, and what he himself has been saying up to now in the article. And then, he begins the process of tripping himself, an act that will eventually stop the circular argument in its tracks. This is what he writes in this regard: “[the US government must] realize that America remains hugely attractive across the Middle East.”

Is he going to trip himself now? He will but not yet. For a while longer, he resists making the next logical step which would have been to free himself of the circular argument and to start looking at the reality that the telescope could be showing him. Instead of doing this, he forces himself once again to take up the Tony Blair comparison of America versus China or Russia, and thus returns to the habit of looking at himself in the mirror once again. And he uses this situation as a springboard to assert that the American system of government is so perfect, even the Islamist love it while the rest of the population loves Hollywood films, McDonald's, Starbucks, jeans, baseball caps, Facebook and Twitter. That must be it; the trip wire that will unravel the whole phony argument. Are we there yet?

Yes. Finally, he did what he should to have done at the start instead of going through the verbal trash he inflicted on us. Here is what he said in this regard: “...this generation of Arabs won't recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Trying to force them to do so will not only fail but risks compromising American influence. It is wiser to … help Palestinians realize their dream of a dignified, free state.” Had he started with this and had he coupled it with the reality that the Arabs have no animosity toward the Americans, he would have dispelled the decades worth of Jewish propaganda which “educated” the American public and political classes to the stupid notion that the Arabs hate America because the first hate freedom and the latter loves it.

Husain would have shown that the half-century's worth of one-sided Jewish talk on the Middle East absent of an Arab push back must now be flushed down the toilet where it belongs. Instead of that, he realized that he came close to committing a sacrilegious act, and quickly did something to appease the Jewish leaders who will be reading the article. He saluted Anatoli Sharansky whom, he says, predicted the rise of democratic forces in the Arab countries. Good he stopped short of saying that Sharansky, the Russian-Israeli Jew, caused the Arab Revolution and led it to a triumphant resolution like only a Jew could do it.

And he ends the article with this: “As Egypt and other Arab nations experiment with democracy, the U.S. cannot be seen to be weak, nor craving for yesteryear, but instead must support the people's cries of freedom.”

The poor thing, he still does not realize that the Arabs understand freedom and know how to go about obtaining it if and when it slips through their fingers. It is not they who cry in vain for freedom, wondering how to reclaim their country and their culture; it is the people who live under Jewish tyranny in the English speaking world. Maybe Ed Husain will someday prove that he understands this message by writing honestly of what he knows without having to appease his Jewish masters.

High School International On The Campaign Trail

If you are a teacher, you're probably aware of a situation in your school where the schoolyard culture is unfolding in a manner that annoys you but you decide to do nothing about it because you're haunted by the thought that your interference may end up making matters worse. An example would be that of a dominant student who is surrounded by 2 or 3 sycophants, all working together to push a weak student into doing the things they would not do themselves. These could be things that range in seriousness from the setting of a harmless prank to the commission a criminal act. But if you are not a teacher, you probably remember something like it from your high school days.

Although this situation looks like a classic high school culture, you will be surprised to know that it is not restricted to the schoolyard. Similar situations happen in real life, albeit in a modified form, at all levels of our culture where people are brought together and made to interact with one another. You see it happen at the office, in the club or the association where a dominant person would surround himself or herself with a handful of sycophants and pick on someone weak to incite them to do something that will hurt a third party for a reason you may never comprehend.

And believe it or not, this culture is also prevalent at the international level where nations and powerful institutions approach other nations or institutions to incite them to do the things they would not do themselves or could not do alone. We have a perfect example of this in the activities of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) that relentlessly incites the American ruling class and the related institutions to commit acts around the world that range from the annoying pranks to the war crimes of the most heinous kind. The latest incitement has come in the form of an article published in the Wall Street Journal today, January 23, 2012.

The article comes under the title: “How the U.S. Should Handle the Islamist Rise in Egypt”. It is signed by Robert Satloff and Eric Trager of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, itself a creation of AIPAC to which it serves as the propaganda machine every day of the week, and serves as the incitement arm every week of the year. When you begin to read the article, the first two sentences tell you that you are about to embark on a voyage into a world that is so distorted, your mind will be made to feel contorted like a pretzel while you try to navigate through the article.

Here are the two sentences: “From an America perspective, the situation in Egypt is a nightmare. One year after Tahrir Square triumphantly toppled a tyrant, Islamists are poised to profit from Egyptian 'people power.'” First of all, these people are not expressing an American perspective. They view themselves as Jews who have acquired automatic citizenship of Israel whether or not they applied for it. Their cause is the promotion of World Jewry to which they owe their loyalty and have dedicated their lives. Second of all, the situation in Egypt reflects the ancient Jewish dream that still remains a nightmare because the Nile refuses to turn into a river of blood; the event that wacko Jews have been praying for since the days of Moses. Third of all, the people they call Islamists are not readying themselves to profit from Egyptian people power; they are the Egyptian people power. If they will profit from something, it will be from being who they are. And that is worth a lot.

Because you realize that you are embarking on a devilish voyage that will take you to a hellish destination, you decide to take a peek at that destination before going through the torture of having to read an AIPAC article. Thus, you look for and find the following commands: “Washington's message … should be that U.S. support … is conditional on their cooperation in maintaining peace with Israel and preserving political pluralism and religious and minority rights … America should determine its relationship based on what Egypt's new rulers actually do...” Yes, it is what you expected all along; these people are working for Israel and World Jewry no more and no less. Everything else you encounter in the article is but the special effect that means to distract the readers when they go through the process of navigating the harrowing course of the writers toward the deceptive conclusions of AIPAC.

Knowing this, you read on to see how evil incarnate operates to bring the games and techniques of the schoolyard to the world stage. And so, it happens early on that you hit on his passage: “American leaders cannot ignore the fact that the security partnership Washington had with Cairo for more than 30 years is in serious jeopardy.” And you raise an eyebrow because they spoke earlier of the triumphant toppling of a tyrant but now they lament that the security arrangement which existed under the tyranny is in jeopardy. And so you ask: Whose side are they on? The tyranny that made Israel feel secure or the triumph of the people whose political pluralism and religious and minority rights they now champion?

They answer their own question but do so indirectly. What they do is argue that the experience in other countries – Turkey, the model du jour being among them – suggests that governance by the will of the people is bad for Israel when the people are Arab or Muslim. So then, you ask: What are these people inciting America to do? Are they telling it to work to bring back tyranny to these places or telling it to warn Cairo that it is expected to preserve the principles of democracy? The answer is that the leaders of AIPAC are doing both at the same time. Why? you ask. Because they don't care one iota about any one of the two situations. What they work for and care about are Israel and world jury; what they work on are America and its gullible leaders. They will say what sounds good at any point in the article even if they contradict themselves from one paragraph to the other. It is in their Jewish DNA to be like that.

But is this not what they accuse the Egyptians of doing? Here is that passage: “America should determine its relationship based on what Egypt's new rulers actually do … not the cooing sounds that their English-language spokesmen offer visiting journalists, diplomats and politicians.” So you ask: What is going on? Well, what is going on is that all of a sudden, things have been simplified and have become easy to understand. It is this: Every morning the Jewish leaders look in the mirror and identify the ugly spots they see have grown on their faces. This done, they rush to their computers and attribute to the Arabs and the Muslims the ugliness they just saw in themselves. And this is what they always coo about sometime softly and sometimes loudly.

