Romney Incites Murder By Self Defense

In a speech delivered in Israel, Mitt Romney endorsed Israel's demand that Iran stop its program of enriching uranium, period. This means the Iranians are told to destroy the centrifuges they now have – enough of them that they can enrich as much uranium to the 20% level as they will need to run a fleet of nuclear powered ships and one of submarines; a long sought after goal of theirs. Thus, what the Iranians are told to do by the wannabe president of the United States of America is abandon their advance in science and technology because it makes the Israelis feel jealous. Failing this, he says, he will support Israel if it decides to attack Iran.

This is crazy to begin with because it shows in a clear and concrete fashion the depravity of the form of governance that is practiced in America. It is bad enough when politicians use the money of the people to buy their votes, it is worse when they go abroad – especially to Israel – and give the Israelis what does not belong to America such as a chunk of Palestine and Jerusalem, then tell the other neighbors to refrain from mastering the advanced technologies because it renders the Israelis jealous. But crazier than this is the fact that Romney took the matter a step further than that. He called Israel's dream to attack Iran an act of self defense.

What is clear is that Mitt Romney still believes in the idea that was planted in the heads of the American elite nearly five decades ago by the Jewish propaganda machine. It was to the effect that America can do anything it wants in this world, and that everyone else must accept it whether it proves in the end to have been the right thing to do or the wrong thing.

The Jewish leaders justified this sort of ideas by advancing the argument that America was so superior and so far ahead of everyone else, no one had the right to rebuke it for its failures, or point to them because such would be an act of insolence aimed at chipping away at America's prestige. And a few Americans, especially of the younger generation, came around to believing in this line of reasoning; hence the start of the push to hammer into the head of the unbelievers the notion of America's exceptionalism – an expression that sounds nice to them whatever definition you may wish to give it.

The trouble is that the younger generation, and apparently Mitt Romney as well, never considered the possibility that what the American leaders say and do abroad affects the American people no less than what their leaders say and do at home. Thus, when these characters go abroad and tongue-lash someone or kick their asses, the American people learn the lesson that it is okay to be rude to someone or kick their asses.

Yes, they will try to tongue-lash and kick asses abroad if they can but since they cannot always do that, they end up tongue lashing each other and kicking asses at home. The net result is that the world's view of America transforms from admiring the decent superpower to fearing the rude superpower to scorning the has-been superpower.

And when an American leader -- who aspires to the highest office in the land -- goes abroad to say that attacking someone you do not like is self-defense, the young and immature in America seek to defend themselves by attacking those they do not like. And you end up getting the Columbine and Aurora effects.

Take it from me, the nations of the world will find a way to defend themselves against the likes of Israel and a Romney in the White House. But ask yourselves who will be there to defend the would be victims of the American mass murders and those of the “stand your ground” madness?

I shudder to think of an American future that is being shaped by Judeo-Israeli ideals.

Mitt Romney Is A Cultural Taliban

The Taliban is a movement so backward; its members blame the act of rape not on the perpetrator but on the victim. At times, these people go as far as kill the woman that has already suffered the indignity and the violence of being raped. And Mitt Romney has just shown to the world he has a cultural maturity that does not surpass the level of the Taliban.

He did so by blaming the culture of the Palestinian people for their low level of income even though they are the victims of a Jewish military occupation that has not stopped to rape their motherland for a single day since the invasion long ago.

It is not that Mitt Romney understands the Jewish culture but does not understand the Palestinian culture. It is that he understands no culture at all except perhaps his own personal thing -- to which I shall come in a moment. As to his possible understanding of the Jewish culture, the latest of his gaffes to come to light is the fact that he scheduled a fund raising dinner in Israel on a Jewish holiday, thus proving that he knows as much about the “Western” protocol of getting to know your host before meeting him, as do the Taliban. Needless to say the dinner in Israel was canceled.

