Daniel Pipes calls the Palestinian refugees a dagger aimed
at Israel 's
heart. He does his best to prove it but fails to be convincing. In arguing the
case, however, he inadvertently manages to show in convincing detail how and
why the Jewish lobby in America
is a real dagger aimed at America 's
heart. More than that, he proves that the dagger has already pierced the heart,
and may have fatally wounded the once vibrant superpower now famous for being
paralyzed by gridlock.
Pipes unveils these realities in an article that has the
title: “Counting Palestine Refugees” and the subtitle: “The Senate nudges us
toward a proper understanding of the issue.” It was published on May 29, 2012
in National Review Online. Two days later, on May 31, 2012, Clifford D. May
published a column in the same magazine on the same subject under the title:
“Whose Middle East Policy Is It, Anyway?” and the subtitle: “The State
Department contradicts Obama and previous presidents on the 'right of return.'”
If anything, he confirms the view that America 's heart has been pierced by
the Jewish dagger.
Here is the smoking gun as described by Daniel Pipes: “I am
proud to report that … based on the work carried out by the Middle East Forum's
Steven J. Rosen and myself … the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee ...
unanimously passed [an] amendment to the State Department and
foreign-operations appropriations bill.” So here is a Congress that is as dead
as the proverbial “dead meat” – put in this state by the Jewish trick of divide
and rule – suddenly coming to life temporarily to serve a Jewish and Israeli
cause and go back into gridlock. It does so unanimously and in a bipartisan way
on a subject that touches the business of foreign operations which is the
purview of the State Department, America 's face to the world. And
because the Department dared to express an opinion contrary to that of the
Jewish lobby, Pipes calls it “a shoddy maneuver unworthy of the State
Department.”
Even a piece of dead meat would have shown more shame and
humility than that, but not these people who believe they are the chosen
children of God. But being a Jew, he could not pass up the opportunity to slit
his own belly harikari style. He did so as usual to try and have it both ways.
In this case, to have it both ways meant to argue against the long standing
Jewish claim that the Arab leaders were the ones that kept the Palestinians in
refugee camps as a way to maintain their war against Israel . But now he says that the
culprits were not really the Arabs but the United Nations agency known as UNRWA
working hand in hand with the American State Department. He claims that these
two urged the Arab leaders to counter the Jewish lobbying in the Senate by
doing their own lobbying against the amendment. Are you getting dizzy, my
friend? If so, try not to faint because you ain't seen nothin' yet.
We need to ask the question: what do these people want America to do
for them that they cannot do for themselves? Pipes tells what that is by first
defining a situation that is entirely of his concoction; one that he describes
this way: “The … heart of the Arab war on Israel … lies not in disputes [but]
concerns the so-called Palestine refugees.” He comes up with this concoction to
give himself the chance to argue that UNRWA serves 5 million of them even
though “only about 1 percent are real refugees who fit the agency's definition”
as to who is a refugee. And he makes this observation based on his
interpretation of the Agency's own text. Accordingly, he concludes that 99
percent of these people are what he calls fake refugees because they are the
descendants of the original refugees, no longer original themselves.
Having called 99 percent of the Palestinians in refugee
camps “so-called refugees” and “fake refugees”, this so-called Jew that is more
a fake than a crocodile tear now expresses his paranoia. Almost in tears, he
does it this way: “Worse: Those alive in 1948 are dying off and in about 50
years not a single refugee will remain alive, whereas their fake-refugee
descendants will number 20 million.” The implication here is that if
Palestinians who are the biological descendants of the people that own the land
of Palestine will still be around, they will make it difficult for the Jewish
leaders to justify giving the land to someone who comes out of the blue and
says: I feel like a Jew, I converted to Judaism so kick that Palestinian out of
there and gimme his property.
Not surprisingly, Pipes gets into another Jewish style
harikari saying the following: “This matters because the refugee status …
impos[es] an ugly, unrealistic irredentist [sic] dream on them.” This is the
testimony of someone who claims to represent the cause of so-called diaspora
Jews who, according to him, must have held the ugly, unrealistic irredentist
Jewish dream alive for 2000 years. Ugly, huh? And what is that irredentist
thing? Did he mean irredeemable? If so, there is a way to redeem both the dream
of the authentic Palestinians and the dream of the fake Jews. It is to share
the land in a one-state or two-state solution to a problem that has festered
for too long already. And guess what, my friend, he seems to agree with this
notion except that he does so in a morally dyslexic fashion which is the normal
Jewish way of seeing things. Here is his take on that: “Nineteen forty-eight
happened; time to get real.” Yes indeed, time to get real because even a
gridlocked and subjugated superpower will never be able to fulfill the fantasy
of a bunch of quacks who believe God gave them Palestine . Get real and admit you're the
fakes and they are authenticity in flesh and blood.