This is how and why, my friend, you see an election campaign in America where candidates to the highest office in the land get on the podium one after the other -- and with very few exceptions -- sing the AIPAC hymn of hate and threats, thus making America feel hated and threatened everywhere in the world like it never was before.

Hidden Pathologies Afflicting Cerebral Jews

All indications are to the effect that the American Administration and its military brass are preoccupied with the situation in the Persian Gulf which is what you would expect of them given the times in which we live. The situation in that part of the world is a complicated one and much has been written about it; mostly by the side that advocates the start of a war against Iran. I expressed my pacifist view on the subject previously, and I do not have more to add to it but I am revisiting the subject at this time for a different reason. It is that a new article inciting war has brought to light a point I consider too important to ignore.

The article in question was written by Mark Helprin under the title: “The Mortal Threat From Iran” and was published in the Wall Street Journal on January 8, 2012. What distinguishes this article from the others is that its author is not known to be a frivolous, trigger happy warmonger who will shoot first and ask questions later. Rather, he seems to be a thoughtful individual that wrestles with the ideas before expressing them. Thus, when you set aside the possibility that frivolity is behind what he is expressing now, you are left to wonder what it is that brought about views which closely match those of the warmongering extremists.

The essence of the article is summed up in the subtitle that was chosen for it: “Iran can sea-launch from off our coasts. Germany planned this in World War II. If cocaine can be smuggled into the U.S. without interdiction, we cannot dismiss the possibility of an Iranian nuke ending up in Manhattan.” The idea here is to reinforce the point expressed in the title which is that America is facing an existential threat therefore must act preemptively and destroy Iran to remove the threat before it becomes a reality. And the question for which I seek an answer is this: “What could have gone on inside the heart, mind or soul of Mark Helprin to make him develop such views?”

In fact, it did not take me long to be hit with this question; it happened before I had the time to finish reading the first paragraph of the article. The reason why it happened is that Helprin begins the presentation by calling the Iranians “primitive religious fanatics” and describing them as being incapable of performing “cost-benefit analyses...” after which he tells us not to assume they will not close the Strait of Hormuz. But you ask: What got him to think this way? And you are surprised to discover what motivation was lurking behind it all. Look at this piece of wishful thinking: “If Iran does close the strait, we will fight an air and naval war derivative of and yet peripheral to the Iranian nuclear program...” In other words, he does not believe what he says; he only wishes that Iran close the Strait of Hormuz and thus trigger the war he craves.

But why would the Iranians contemplate closing the Strait of Hormuz in his calculation? Is it because they are not capable of doing cost-benefit analyses? Not so, he now says, ascribing to them a reason that is actually a reasonable thing, believe it or not. A reason? What kind of a reason could primitive religious fanatics have? Well, Helprin offers one that is so rational it would cause any nation to do what he believes the Iranians might do. Look what he says in that same first paragraph: “...especially if the oil that is their life's blood is threatened.” And that's not all because when he gets to the second paragraph, he lists nine (count them nine) other reasons why Iran would want to have a nuclear program in the first place. Looking at the way he discusses the matter, you realize that the reasons he describes are so rational and legitimate, he -- as an observer -- has deduced that the Iranians must have embarked on a program to arm themselves with nuclear weapons because they were duty bound to do so, therefore inevitable that it happened.

This is so confusing, what on Earth is going on? The answer to this question is to be found in the subtitle of the article. Let me reprint here for convenience: “Iran can sea-launch from off our coasts. Germany planned this in World War II. If cocaine can be smuggled into the U.S. without interdiction, we cannot dismiss the possibility of an Iranian nuke ending up in Manhattan.” Where -- in the not too distant past -- Mark Helprin used to project the image of a thoughtful individual who wrestled with the ideas before expressing them, he now betrays himself by showing his insane side. As you can see from that passage, he is fearful that an Iranian nuke will end up in Manhattan because of three impressions that gnaw at him. First, he feels that the Iranians have the capability to sea-launch from off America's coasts. Second, he remembers from history that the Germans planned something similar during the War. Third, he assumes that if cocaine can be smuggled into the U.S., so can a nuclear bomb. In fact, he later lists a few more impressions but let's not worry about them.

What is important at this juncture is to understand Helprin's insanity because it is a sample of the fuel that powers the Jewish think tanks which drive America's foreign policy today. The fact is that you can think up hundreds of scenarios, and you can make hundreds of movies about weapons of mass destruction being smuggled into America to blow up Manhattan or Pennsylvania Avenue. But nobody who is sane will recommend that America go around the world and blow up everyone who might develop the capability to do so. And this leads to the question: How then do Helprin and those like him convince themselves of the notion that the Iranians must be singled out and destroyed before they take the initiative and be the first to act?

Well, Helprin and the people of the think tanks have convinced themselves of such notion by questioning the ability of the Iranians to be rational human beings. Here is the passage that tells you this: “[Iran's] conceptions of nuclear strategy are ... looser … than those of Russia, China and … our own. And yet Eisenhower and Churchill weighed a nuclear option in Korea, Kennedy a first strike upon the U.S.S.R., and Westmoreland upon North Vietnam.” This says that he and those of the tanks believe in the evil nature of human beings because one Englishman and three Americans came close to committing an evil act. Thus, he and they would argue that the Iranians -- who are worse than the English and the Americans -- should not be trusted to restrain themselves but that they will go ahead and commit the evil act.

And why are the Iranians worse? Because they make absurd claims with which “we” prefer to dance, says Mark Helprin. To illustrate his point, he asks: “...why spend $1,000-$2,000 per kilowatt to build nuclear plants instead of $400-$800 for gas, when you possess the second largest gas reserves in the world?” He does not answer the question but the answer is that like everyone else, the Iranians are in the process of diversifying their sources of energy. In addition to oil and natural gas, they have uranium ore which they extract and put to use for the betterment of their society. It is their right to do so as a sovereign nation; it is the duty of their leaders to do it for the nation.

You then encounter an argument that is meaningless but one that is frequently used by people who know little about the subject of reserves in the natural resources yet use the numbers to bolster their argument. Helprin writes this: “In 2005, Iran consumed 3.6 trillion cubic feet of its 974 trillion cubic feet of proven reserves which are enough to last 270 years.” This is a long time, therefore a very impressive number to use in an argument. But what is 3.6 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in terms of barrels of oil equivalent (boe)? To find out, you divide by 6,000 to obtain 600 million barrels a year which you divide by the 365 days of the year to find that it only amounts to 1.64 million barrels of oil equivalent a day.

To appreciate the meaning of this result, you need to put it in perspective both in terms of the passage of time and in terms of the development envisaged for the nation. The population of Iran is now close to 80 million people and growing at the rate of 2.5% a year. If this rate is maintained for two generations, the population will double in 28 years and double again in another 28 years to reach 320 million people, the same as that of America today. Judging by the rate of development in the emerging nations, the standard of living in those countries will equal if not surpass that of today's America in less than two generations. Thus, Iran will by then consume energy at least at the same rate as America consumes today both on a per capita basis and in absolute terms.

So we ask: How much energy does America consume today? And the answer is a little more than 92 quadrillion BTUs a year which (I spare you the math) comes to about 42 million boe a day. Thus, if America were to convert all its use of energy into only natural gas, it would consume all of Iran's reserves not in 270 years but in 10 years and 7 months only. Wow! That's not even half a generation! And this is without counting what Iran will need to export in order to pay for the development it has envisaged for itself. Now you know why these people need to have a nuclear program that will contribute to their demand in energy.