Now, about Romney's personal culture. It has to do with what he believes is success in business. Like Bernie Madoff, Mitt Romney does not differentiate between getting rich by creating wealth and getting rich by accumulating wealth. He does not see that entrepreneurs create wealth by producing goods and/or services they sell to the public or to other enterprises. This contrasts with the fact that some people exploit the weaknesses of the system in order to do the kind of financial engineering which allows them to accumulate wealth that is created by someone else.

These people may or may not break the law; they may or may not do their thing discretely enough, it is impossible to prove they broke the law. But in the end, the techniques they use are the same whether or not they go over the threshold and become a Mitt Romney who got away with it, or become a Bernie Madoff who got caught.

Romney inherited seed money as well as fame from a father who, from all indications, was a true entrepreneur. Using the money and the good name of the father, Mitt practiced the worst kind of financial engineering. That is, he attracted other investors and used their money to buy the enterprises of small entrepreneurs -- zeroing in on a given industry.

He laid off the people that worked in those enterprises and shut down the operations. This done, he reorganized the companies in such a way as to produce and sell low quality goods made partially or entirely from imported parts and components. This is what everyone calls getting into a race to the bottom with the Third World, but he calls being efficient. No surprise there; it's all part of the same mentality and personal culture.

And this is the business culture that Romney and a few other “corporate raiders” have brought to America. You can see that it is bad for the country from Romney's performance in Israel when he praised the Marxist business model there saying it is a model that everyone should want to emulate. No doubt, if elected president of the United States, which he wants to be, he will try to impose that model on America.

What differentiates Romney from the other corporate raiders is precisely that he wants to be president. This is why he went abroad where he managed to display not a political and cultural prowess of presidential caliber but a clumsiness that put him in league with the Taliban. And he has shown he is more than a run of the mill corporate raider, he is a Marxist corporate raider devoid of culture and low on Western protocol.

He ought to be shipped to Israel or Afghanistan if North Korea refuses to take him.

The Romney Lampooning Of Israel

The wannabe president of the United States of America, Mitt Romney, gave a speech in occupied Jerusalem to please who knows whom. The speech started as a suck up address but then deteriorated to being a lampooning of Israel. Or was it? Having praised the Israelis for what they managed to do in creating a Jewish nation, and in maintaining it as Jewish despite the adversities, he talked about Iran whose leaders he described as being “the product of a radical theocracy.” In case someone did not see the irony in him standing on what he says is Jewish soil, and calling Iran a theocracy, he went on to demonstrate his point in a more emphatic way.

He started the argument this way: “Israel and America are in many respects reflections of one another.” To prove this view, he went on to show the similarities between the two regimes from the political, economic and cultural standpoints. One of the similarities he mentioned was the following: “We both believe that our rights are universal, granted … by our creator.” Obviously, the intent here was to have every astute observer mumble to himself or mumble aloud: “And what do you think the Iranians believe, Romney my boy?”

Another similarity that Romney mentioned was this: “We both believe in the rule of law, knowing that in its absence, willful men may incline to oppress the weak.” Obviously, the intent here was to have the astute observer ask if he meant (1) to undo every veto that America has cast against the Security Council resolutions condemning Israel; (2) force Israel to abide by the resolutions that have not been vetoed such as those which say he is standing on occupied Palestinian land; (3) recognize that Zionism is worse than racism because the racists reject their views when their assumptions are proven false whereas the Zionists are so certain of their supremacy, only a God could convince them they are wrong but He is not trying to do so.

Which leads us to the second part of that observation: “willful men may incline to oppress the weak.” Obviously, the intent here was to have the astute observer ask if he will tell the Israelis to leave the unarmed Palestinian people alone. Could it be that he concluded three generations of occupation make of what passes for a Jewish religion not really a religion but a demonic form of savagery? Does he see that this situation also diminishes America given the support that the superpower extends to Israel to continue the horror? In case Israel fails to respond favorably, will he as president of the United States cut off all relations with what he calls the Jewish state? Will he promise never to arm it again; never to give it another dollar or guaranty a loan it takes out? Will he? Will he do any or all of these things?