To see how a horror story of this magnitude can materialize,
you need to understand how small steps are taken that in the aggregate
imperceptibly turn a normal situation into a deformed monstrosity without
people noticing what is happening till it is too late. Lucky for us, Daniel
Pipes unveils this reality and demonstrates how the Jewish dagger was brought
to the heart of America ,
piercing it and fatally wounding the superpower. Speaking of the amendment he
helped formulate, he says this: “...proposed by Senator Mark Kirk [it] requires
the State Department to inform Congress about the use of the annual $240
million of direct American taxpayer funds donated to Palestine refugees via UNRWA.”
On the surface, this looks like a small harmless thing to
ask for. After all, this is taxpayer money and all that is requested is that
the State Department inform Congress about its use. But like a Chinese proverb
says: A long journey begins with the first step. And Pipes let it be known that
they had this long journey in mind even before making the first step. Here is
how all of this is expressed over several paragraphs: “The Kirk amendment does
not call for eliminating … benefits … But despite its limited nature, Kirk
calls the reporting requirement a 'watershed' … Because, were the State
Department compelled to differentiate … the U.S. and other Western governments
could eventually decide to cut off the fakes and thereby undermine their claim
to a 'right of return' to Israel.”
You see what I mean? You see what he says? He says in his
subtle sweet way: Taxpayer money? What taxpayer money? Taxpayer money, my ass.
All I care about is Israel .
I begin by feigning that 240 million dollars are more valuable to the American
taxpayer than the 3.1 billion going to Israel every year in addition to
the 5 billion or more that go there in the form of tax exempt indirect aid. But
after that, the small sum to UNRWA will be eliminated over time and in due
course. Perhaps it may even be diverted to Israel . In any event, the next step
will be to use this development as a precedent on which to build a case that
will disallow the Palestinian 'right of return,' our ultimate goal. And this,
my friend, is how Israel and
the Jews win as they always do in America ,
and this is how America
gets another dagger in the heart. She is a big girl and she can take it. You
still think so?
We now look at the Clifford May column on the same subject.
After an introduction that sounds like anything but honest, he says this: “I
first wrote about this a few weeks ago ... to stimulate an honest discussion
based on reliable data.” He does not say what data he is talking about but the
only area where data could be looked into is the number of refugees that were
born before and after 1948. But this is not where honesty is required because
it does not matter what the exact number is. Rather, what is required here is
an honest look at the principle of equity in international affairs. And when
you view the matter from this angle, you immediately realize from his
introduction that he intends not to be a model of honesty.
In fact, he begins the column by committing the two
harikaris committed earlier by Daniel Pipes. Firstly, given that the ultimate
aim is to argue for the denial of the Palestinian “right of return” by denying
the Palestinians the refugee status, he starts the column like this: “If we set
up an organization … to resettle refugees, over time more displaced persons
should … cease being refugees.” Like Pipes before him, he expresses the view of
someone who claims to represent the cause of so-called diaspora Jews who,
according to the current view, should never have entertained the dream of “Next
year in Jerusalem .”
Secondly, he says this: “UNRWA … has sought not to diminish the
Palestinian-refugee problem but to enlarge it.” Like Pipes before him, he
discards the strongest card they used to play in the Congress and the media --
which was to blame the plight of the refugees not on the culprits that were the
Jews but on the Arabs he now exonerates. And he does this reversal so as to
recycle the card and reuse it against UNRWA. Whoa! What can be more Jewish than
that? Are you dizzy, my friend? Brace yourself because there is more to come.
They had numerous other cards they could play against the
Arabs at a time when they were blacklisting the voices that sought to push back
against their daily defamation. He has not discarded these cards but is using
them yet again. Here is one: “Palestinian Arab forces … launched a war to
destroy … Israel .”
And here is another: “...Israel
was resettling hundreds of thousands of Jews expelled from Arab and other
Muslim lands.” But the truth has come out; and it has been shown time after time
on this website and other websites that Israel
was the one to start all the wars in the Middle East .
As well, it was a whisper fashioned after the model of the infamous chant: “Let
my people go” that was responsible for the Jews being lured to Israel from the
other lands – be they Arab, Muslim, Soviet, Ethiopian or what have you.
Claiming to seek an honest debate but having started with a
ton of dishonesty – the most important being that the ultimate aim of the
exercise is to deny the Palestinians the right of return -- what do you think
the role of the stooge Senator Mark Kirk was in all this? Here it is: “A
statement from Kirk's office explained, 'with U.S. taxpayers providing more
than $ 4 billion to UNRWA since 1950, the watershed reporting requirement will
help taxpayers better understand whether UNRWA truly remains a refugee
assistance organization or has become a welfare agency for low-income residents
of the Levant.”