Having overlooked these facts deliberately or by ignorance, Helprin now relies on his fantasy to come up with the semblance of a mathematical argument which he hopes will sound scholarly and compelling. In fact, there is no math in what he does because plucking a number out of thin air and calling it probability is not math at all. Here is what he does. He randomly chooses a 1-in-20 probability of something happening and applies it to 3 possible scenarios: breaking a leg; or one person dying; or half a million people dying. And he argues that: “Cost drastically changes the nature of risk, although we persist in ignoring this.” Whatever that means, there is something worth noting here. It is the use of the word persist because it is the most assertive way in which you can make a point. And what is he asserting? He is asserting a probability he plucked out of thin air, nothing more than that. And this is a sleight of hand that only the insane would use to con a gullible audience.

He then uses the following sentence to begin the buildup toward a finale: “Assuming that we are a people worthy of defending ourselves, what can be done?” And he answers his own question by playing the role of military commander, laying out a war plan that is supposed to show how Iran can be destroyed. I must admit I have no idea if the plan will work but I know math, and I tell you if this guy is as backward in military matters as he is in math, God help those who will take up his suggestion and try to implement it.

With Iran destroyed in his mind's eye, there remains the question of the consequences. He sees them materializing in two areas which he quickly dismisses as minimal. The first consequence he cites is the loss of oil production from Iran which, he argues, can easily be offset by Saudi Arabia. The second is that Iranian proxies, as he calls them, “would attempt to exact a price in terror … we would brace for the reprisals … they would then subside.” What is wrong with this approach is the myopic nature of the argument. The way I see it, you can be so efficient at committing an evil act, there can be little or no consequence in the immediate aftermath but there will be plenty to worry about in the future. To wit, no one today cares much about the efficiency with which the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor or the efficiency of the Nazis as they embarked on a project to exterminate the Jews. But look what history is now saying about these two events. By the same token, will the American people want to brew the cup of shame today from which their children will be forced to drink tomorrow? I doubt it.

Mark Helprin then does something that reduces him in a single instant from the thoughtful individual who was thought to wrestle with ideas before expressing them, into something that is even worse than a frivolous, trigger happy warmonger who shoots first and asks questions later. To paraphrase an Iranian saying, he is reduced to a mucus secretion fit only to be blown into a handkerchief. As to what he did to deserve this designation, he wrote this: “Any president of the United States fit for the office should … say … that … Iran … must be deprived...” Let be known that an insane little snort such as Helprin is never in a position to judge the fitness of a president elected by the American people to hold office. What should be said to a character like this is the following: Go play with yourself somewhere else, kid, war is a serious business to be dealt with by grownups.

He lets out one last bark that is not worth discussing.

Zion's Hate And Incitement Machine

If you want to know how a hate and incitement machine works, there is an easy way to do it now. All you have to do is look at the January 8, 2012 editorial page of the Boston Herald and the January 15, 2012 editorial page of the Washington Post. The first has a piece with a title that says: “End Egypt arms aid”; the second has a piece that says: “Harassment in Egypt”. You will find that both editorials discuss a subject at such a low level of comprehension, it would make a 16 year old high school dropout wonder if she should apply for a job writing editorials for a Jewish dominated American publication. She knows she can write at this level if not better even though her teacher once said to her parents she has a learning disability that requires professional help. She may need help, she thinks to herself, but if those characters can have a position like this where they get paid handsomely, so can she. And she delights in the thought that if she did get such a position, it will be a lesson that her teacher will never forget.

The two editorials in question were written in reaction to the Egyptian government raiding the offices of a number of outfits calling themselves names such as: International Republican Institute (IRI), National Democratic Institute (NDI), Freedom House and the like. The Boston Herald describes their activities as: “...inoffensive U.S. democracy coaching organizations” and calls the reason why the Egyptians moved against them: “...a bogus claim of foreign 'interference' in Egyptian politics.” A little later on, the editors of the Herald enforce their argument by saying this: “[The outfits] have offered evidence that they complied with Egyptian law.” By contrast, the Washington Post says this: “Egyptian authorities are insisting that the NGOs register under laws passed but never enforced … which would allow the government to control funding.” A little later on, the editors of the Post say the following to further their argument: “...the aid is vital … to counter the huge flow of money from Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf states to Islamist groups.”

So then, what role were the outfits playing? Were they inoffensive organizations that complied with Egyptian law, or outfits that operated in contravention of the laws that were there all along but were not enforced until now? And what is this idea about countering the inflow of money from Gulf states to Islamist groups? Did the Americans decide to turn Egypt into a battleground on which to fight for influence against the Arab states? Amazing gall for a people whose house is in such a disorder, they need someone to show them how to fix it! But if you are tickled by this and you wonder how the new form of cold war is being waged in the Middle East, the following quote from the Boston Herald may tell you something: “An end to military aid, coupled with the new U.S. talks with the Muslim Brotherhood, would show Egypt's generals where they really stand.” Now I ask this: Are the mentally challenged editors of America's Jewish dominated publications calling on their country to fight the Muslims with one hand and extend the other hand to them just to bug Egypt's generals? What kind of low IQ high school adolescents are these who are in charge of America's cultural life? No wonder the nation is going down the tube as fast as you can flush a toilet.

As you may have guessed, my friend, the International Republican Institute is an arm of the Republican Party of the beltway in the District of Columbia, while the National Democratic Institute is an arm of the Democratic Party, also headquartered at that same address. And this is how the Boston Herald describes the whole matter: “The raids on the offices of the … congressionally financed affiliates of the major U.S. parties, was an insult meant to show that the military is determined to dominate whatever civilian government emerges from … the parliamentary voting [in Egypt].” Well well, what have we here? The first thing that comes to mind is the question: How in hell can someone insult a congress that is made of parties which are themselves filled with nothing but (PPMGs) pimps and prostitutes, madams and gigolos? Is this not, by itself, the worst insult you can hurl at the idea of national governance? You cannot insult the insult, idiots!

The second thing that comes to mind is that there is here an implicit recognition of the fact that the battle being waged by foreigners in Egypt is a battle to “dominate whatever civilian government emerges...” Get it now? The PPMGs of America are borrowing money and using it to transform the nations of the world, Egypt among them, into PPMGs just like themselves. And why is that, you ask? Why, to serve Israel and world Jewry, of course. Just think about it, the aim here is to establish the long sought after Jewish dream of a world made exclusively of pimps and prostitutes, madams and gigolos like the Congress of good old USA -- all serving the one and only master race. Neat eh!

But you wouldn't know that from reading the Washington Post which says this: “Egyptian security forces … launched a … raid on 17 offices of American and U.S.-funded civil-society groups, including stalwarts of democracy promotion such as the National Democratic Institute, the International Republican Institute and Freedom House.” So you are prompted to look for a description as to how the outfits go about doing their “stalwart” work but find none in the editorial of the Post. Luckily, however, you find the description in the Boston Herald which says this: “Around the world the two U.S. institutes offer training in techniques needed by political parties ... how to register voters, how to organize campaigns, how to monitor polling places and so forth. They do not advocate particular policies. They have offered evidence that they complied with Egyptian law.”