And there was this similarity in his speech: “We both believe in democracy.” Obviously the intent here was to have the astute observer ask if this meant the next time that Foxman of the anti-Defamation League decides to unleash his dogs of war and instruct them to go against the people who express their views in America or anywhere in the world, he will respond. Will he, as president, unleash the investigative powers of his office to go after Foxman and his abominable organization with the view of clipping their wings and rendering them as harmless as a defanged hyena?

And there was this similarity: “We both believe in free enterprise.” Obviously the intent here was to have the astute observer crack his belly wide open while laughing his head off. Or was it? To say something like this to the Israelis whose economy is the reverse of free enterprise is to call Karl Marx a Milton Friedman; or call Milton Friedman a Karl Marx. But even with a cracked belly and no head to cap it, an observer – whether astute or stupid – can see that Israel's economy is two thirds public and one third private which is the exact opposite of what free enterprise is all about. Thus, we must conclude one of two things: either Romney knows this and he is lampooning the Israeli economy, or he has no idea how a capitalist economy works and he intends to turn America into a Marxist state. In either case, his presidency will turn out to be a calamity. Is this guy for real?

Romney went on to say this: “As someone who has spent most of his life in business, I am particularly impressed with Israel's cutting edge technologies and thriving economy. We recognize yours as the 'start-up nation' – and the evidence is all around us.” If anything, this passage should tell Romney never again to have a Jew write a speech for him on a subject that pertains to the Middle East. They made other presidents sound like mouth-farting idiots. It is obvious that this part of the speech was written for him by his adviser Dan Senor who wrote a book about Israel and called it “Start-up Nation.” The book is a bad joke that did more than anything to tell the world Israel is a technological fake.

The truth is that it takes only a million dollars to list a company on the National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations (NASDAQ). To create the semblance of having a thriving technological base, every Israeli who comes up with an idea for an application that does not surpass that of a North American high school student, is patented in Israel and used to start a company around it. A million dollars are loaned to the company so as to get it listed on the American NASDAQ -- money that is later withdrawn without notifying the Association, and used to list another company. And the charade keeps feeding on itself like a Ponzi scheme.

The listings are meant to have two effects. The first is to give the impression that Israel is advanced in technology, especially that a listing is always accompanied by a big write up and the sort of rubbish you see in the Senor book. The second effect is that it attracts the so-called angel investors who throw money at a project not expecting a return but simply to encourage the budding young entrepreneurs who may someday come up with the next Microsoft or Apple. But neither a Microsoft nor an Apple ever came out of that hellhole they call Israel. On the contrary, these people have proven to have the Midas touch in reverse because everything they touch is turned into a disaster.

And the scary part about the Romney speech is this: “What you have built here [is] a model for others.” If he truly believes this – should he become president and implement this model in the United States, it will be goodbye America. Might as well start rehearsing the song: You will become like Israel but remain somewhat below North Korea. Let us pray and then bury you alongside Karl Marx or maybe alongside one of the dear leaders.

Then in the Romney speech, came a bombshell that exploded like a fragmentary bomb made not of metal but of pig manure. Look at this passage: “Finally, we both believe in freedom of expression, because we are confident in our ideas and in the ability of men and women to think for themselves. We do not fear open debate.”

Assuming he thought that the astute observer had failed to catch the irony in his earlier observation about democracy, he could not make the same assumption about this bombshell because the truth about what happened had already come out. And what happened was that a meeting between Romney and the leader of the Israeli opposition, Yacimovich was canceled on orders from Netanyahu. You can't miss the irony here.

Which forces us to reject the notion that he was lampooning Israel, and adopt the notion that he has no idea what he is talking about. And this is something that leads us to exclaim the following:

Freedom of expression my ass! Confident in their ideas my ass! The ability to think for themselves my ass! Romney as president of the United States my ass!

Go back to making money destroying companies and laying people off. But do it in Israel and leave North America alone.

Things are good out here, we don't need someone messing it to please Netanyahu his bosom buddy.