But the truth is that not one non-Jewish American taxpayer
in a million will hear about this, or could care less if they did. To be
convinced of this, listen to what another Mark (this time a New York Jewish
lawyer called Mark Langfan who lobbies the Congress for Israel) has said
recently not about the proverbial man in the street but the staff that is
manning the offices of lawmakers: “I walk into the staff office of Senators and
Congressmen and it is scary. They say, 'we don't want you to think we're
stupid, we just don't know anything. You have to start from what is the West Bank ? Where is it? They don't know anything.'” And
the stooge Senator Mark Kirk wants us to believe he is doing what he is doing
on behalf of the American public. No wonder that place has been likened to a
private Jewish urinal and toilet bowl. You stink, Senator. Where do you take
your bath? In that urinal?
Implementing the rules of divide and conquer, the Jewish
leaders succeeded at polarizing the Republican and Democratic parties, thus
gridlocked the Congress on matters concerning the business of America to better
serve the causes of Jews and of Israel. This done, they pitted the legislature
against the executive by getting the Congress to pass binding and non-binding
resolutions that effectively usurped the powers of the President in foreign
affairs. This done, they started to work on pitting the two most powerful
institutions of the executive: The State Department and the White House. To
this end, Clifford May uses several dazzling paragraphs to give a taste of how
the Jewish leaders plan to conduct the upcoming battle. And he ends the column
this way: “In the days ahead, it will be instructive to see whether President
Obama insists that the State Department follow his policies – or whether he
permits Foggy Bottom [State Department] to overrule him.”
The flavor of the battle he describes in those dazzling
paragraphs is not new. The Jewish leaders used it several times before, the
most notorious case being the attempt to force both the State Department and
the White House to break international law and recognize Jerusalem
as being the capital of Israel .
They did this by committing a sin so depraved, no one uses it as frequently as
they do: it is to use human beings as objects to score a success that may not
even amount to a material gain. What they did in this case was to instruct
Jewish American women to get pregnant, go to Jerusalem
and have the baby there, then ask the State Department to issue a birth
certificate stating that the baby was born in Jerusalem , Israel
And this is a good point where to launch a discussion
pertaining to the legal arguments that could underpin the cause of the
Palestinian refugees. When lawyers take up a case, they look to see if the law
is on the side of their client. If so, and if the case is “slam dunk,” they
argue the law, certain that they will win. If not, they try to argue equity
which means they try to convince the judge that although the law may not be on
the side of their client, there is a higher moral case to be made in favor of
him or her. Sometimes it works; most of the time not.
When it comes to international law, there are very few
instances where a case can be viewed as being slam dunk because most cases get
tangled up in politics, and fall prey to the veto accorded to the five permanent
members of the United Nations Security Council. Thus, if you are not one of the
permanent five but can get one of them to sponsor your cause, you may do
anything you want and get the sponsor to blabbermouth nonsense on your behalf
while pretending to argue the equity you were denied when, in fact, you could
be as guilty as a confessed serial killer still bragging about your criminal
exploits.
This being the international climate in which American
foreign policy is compelled to function, the Jewish organizations used it to
make America stand by Israel and protect it every time that the latter
committed a crime which may have ranged from the benign to the most heinous you
can imagine. The Jewish leaders did it by arguing that Israel was in
danger of being destroyed, then escalating the rhetoric to move on a spectrum
that culminates in the accusation that someone is motivated by antisemitic
sentiments. And the Jews always refused to stop this monstrous defamation till
they got the favorable response they were seeking.
So then, where are we on that spectrum in the case of UNRWA
and the Palestinian refugees? Right now, they are using the small details of
local laws -- bouncing them in every direction – and looking for a way to make
them apply to the international situation. Here is an example of that: “In
other words, a Palestinian could not seek admission to the U.S. as a
refugee on the grounds that his grandfather was a refugee.” But the seeds are
being planted to escalate the rhetoric in case they don't get what they seek.
Here is the example of one seed: “American policy, by tradition, has not been
to suggest that allies kill themselves.” Thus, to refuse to accede to their
request will at some point in the future be described as being a call to commit
suicide, therefore a flagrant display of antisemitic sentiments.
It all
started with an amendment formulated by Senator Mark Kirk as a plan “to cut not
a dollar of American support for UNRWA but simply to stimulate an honest
discussion.” However, it is now clear that the real intention has always been
to carry hidden inside the plan, demonic seeds programmed to explode into the
most atrocious kind of politics America
has seen since it became a republic.
And all
that was necessary was for the Jewish organizations to discover that Senator
Mark Kirk had lied about his military service. They blackmailed him, recruited
him and forced him to start the ball rolling for them. In the end, they got the
chance to claim that the Congress has voted unanimously and in a bipartisan
fashion to support Israel .
As they see it, they will now be able to tell the world, especially the Arabs
and the Muslims, that they have America
in their pocket like the key to a private washroom.
But when
they are in America , they
will always claim that they have only managed to protect Israel from
having to commit suicide. What they will not say is that they got America to commit suicide on the international
stage as it has been doing for decades to allow Israel to play the role of thug
nation as it has always done.