The part regarding abstinence from advocating particular policies and the part regarding compliance with Egyptian law were shown to be lies and so we dismiss them as noise. As to the training that the editors say the outfits give to people around the world, I ask this question: How long does it take to train someone to register voters, organize campaigns and monitor polling stations? And how much does it cost to do that? Well, the answer according to the Washington Post is that it takes 40 million dollars a year for an indefinite period of time in Egypt alone. To put this in perspective, given that Egypt amounts to one percent the population of the world, it will take 4 billion dollars a year for an indefinite period of time to teach the world how to look for and recognize a Florida style chad that may not have been properly punctured by a voter. What a sick joke cooked up by the mentally challenged to impress the mentally challenged! But will the Chinese give the Americans this much aid to implement a project that is as dumb as this? Wake up taxpayers of America, someone is eating your lunch and it isn't the Chinese who are lending you the lunch money which your children will be asked to pay back.

Now get this from the editorial of the Washington Post: “Egyptian officials seeded local media with stories that portrayed the nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) as part of an international conspiracy to interfere in the country's politics.” Okay, my friend, go ahead and have the bellyful of laughs you are itching to have, then read the following. I realize that you're laughing because the two editorials are by themselves proof enough that somebody is trying to interfere with the politics of Egypt. This aside, what is puzzling is that they called the thing international conspiracy. The fact is -- and the world has known the thing to be -- a Jewish American conspiratorial farce that deserves to be referred to with the word “seeded” as did the editors of the Post. And this is because to grow something, you need seeds as well as the fertilizer on which they feed. Looking at the outfits that were created by the US Congress and financed with taxpayer money, we find them to be nothing more than seeds of evil planted in the countries that tolerate them. And these seeds do not come alone because with them comes the fertilizer on which they feed. And this is why this enterprise -- like all congressional enterprises -- stinks a malodor akin to the toilet of a Jewish American bordello. The world prays that the American voters will find a detergent strong enough to clean up this disgusting mess.

Here is something that will shed more light on the matter. It is often said in politics that if you want to know where the corruption begins and ends, follow the money. Similarly, it can be said that if you want to know where the conspiratorial farce begins and ends, follow the Jewish American stink. And here is one trail that comes courtesy of the Boston Herald: “Egypt's military rulers deserve more than the finger-wagging...” Further down the editorial, you meet this: “Timidity in the face of insults just encourages further truculence.” As to the Washington Post, you have this trail: “The State Department publicly condemned the raids.” Later on you meet this one: “But in public, the administration's rhetoric has been softening.” And this one too: “In short, the Egyptian government is openly flouting the administration's demand...”

What should this say to you? It says that the propaganda arm of the hate and incitement machine which stands tall in America reflecting the will of World Jewry is beginning to panic. These characters are panicking not because they are losing; they always do in the end and they know it. They are panicking because this time the loss is happening in full view of the public. And what this means to them is that they will never be able to spin the thing and make it look like another Jewish triumph of biblical dimension. Here is how it worked for them this time around. Knowing that having America in their pocket and knowing that Egypt was close to America, they thought they had Egypt too in their pocket. But then came the rude awakening when they discovered that Egypt can never be in someone's pocket because the people of that ancient nation know how to be friendly without knuckling under or falling into a state of subordination like do the Americans when someone whispers a sweet word in their ear. This is why the Jewish organizations panicked and why they sent a call to the media under their control to train their guns at Egypt's display of independence and fire all the stink bombs they can.

What else do these people dream about? Here is one thing from the Washington Post: “The significance of this dispute is difficult to overstate … At a minimum, any Egyptian government that follows [such] policies ought to be denied military aid.” The fact is that Egypt is not getting military aid from America. It is partnering with it in the defense of the region where America's contribution is the made-in-America equipment that costs about 1.3 billion dollars a year. When you compare this to the 2 billion dollars that America spends – not every year but each and every week -- and do so in Afghanistan alone not the entire region where that nation is located, you begin to appreciate how small is the contribution that the Egyptians are getting from America to do the big job they are doing. You can also see why they should tell the US Congress to take this deal and shove it right up their collective asshole then go to hell.

In fact, the Washington Post goes on to say something that shows you how stupid its editors are and what a bunch of assholes the Congress is made of. Here is the revealing passage: “That's why it is fortunate that Congress, over the administration's objections, conditioned the 2012 funding for Egypt on a certification that the government was carrying out a democratic transition.” The fact is that the intervention by Congress came before the Egyptian government had decided to enforce the law of the land, and started kicking asses like many in Egypt were urging it to do. In fact, this point was brought to light repeatedly since the eruption of the incident, and the argument was made to the effect that the Egyptians were finally telling the American Congress of PPMGs what to do with themselves. The editors of the Post must have known about this and yet, here they are making it sound like the cause was the effect, and the effect was the cause. Listen to me guys; get yourselves a 16 year old high school dropout who will show you how to write editorials that make sense.

This is an election year in America and the people there are about to vote for the executive branch as well as two thirds of the legislative branch. They can make it clear to those they choose before they choose them that they want a government of men and women who will represent them and work for them. What they do not want is a bunch of pimps and prostitutes, madams and gigolos who will rule over them in response to hate and incitement commands they receive from the Jewish propaganda machine.

It is time for the assholes everywhere in the American government to retire and let someone else save the country from the Judeo-Israeli scourge that has possessed it for too long already and has pushed it to ruin in every sense of the word.

The Struggle To Keep America Viable

Can America be saved? This is the question that the world is asking now because the consequences of success or failure loom large when you consider the value of that country in the world today. Yes, it is a novel thing to ask if America can be saved but the question was asked many times before in connection with other places because history never stood still. Instead, history saw and has recorded the rise of nations and empires that later fell to make way for someone else. Yet, despite the predictability that a nation or an empire will rise and fall, there is nothing inevitable about the duration of its stay or the manner of its fall. And this is why the world is anxiously contemplating the fate of America today.

We ask that and the other questions because big questions have preoccupied our species since the time in our evolution when we began to think. And we see this preoccupation repeat itself every time that a child reaches the age at which it begins to think for itself and to reason things out. In fact, as children we ask our parents where we came from and expect a simple answer that may or may not come depending on the disposition of the parents. Then as adults, we ask each other why we exist at all, not expecting a direct answer but hoping to have a discussion at the end of which will emerge an explanation as to the role we are meant to play in life. All in all, we go through life wanting to know where we came from and why we are here posing direct questions and many other related ones.

Whether or not we hit on an explanation that will help us pursue a destiny we understand and fully appreciate, we go through life in one of two states or any of the shades between them. Either we are a well defined figure known by name and a personal history having some control over what happens to us; or we remain a nameless cog that labors anonymously in the collective that is the human species having no control over what happens to us. Whatever the case, we feel at the end of it all that there was never a definitive answer to the questions we posed concerning our purpose in the Universe. A lifelong experience teaches us that we are because we are – and this is all there is to it. And we realize that we lived this long because each day, we found a reason to ask a new question and seek an answer that never came.

Whatever path we take in life, however, we still face the reality that we are genetically programmed to preserve the self and the species, something we do at the expense of everything; and when necessary the expense of everyone else. Whether or not we like it, our instinct delivers the urge that compels us to do what is required to be safe and thus remain alive. We are also programmed to forage for nourishment so as to remain strong and healthy. And we are programmed to reproduce ourselves so as to preserve the clan and the species. In fact, we share most of these instincts with the primates and the lower organisms that have evolved to become us. We even share with the higher species a few cultural attributes such as working with the clan to protect the young, and share the trait of hunting with the group by participating in a strategy that is determined and led by the alpha of the pack.