Money Bloodstream Of The Hate Machine

Having demonstrated to the Brits what the political version of an American Joker looks like and sounds like, the plan for Mitt Romney is to spend a couple of days in Israel where he is expected to do two things. He will meet with wealthy American Jews who will be flying into Israel from the United States with checkbooks in pocket loaded with American dollars. These people will meet him at a fund-raising dinner which they set at 50,000 to 100,000 dollars a plate. In return, for this money, Romney will give a speech outlining how, if elected president of America, he will turn his country into a more obedient servant of Israel, and a faithful booster of all the Israeli and Jewish causes even if this will add to the ruination of superpower America that is no longer what it used to be thanks to them.

What they also have in mind for him down there is to have him elaborate on the promise he made to reopen the case of Jonathan Pollard. This is the Jewish spy who helped Israel bomb the peaceful nuclear power station in Iraq by giving it the satellite images needed to commit that heinous criminal act. In fact, this was the act that started a chain of events which culminated in the castration of America, and the elevation of Iran into a regional superpower. Come to think of it, this is what lethal friends are for -- are they not? And when it comes to imposing themselves as friends of someone whose blood they plan to suck, no one does it better than the Jewish leaders, and no one succumbs more readily to the temptation than the American leaders. Together, these two are like the hand that penetrates the glove and fits into it perfectly. In the meanwhile, this is how the American people get it right up their rear end – screwed up royally by the “fickle finger of fate” each and every time.

Not to be outdone by Romney's show of fake love for Israel and all the Jewish causes in this election year, President Barack Obama signed a bill that had been sitting on his desk for several months. The bill is now law which authorizes the sending of another 70 million dollars to Israel so as to help complete the imaginary dome they say is protecting Israel from the Palestinian flares and firecrackers they insist on calling rockets. And they add to the charade despite the fact that everyone knows there is no protection dome in Israel -- by telling another lie. The truth is that Israel needs the money to buy not a dome but buy enough dough to feed its people for a few more months. Rice, wheat and corn is what this money will buy when no one is looking because there is something that we and Romney are not supposed to know about.

In fact, what Romney will not do in Israel is lay a wreath at the tomb of Moshe Silman, the Israeli middle-aged man who set himself on fire to protest the socio-economic problems plaguing that hellhole. But unlike the Tunisian Mohammed Bouazizi whose act sparked the Arab Spring, the one committed by Silman was hushed up in Israel and was totally blacked out in the North American media. Unable to pay rent, feed himself or buy medicine, Silman was helped for a while by his sister, but realizing that this cannot go on for ever, he blamed his troubles on the screwy set up which exists in Israel where corruption is so rampant, the government and the institutions do nothing -- in his words -- but take from the poor to give to the rich. And this was the theme of the protests that have been going on in Israel for more than a year now; events we do not hear about in this Jewish controlled media hellhole we call North America.

This being the case, what else may be happening in the world that we are banned by Jewish decrees from knowing about as we consume our daily ration of media motley of made up stories? Well, you can go over this blacklisted website, my friend, where you will find warnings that America was following the Israeli economic model so perilously, a crash was bound to happen. Eventually, the crash did happen in 2008, the Americans felt it but the media kept on saying that Israel was doing so well, it was like a piece of paradise in a hellish world that is envious of it. No, I was saying, this is a lie. I shouted like a lone voice in the wilderness that Israel was the pits; it is a hellhole that could not come up to the level of a Sierra Leon or a North Korea if left without American help, and the help of many other donors.

How did I know this when the world was turning a blind eye to the truth? Well, I studied (rather I tried to study) the Israeli economy but discovered that there was no economy to study in Israel. Unlike Sierra Leon or North Korea where there is the semblance of a nation with a rudimentary economy, Israel is neither a nation nor an economy. It is an outpost financed and held in place mainly with American money and some help from a few other sources. Take that away and Israel will look like a doghouse and a hellish place.