Thus, when we do not think of the big questions that concern the subject of existence, we think of the more mundane ways by which we may fulfill our needs and those of the clan; be it the family, the tribe or the nation. And this sort of thinking is the source from which have emerged the various philosophies of life since the beginning of recorded history. In the end, the ideas that go into the construction of these philosophies may or may not be as large as the question of existence but they are large enough to command nearly one hundred percent of the time and the energies that we devote to the preservation of the self, the clan and the species.

It can be argued that there are as many philosophies of life as there are human beings on the planet and have been since the beginning of time. But anyway you look at it, you will find that even the big philosophers who left a mark on the history of human thought were not so original as to claim they were isolated from the world and from each other. The truth is that any idea can be shown to have roots in the environment that surrounded its creator or the thinking of the people who nurtured him or her. It is that no idea can be plucked solely from the thin air of abstract thought divorced from any empirical base. For this reasons, you will find a remarkable overlap in the philosophies that are adhered to and propounded by different people, including the thinkers who oppose each other.

This allows us to group the philosophical trends that seem to come around, swirl for a while then disappear to be replaced by other trends. But the beauty of it all is that there is nothing new under the sun. However fresh a new trend may look, it turns out on close inspection to be nothing more than a variation on an old theme, one that was remodeled to suit the times. And nothing is more trendy these days than to talk about the systems of governance which the various clans of our species live by. The talk is usually led by political entities claiming to have found the trend that will best respond to the needs of those who will adopt it. But who are the entities that make such claims? The answer is that there are many of them, and they are as diverse as the candidates who aspire to a higher office, the political parties that seek a mandate to govern, the nation that minds its own business and leads by example or the one that is messy at home yet tries to mess with everyone else's business.

The United States of America is a nation where the debate is now raging with regard to the subject of governance. The question that the debaters try to answer concerns the definition of a political trend they call conservatism. And this is happening because there is an ongoing contest between two parties; the Democrats who lean toward liberalism and the Republicans who lean toward conservatism. Being in charge of the presidency at this point in time, the Democrats do little more than wait for the Republicans to choose one among them who will run against the sitting President. On the other hand, the Republican hopefuls are doing what they can to win the hearts and minds of the delegates who will pick the winner in the battle of ideas. To this end, each hopeful tries to define himself by defining the brand of conservatism that they should adopt as a party.

What seems to be happening is that the debate is coming down to a contest between two lines of thought. One line is articulated by those who call themselves social conservatives and have characterized their movement as being true conservatism. The other line is an idea that remains ill-defined but is called moderate which probably means that it is seen as being a diluted form of conservatism. Thus, we have on one hand true (or social) conservatism that is supposed to stand for a small government in charge of defending the borders of the nation, the personal liberties of the people and little else. Those who embrace it would be individuals that rely on themselves to do what is good for the self and the community. On the other hand, we have the so-called moderates who do not seem to have characterized their movement as yet but have left it to the other side to define them. And the way this was done is that their philosophy was painted as standing for a European-style big government that will redistribute the wealth by acting like a nanny state, taking from the have to give to the have-not. Or as they like to put it derisively; take from those who produce and give to those who don't.

Ask yourself: How superficial can the Americans get during the silly season they call the election cycle! In fact, the elephant in the room they all ignore is the Neocon factor. To be sure, the word Neocon has become a euphemism to mean the Jews who used to be Liberals but have adopted some of the Conservative causes, and have decided to champion them by joining the movement. The reality is that when it comes to social issues, these people still maintain their ultra liberal bent which means they work for a culturally permissive society that rejects the old values and embraces the new mores whenever they come and whatever they look like. Where the conservatism of these people shows up is in the idea of defending the nation -- or so they say. But here too, they veer off the mark by a wide margin, at least in this sense: To a true conservative the defense of the nation means the defense of its borders; but it is not so to the Neocons. To these people, defending the nation means to constantly be on the offensive somewhere in the world if not everywhere in it, poking the rib of this one, kicking the ass of that one and urinating on the dead bodies of a third one.

The trouble with this approach is that it will not do what the Neocons promise it will. They say that the role they envisage for the American military can be sustained indefinitely, resulting in a world that will be kept safe for ever. They even trumped up an expression to describe the world order they say will materialize out of their vision; they call it Pax Americana. To defend their point of view, they promise that America will be able to reverse the trend in which it has been locked for several decades now. They say the nation can build an economy that is large enough to sustain a military that will be equal to all the military powers in the rest of the world put together. This can be done, they say, even at a time when America comes to only 4% of the world population. And bear in mind that this is a world which is fast catching up industrially to what used to be the industrial superpower of the world but is no more. Add to it the fact that aside from its internal debt, America is indebted to that same world to the tune of two years worth of production in the tradable goods and services, and you will see the extent of ignorance and idiocy which are inherent to the Jewish predictions.

The fact is that the Jewish self declared leaders will make the prediction that suits the moment every time they approach you to convince you of something. This is how they dragged America into the many wars that have turned the once superpower into the current super fool. When you ask them to elaborate on their theory, they say that America is so exceptional, you see people from around the world try to flock to it. They go on to explain that the Administration can do two things. First, it can stop the flood of illegals who come from south of the border to pick fruits and vegetables. Second, it can open the door of legal immigration widely to take in the people who will start a business or invent a product that the world will want to buy. But the one thing that these jokers have not done yet is to invent the magic wand that will do all this by waving it. America listened to the jokers of yesterday; no wander America has become the joke of today. Repeat this silly performance one more time and there will no longer be an America to laugh at or weep over.

Now consider this. If America went around the world, poked people in the rib, kicked their asses and urinated over their dead bodies, will it not happen that someone will want to retaliate and come into the country under a false pretense to do damage? Maybe so, say the Neocons, but America can do what Israel is doing which is to profile the people who wish to come in, identify the bad guys among them and keep them out. Oh yeah! But who are the people who visit Israel? Are they not Jews from among the 18 million or so who still inhabit the world -- each of which is known to a synagogue somewhere on the Planet and whose application to travel to Israel is signaled months if not years in advance?

Also, are they not the American evangelicals who would be checked and vouched for by the pastors that send them to Israel confined to a small group and packed on chartered flights and chartered buses? The sad fact is that you cannot run a big country like America which is open to 7 billion people the way that you run little hermit Israel. Besides, America works for a living and needs to remain an open society. By contrast, Israel need not work because it feeds off America. And so, if America were to do what Israel is doing, no one will be there to feed America. No, that idea was never a good one but is a cockeyed Jewish suggestions that would not even serve as breakfast for a starving dog. Keep the idea and the breakfast for Israel if you want but leave America alone; it has done well without Israel and has done dreadfully since the establishment of that dreadful thing.

This being the case, we ask the pertinent question: what is it that the Jewish leaders really want to achieve? And we begin to formulate an answer when we look at the instincts we share with the organisms that have evolved to become us, and look at the cultural traits that we share with the other species. It all boils down to the preservation of the self and the clan; and down to the things that we do at the expense of everything and everyone else whether acting alone or in conjunction with the rest of the clan. What is clear from all this is that to make a mark on history, there has to be a clan powerful enough to battle against and defeat all perceived threats at least initially, and there has to be a leader who is knowledgeable enough to lead the clan to victory or even an eventual defeat.