What alarmed me most was the fact that America was made to copy the Israeli non-business model. To achieve this, America was turning itself into a handful of giant retail stores that sell cheap imported goods while gradually destroying the local manufacturing base and putting out of business the small neighborhood stores. This is how the Israeli so-called economy is structured. You have a number of retail stores which are owned by a handful of families with dual citizenship – mostly Israeli and American but also Israeli and some European nationality. These same people own businesses outside of Israel where they make real money in the manufacturing and/or the wholesale sectors.

To make the operation in the Israeli outpost worth maintaining, they turned the place into a way station where they park their money and keep it sheltered for a while from the authorities of the countries where they generate the profits. After that, they start taking the money out to invest anywhere in the world where they see an opportunity. But this would not be sufficient to generate the surplus that can maintain a population of a few million Israelis. They needed to find a number of other sources that would supplement the cash flow. To this end, they plugged their sucking pump into the bloodstream of the German people and demanded reparation payments. They got it; and this is something which is still ongoing half a century past any statute of limitation you will find anywhere in this world.

But that is not all they did because by now they had secured the complete and absolute control of the house of insanity known as the Congress of the United States of America. They incited the criminally insane members of that toilet bowl to pass stinking legislation by which to blackmail some European nations such as Switzerland to pay Israel moneys that no Jew was ever entitled to. In addition, they mounted endless fund-raising campaigns throughout the world to ask for donations which they received with extreme generosity. They also borrowed money that was secured with American endorsements, debts that keep piling up with no hope they will ever pay them. And this means that America will end up paying. Despite all of this, they still managed to bring the Israeli outpost close to a financial cliff on several occasions, and had the American Congress of imbeciles bail them out each and every time.

They have something else going for them. We see it clearly in the way that the current administration and the one seeking to replace it have been made to play the Jewish game. When you follow the money, you see it go round and round and round. Here you have wealthy American Jews go to Israel with their pockets stuffed with American dollars they intend to donate to the Romney campaign. This will diminish their coffers in America which will require replenishment. They will be able to do this because they also own the businesses in Israel where their money is sometimes parked. Some of that money will come back to America where it will be used to finance the two campaigns. The net result is that the American taxpayer which is already on its knees will end up as usual feeding Israel, its moguls, the Jewish moguls in America and the two political parties.

Any change in this carousel of political insanity risks exposing the fraud that is perpetuated legally on the American people. This is why it is up to them now to say enough is enough. The thing, however, is that the situation in America is no different from the one in every authoritarian state. In America, as in pre-revolution Tunisia, the press is not free. Thus, there will be no one to spread the word that the people have had it up to here, and that they want a change. But will there be a Bouazizi who will make a splash as in the Arab world? Or will there be a Silman who will die in silence and take his cause with him to the grave?

Time will tell.

Figures Don't Lie But Liars Do Figure

On July 26, 2012 Karl Rove published in the Wall Street Journal a piece he calls: “Obama and the Economic Blame Game” which also has the subtitle: “In a new poll, the public fingers the president.” Rove quotes a large number of figures none of which I dispute since I can neither prove nor disprove any of them. But what surprises me about the article is the fact that those numbers clash mightily with Rove's interpretation of them. In fact, as I went through the numbers, I wondered why he chose the title that he did, and why he allowed the subtitle to remain as it is.

The first thing that the author does is hit the reader with a powerful opinion: “...bad news for … Obama's attempts to blame someone … for America's economic problems.” Well, I always thought that an economy is driven by market forces. If you want to know why your economy behaves the way that it does, you identify the forces acting on it, and see if there is something you can do -- using the fiscal, monetary and other tools available to you -- to alter the composition of those forces. This said, I have not heard a thing coming out of the current administration which says that the president or anyone in it did anything but work on those forces the best way they could.