In fact, every nation that left an imprint on history has lived through a similar pattern. The exception has been the Jews who for thousands of years have never formed a clan large enough or cohesive enough to battle against what they perceived as an infinite menace that is forever threatening their existence. Thus, they always climbed on someone's back and rode them to a war they hoped will result in a victory for themselves: The ultimate subjugation of the human race to their will as a fulfillment of the fantasy they have had for thousands of years and still believe was promised to them by God. Being useless, however, both in thought and in action, they only managed each time to do damage to themselves, to anything they touched and everyone they advised.

The young and intelligent Americans of today -- be they Conservatives, Liberals or Independents – are now beginning to see that the Neocons are but the con artists of olden days who ruined many a nation and have labored to ruin America for half a century. Those among the young Americans who aspire to lead their country out of its current difficulty are rejecting the Jewish narrative which seeks to maintain a status quo on which Israel and the Jewish organizations continue to feed like there is no tomorrow. Thus, the would-be leaders of the new America are rejecting the command which tells them to just go and suck an egg; but are freeing themselves from the yoke of the past while searching for a way by which to pull their country from the brink of the precipice to which the Jewish leaders have taken their country.

Good luck to them.

Forget The Rapture, Here Comes The Rupture

On or about the first day of the new year, someone claimed to have discovered an ancient scripture in central America predicting that the world will end in 2012. Of course, there have been many such predictions before and there will be more as they are made by mischievous individuals who get a kick scaring people, or made by religious nuts who become rich practicing the trade of predicting the Apocalypse. One such wealthy nut is the 90 year old California preacher Harold Camping who predicted that the world will end in May of 2011 and was proven wrong – having made the same prediction seven years earlier and proven wrong there too. But he goes on predicting undeterred by his failures.

The reality, however, is that most people around the globe are sophisticated enough nowadays to dismiss such claims but there are those who may well be an educated lot yet believe in the predictions. Whether these people are naturally naïve or whether they are rendered childlike credulous by a religious training they received at an early age, they tend to take what the perpetrators preach at face value and not question it. These people are especially prone to what is being said when the perpetrators coat what they say with a religious language that was inculcated into the listeners as children. These people may have been prepared for this moment long ago but fate would have it that they should succumb to the temptation only now.

Still, from the mythologies of ancient times to the writings of the astrologer Nostradamus in the Middle Ages to the predictions of the end of the world in modern times, such stories do little more than entertain the majority of the people who hear about them. They wait for the date to come and go -- perhaps with a little apprehension -- but then shrug off the episode, asserting that they never fall for something like this and denying that they were apprehensive for even a short moment. In some ancient cultures, however, predictions about the end of the world brought out the deep seated human fear as to what the “gods” had in mind. In some of these cultures, the prediction was reason enough to initiate an offering that included the sacrifice of human beings – usually young children -- to please the gods and subdue their wrath. Fortunately, however, no such action was called for in most other cultures. When the time came and the prediction did not materialize, the people deemed it to have been baseless and dismissed it as a nightmare that came and went.

In modern times too, such predictions were usually dismissed as fantasy till something happened in America that gave the subject a new dimension and turned the matter upside down. Irony of ironies, it is in the republic where the separation of church and state is deemed to be as safe as a rock that religion began to tangle with the political manoeuvrings of the democratic process. The two are now tangled up so intimately that a prediction about future happenings is liable to become a major factor in the unfolding of the electoral activities. In fact, we now see the entanglement impose itself with force when candidates who run for a high office seek what has come to be called the Evangelical vote; that of the Christian fundamentalists.

To be sure, the trend started to put down roots some time ago, albeit imperceptibly, before growing into the irresistible force that it is today. We can see revealing evidence of this when we look at America's political interaction with the rest of the world in a historical context. To this end, few people would argue against the idea that America had always been non-interventionist if not isolationist in world affairs from the day of its independence to the middle of the Twentieth Century. Yes, America did participate in the First World War but only because it was urged to do so by local ethnic groups who pushed it to take one side or the other in a war that was too savage to ignore. America was also goaded to participate in the Second World War by Winston Churchill of Britain who warned that if Europe fell to the forces of the Axis, America will be the next target.

But this is not all that Churchill did. At the end of a war in which the United States, Britain and other allies such as the Soviet Union were victorious, Churchill warned the Americans that the Soviets were building a dangerous empire, and he incited them to oppose it in every way they can because the empire was expansionist and a threat to the world, especially to America. The warning was taken to heart by the Americans, and they became obsessed with it as they started to see a communist threat over the horizon of every sea and every ocean, and see the threat behind every mountain in Europe, Asia, Latin America and Africa.

This was an incredible shift to the state of mind of what used to be optimistic America. And the first result of this shift was the tragedy that came to be called the war in Vietnam, a backward country that can legitimately claim to have defeated a superpower with the bare hands of its sons and daughters whose thirst for freedom burned bright in their hearts regardless of the flag under which they operated. Yes, these boys and girls fought under a communist flag and yes, they fought against the American boys who had come to rob them of the freedom to choose how they wanted to live. In the end the Vietnamese won the war and guess what; they adopted the Americans as their best friends. Go figure and try to explain how a superpower can be made to fear something as innocuous as the wish to live freely without outside interference. Try it and let me know if you have found an explanation.

The truth is that Vietnam was not alone, however. It had China and the Soviet Union supply it with small arms, and had the treacherous hand of saboteurs inside America working for it. These were the hidden allies of Vietnam as much as they were the openly vocal opponents of the war against it. They were the people who conspired to weaken the home front by opening a crack in it, and working tirelessly to broaden that crack. To this end, they employed a subtle kind of destruction that America was not familiar with and had no means to defend against. In the end, the saboteurs contributed mightily to the defeat of America in Vietnam as seen by the chaotic and humiliating scenes depicting the helicopter-mounted evacuation of the American embassy in Saigon. What came after that was the vow to never again fight a ground war on the Asian Continent; a vow that was broken three times in two places already and promises to be broken yet again.

But who were the hidden allies of Vietnam who sabotaged the American war effort from the inside? It is clear today that they were the Jewish organizations whose goal was to get America out of Eastern Asia -- a corner of the world that is neither Arab nor Muslim -- and embroil the country in Western Asia where there was an Israel itching to go on a rampage and seeking the protective “umbrella” of a superpower to support it and resupply it if and when it stretched itself too far or came close to the brink. Western Asia is where America went eventually, having been groomed to fight against the Arabs and the Muslims; and groomed to die for the glory of Israel as well as the benefit of all the Jewish causes. To successfully pull off a scheme like this, the Jewish leaders worked hard to cultivate a grassroots constituency for themselves inside America, one that increased the power of their internal sabotaging machine by several orders of magnitude.

Now comes the true demonic part of this horror story. Having tried and failed to get enough Christians to hate themselves and hate their religion for what the Jewish leaders were claiming was the ill treatment of Jews at the hands of Christians throughout the ages, the Jewish leaders reversed themselves. They now worked on making the American Christians join them; and they did so by using a trick that can only be called sorcery. The problem had been that for two thousand years, Christianity and Judaism were considered to be mutually exclusive. The reason was then -- as it is today -- that the Jews are waiting for a Messiah to come and redeem them while the Christians consider Jesus to be the Messiah that has come already and has redeemed them. If you believe in one narrative and if you are sane, logic would dictate that you reject the other narrative because the two cannot coexist in one and the same cranium. It is simply that the two narratives are mutually exclusive.

To get around the brute force of this logic and defeat it, the Jewish sorcerers came up with an ingenious solution. What they did was to make the rituals of the two religions look so much alike, they became the one and same Judeo-Christian religion. This done, the Jewish leaders launched a campaign to recruit Christians of the evangelical flavor as foot soldiers; and they put them in the business of damning America while predicting at every turn that America the beautiful will go straight to an ugly sort of hell if it did not live and die for the glory of Israel as well as the promotion of the Jewish causes. Sunday after Sunday after Sunday, preacher after preacher after preacher went on television to give sermon after sermon after sermon in which they damned America for not standing solidly enough with Israel and all the Jewish causes.

This had to be done, said the newly converted idiots, because the Jews are the gods that the American people must worship from now on and accept to serve as their slaves. Don't ask why because this is a dogma that does not lend itself to explanation. Thus, the evangelical foot soldiers took the message of their newly found faith under the banner of CUFI (Christians United For Israel) to the American Congress of pimps and prostitutes, madams and gigolos; and they forced the horrible characters of that stinky institution to act on the message as if it were the new and improved gospel truth of the new and screwed up army of imbeciles.

But despite all that effort, some Christians were not fooled by the Jewish scheme. In fact, these Christians had a scheme of their own up their sleeve with regard to the relationship they maintained with the Jews. Instead of snubbing the flirtatious advances of the Jewish leaders, they welcomed them and responded in kind because they saw that the situation could play in their hands just fine. As it happens, both the Christians and the Jews are waiting for a moment they call the Rapture when the Messiah is expected to appear and convert everyone to the one and true religion. The Jews believe that it will be Judaism while the Christians believe that it will be Christianity. When you juxtapose the two expectations side by side, you see that the Evangelicals and the Jews in America now look like two scorpions engaged in a mating dance. They circle one another, each waiting for the moment of the Rapture to pounce on the partner and mate with it or eat it alive. A divine comedy that turned so tragic, it must be making Dante Alighieri squirm in his grave.

Rational people do not expect to see an ending like this to the drama of human existence but writers and artists of all sorts have used their works to describe other possible end scenes. From the way that things are developing at this time, it can be said that the one certainty we may hold is that a rupture and not the celebrated Rapture will occur between the Jews and the Christians. If and when this happens, it may invite a rupture between the Jews and everyone else in the world. And this could be the event that someone will most certainly try to exploit and score a final victory over the Jews. As you can see, it was never “never again” but was always “here we go again”. And this is where the matter stands at this point yet again.

It is not too difficult to see a scenario like that unfold when you consider how far things have gone already. To get a sense of this, imagine the following parable. The parents of a number of children leave the little ones in the care of the oldest son and go away for a while. One day an evil character comes along and rapes one of the daughters. Instead of seeking justice, the older brother offers the next daughter to the rapist. Being a pedophile of equal opportunity, the rapist asks for a little boy instead, and the big brother acquiesces. The pedophile-rapist keeps demanding more and more, and the brother keeps acquiescing more and more till the rapist gets to acquire and own as sex slaves all the boys and girls in the family, doing with them anything he wants anytime he wants it.

I now ask you this, my friend: What do you think the parents will do when they come home and see that situation? Think about it and think about the Republican candidates who seek the nomination to the presidency of the United States by saying things that go more or less like this: I am for the display of my Christian faith in public places and for the Jewish organizations that work to ban my faith from such places. I am for the marriage between a man and a woman, and I am for the Jewish leaders who fight to legalize gay marriage. I am for life and also for the Jews who would butcher the unborn by partial birth. I am for mentioning God when I feel like it and for the Jew who works to throw me in jail when I try. I am for freedom and for the anti-defamation league that censors me when I say something it does not like. And so on and so forth.

Don't you think that while this spectacle is maintained, someone will want to say: We have had enough of this; let's make the Jewish big brother see what it's like to be raped by a stranger over and over and over again? America is thirsting for justice and we are left with only one way to quench that thirst: it is the shedding of Jewish blood one final time.

Don't come and cry on my shoulder when this happens, mindless big brother. I stuck my neck out and I spent a lifetime warning you about this eventuality. The last thing I want now is to see you come anywhere close to my shoulder or my neck ever again. And remember this, when I say never again, I don't say it to impress; I say it to mean it. Never again means never again.

A Muddled Web Of Self Fulfilling Prophecies

The Iowa Caucuses which are the first of the primaries to choose the Republican nominee who will run against the incumbent Democratic President in the upcoming American election has come and gone resulting in an outcome that is at best inconclusive. When this is added to the confused scenario that was developed along the way, the result may be signaling that a change is taking place in America. To see this and to grasp the potential ramification, we need to understand something about the current situation, and how things got to be where they are. But we can do so only by going through the maze of noise and distortions that were pumped into the cultural life of America during the past half century, and this is where we begin to probe.

It is that in the name of moral clarity, the self appointed leaders of the modern Jewish movement have managed to erect a construct of ambiguities that is so contorted, it has muddled the web of relationships which ordinary Jews were trying to forge in good faith with the American public and the American pillars of power, having survived a sorrowful sojourn in Europe; one that triggered a string of pogroms against them and culminated in a Holocaust that did away with many of their relatives. Never again, said the Jews but their leaders had other ideas as can be seen from what follows.

The result of the work done by the Jewish leaders has been that contrary to the path normally taken by immigrants when they move into a new society, the path of the Jewish evolution in America ended up looking like an accident waiting to happen much as it looked in all the places to which they migrated over the centuries. This happened because instead of welcoming the opportunity to be like everyone else, the Jews were again made to trace the tortuous pattern that has led to their demise in every society where they tried to mix. It happened in America at the urging of their self appointed leaders who once again pulled the old trick of predicting that annihilation will be their fate if they did not follow the instructions handed to them now, and those that will be handed to them as time moves on. Thus, it can be seen that the false prediction of their annihilation has always been the main factor to trigger the attempts to annihilate the Jews. This has been the self-fulfilling prophecy that always delivered or came close to doing so.

What happens in practical terms as people migrate from one place to another is that they get to study the new environment so as to discover the traits that they and the locals may like or dislike about each other. This done, they highlight their similarities and iron out their differences then organize manners of interaction that satisfy everyone after which they live together in relative harmony. Instead of doing any of this, the Jews were forced by their leaders to seek a special place in American society and were granted that place. This was a success that the Jewish leaders managed to score by advancing the notion that antisemitism was a genetic defect common to all human beings; one that can only be contained by highlighting the uniqueness of the Jews and by treating them better than everyone else.

And there lies the mechanism responsible for the eternal damnation of Jews. It is a tool in the hands of leaders who use them and use their recurring tragedies to exploit every environment in which they set foot. But after they have squeezed all that they can from each environment, and when trouble begins to raise its head, the leaders who would have enriched themselves by now, bolt out in a hurry and leave ordinary Jews to suffer the consequence of what they themselves have wrought over time. Another tragedy takes place; it is used by a new crop of self-appointed Jewish leaders who quickly ask for monetary compensation and a special treatment for themselves and for the Jews they claim to protect. Thus starts the cycle once again as it has for hundreds of years if not thousands of them.

To pull off a demonic scheme of this nature in America, the Jewish leaders started to work on it the moment that they were allowed to migrate into the country, something that happened as a consequence of the events which took place during WWII in Europe. Knowing what they attempted to accomplish everywhere else in the world but failed miserably time after time, they modified their plans to suit the American scene. To this end, they engineered a master-slave sort of relationship with prominent figures whereby the Jewish leaders took on the role of master, and the Americans the role of slave. But unlike the claim they made to those they called their people, the aim of the leaders was never to save the Jews from the threat of a non-existent annihilation; it was to forge for themselves and for Israel a parasitic relationship with the American taxpaying public.

In fact, the aim of the Jewish leaders was twofold. First, it was to rig the American system of governance so as to make it possible for them to live well and prosper with the tax exempt donations sent to them by the wealthy Jews who took the trouble to establish fake charitable organizations and shelter their monies there. The second aim was to maintain the semblance of a viable economy in Israel where they temporarily parked their surplus money. They needed that facility to hunt for opportunities in the region and to hunt for them elsewhere in the world where they invested the money they spirited out of America under false pretenses.

To give this act of treachery the look of legality and remain safe, the Jewish leaders had the Americans tweak the foreign aid program in such a way as to protect them from being caught doing something illegal. These people did not mind being caught doing something unethical because they knew that being Jews, they were not going to be held accountable for that. On the other hand, the red line they tried to avoid crossing – not always successfully – was to do something that would be outright illegal. To this end, they had the prominent Americans convince the loathsome congress of treasonous prostitutes to tweak the laws in such a way as to serve the Jewish causes. And the horrible characters of that detestable assembly of legislators responded by writing the laws in such a way as to make the Jewish high crimes look like unethical indiscretions of such low intensity, they were not worth prosecuting. And the money flowed from America to Israel with some of it being kicked back to America and distributed as campaign contributions to the congress of pure filth.

And that filth does not remain in the US Congress alone but spills over to infect all forms of American political life. In fact, you see and feel aspects of the drama of horror when they hit you in the face as you watch the ongoing race of the primaries. Knowing that the final choice, when it comes, will be the nominee who will run in the general election against the incumbent president, you observe with fascination a uniquely American struggle unfold inside the same Republican party. You see players who are supposed to be on the same team clobber each other as if they were mortal enemies. And this is something they claim will help them determine who will merit to run against the Democratic antagonist; but they also acknowledge that the fight will produce the ammunition that the other side will use against them later on.

And this is when you begin to think that there is more to the drama than meets the eye. You see that the struggle must be unfolding inside a cocoon where deceitful ideas are incubated by the strategists, and dubious declarations are drafted to accomplish two opposite goals. You understand that the strategists aim to win the immediate vote of the hardcore Republican base which is extreme by its nature while trying to avoid losing the more moderate vote of the public at large; the one that will be solicited later in the year. But this is not all that you suspect is happening because you feel it in your bones that something more odious is shaping inside the cocoon. You spend time analyzing what you see and hear; and you realize that subtle work is being done to defeat the time honored notion which says that foreign policy disputes among the antagonists -- even of opposing parties -- must stop at the water's edge. But here they are of the same party, and they openly violate this notion. You conclude that what is happening is the work of the Jewish leaders whose aim is to make the talk about Israel the most important topic in this election cycle, not the future of America.

The way they pull off this feat in practice is that the Jewish handlers who volunteer to work for the candidates do so not only for one party but for both; not only for one candidate but for all of them. When debating each other, they highlight their ideological differences as each is seen to articulate a contrary position; be it the left leaning position or the right leaning one; be it a moderate position or an extreme one. You see such differences rise to the surface in all the subjects that come up for discussion except one. When the subject touches on matters that may be of interest to Israel, the debaters turn the exchange into a farce of Third World caliber. You are prompted to laugh and dismiss the discussion the moment that you see the antagonists become same-side protagonists; and you see them fall over each other as they compete to proclaim their undying love for Israel and their unbounded desire to inflate the importance of the Jewish skunk in the Arab garden whatever will be the cost to America in terms of lives and of treasure.

You understand that the aim of that policy is to prevent the Arabs from recreating in the region the model of peace and tolerance they once had; a model that the world clamors to see rise again but that the war mongers in Jewish America dread; a model that the Jewish leaders would kill and cause American boys and girls to be killed to stop in its tracks. You put two and two together and realize that the Jewish leaders anticipate the devolution of America; thus they turn up the screws on the system of governance to transfer more of America's wealth to Israel and more of America's influence to world Jewry before the Republic becomes a spent force. Being the opportunists that they are, they take advantage of the current election campaign to argue among themselves that since America still has something left to it, they can squeeze out a little more of it even if such act will leave nothing for its people but a depleted fruit that was once so full of juice and sweetness, it was the craze of humanity but is no more. Shed a tear for America and celebrate the glory of Israel.

It dawns on you that once again, the Jewish leaders have resorted to playing the card they always played to motivate their followers. It is the self-fulfilling prophecy of doom and gloom which they invoked the last time around not to warn the Jews but warn of a gathering storm that will unleash a mushroom cloud over America and thus annihilate that country and everyone in it. The false prophecy triggered the war on Iraq which they promised was going to result in kisses being blown to every American who will visit that country but whose consequence has been a calamity that America could have done without. The prophecy was fulfilled but not in the way it was predicted. And here we go again as the Jewish leaders push the candidates in the Republican primaries to warn that America is about to be annihilated, and thus advocate the launch of a war against another Middle Eastern country which they promise will result in kisses being blown to every American who will visit the Persian Gulf region. Don't bet your glut of houses on it, America.

And yet, you sense that despite the noise and the distortions that swirl around you, individual Jews are becoming increasingly conscious of what is happening around them, and conscious of the horror that is being committed in their name by leaders who appoint themselves head of one thing or another in the service of Jews. While these individuals show concern, they still feel helpless to do anything about the fake appointees. However, a handful of them are beginning to speak out and explain that the problem lies not with a humanity that is said to be antisemitic by genetic defect but with Jewish leaders who use the Jewish people and their tragedies to buttress their personal interests. Those individuals also see that the problem lies in part with the mass of ordinary Jews who are forbidden by religious beliefs to question the motive of their patriarchal leaders, a stance that prevents them from rebelling against the higher-ups however fake or useless they may be.

Reacting to these developments, you wonder what the American people are thinking of the never ending demands that the Jewish leaders keep making on behalf of Israel and of world Jewry. It dawns on you that individual Jews may be realizing for the first time that history is about to repeat itself, that Hell may be coming to the world once more and that they will find themselves at the center of it yet again. The dreaded end that their leaders always beg for may happen if only by accident, and the annihilation that the leaders keep predicting may be around the corner, brought to them by the activities of those same dreadful leaders.

You wonder if those Jewish individuals will be able to do something about the matter in time, and if the time has come during this election cycle when someone will be courageous enough to stand up and say that if elected, he will cut Israel loose to make peace with its neighbors and live inside the model of peace and tolerance that the Arabs know how to construct better than anyone else as they have demonstrated during the centuries when they were on top and never allowed a pogrom or a holocaust to happen.

The Jews are to accept this reality or suffer the consequence alone because not one American life or one American dollar will ever again be spared to give an Israeli prime minister a fake political erection he can show off in world forums and brag about the control he has over America's system of governance. Never again.