Still, Rove writes that a newspaper called the Hill released a pole which says “66% of the voters believe the weak economy is Washington's fault.” The fact that the word “voter” is used here makes you wonder who chose it in this politically charged atmosphere. Was it the newspaper or Rove? No matter; let's move on. Rove then asks this question: “And who is most to blame?” He answers: “34% said Mr. Obama. Congress was named the culprit by 23%, while 20% chose Wall Street and 18% fingered former President George W. Bush.” And so, Rove concludes that: “Mr. Obama's obsessive campaign to blame his predecessor is failing.”

Given that I never heard a thing coming out of the current administration to indicate that Mr. Obama is doing anything more than identify the forces affecting the course of the economy, I must conclude that Mr. Rove who was a big player in the previous administration is trying to whitewash the true history of the economic calamity which hit America and the world during the tenure of that administration. Thus, the only obsession I see here is that of Karl Rove and all those of his political ilk who wish to see someone take the blame for not doing enough to clean up a mess so massive, only the passage of time can clean it up. But get this, my friend -- altering time is a scientific achievement that has not yet been realized. Whether or not Obama can walk on water, the one thing he cannot do is compress time. Maybe Karl has some suggestions in this regard.

But that does not seem to interest our esteemed author because he goes on to thrust on the reader another powerful opinion before justifying it with a number. Here is the opinion: “The public … believes the buck stops with the current occupant of the Oval Office.” And here is the justification: “53% said Mr. 'Obama has taken the wrong actions and slowed the recovery down.'” Well, what the “public” is saying here is that in retrospect, the President could perhaps have done a little better despite the gravity of the situation he inherited from the Bush/Rove administration. But nobody is perfect so what the heck, we will not crucify someone; not even Karl.

But having gone through all this trouble to deny that Obama inherited a mess, the author of the article now embarks on a massive attempt to explain that the non-existent mess was Obama's fault anyway because he was a Senator in a Democratic administration when it all started. And so he admits that there was a subprime debacle which started the ball rolling and the mess to shape itself -- but that was their fault not ours, he says. Well, well! How these politicians cum journalists never cease to amaze me with the power they have to do themselves in as they try to have it both ways.

But I am not going to challenge Karl Rove on this history because I know little to nothing about it. What I know, however, is another history I would like to tell.

When I came from Quebec to resettle in Ontario toward the end of 1997, I started a business called Viago Printing and Office Supplies. While running it, I also launched a small local newspaper. Needless to say the load was heavy on me, and I relied on family and friends to help me carry it because my financial resources were limited, and I did not hire enough people to help.

Still, I could have done well but for the fact that three serious illnesses hit me one after the other, and they eventually required that I undergo three serious operations. I had to wind down the business -- which I did in 2002 without declaring bankruptcy -- having paid my creditors everything I owed them. I then sold the inventory that was left to my competitor who eventually became a friend I checked with once in a while.

I got busy doing other things and taking care of my health when one day I received a phone call from someone I did not know. It was a woman with whom I had a nice conversation, but because I did not know then what I know now, I did not ask her the details I now wish I had. What I still remember of that conversation is that she was speaking on behalf of a holding company or some such outfit that was expanding its business in the stationery and office supplies wholesale and retail sectors. She wanted to know if I would sell my business. I said I wound it down without declaring bankruptcy which is why it was still listed in a few places as an ongoing and viable business.

I was, at that time, recuperating from the first operation, and so I left the matter there and did not think much about it. There was no Office Depot in Oakville, the town where I still live but there was one in the neighboring city of Mississauga. I drove there one day only to see that Office Depot had changed its name to Staples. This is when I remembered the conversation I had with the woman who called me a few months before. It must have been these people. And so, I rushed back to talk to my friend and former competitor only to find that he had gone out of business. I asked his neighbor what happened, and he told me the man sold the business and went traveling around the globe. The new owners laid everyone off and shut down the business.

You sonafagun, I said. I remembered him telling me how much he loved traveling around the world but especially to Egypt where the ancient culture there always fascinated him. He had also told me something I dismissed at the time but now looks like a possible premonition on his part. He knew as did the whole town how much the Toronto Star was trying to put me out of business from the moment that I launched the newspaper which competed with two of their local affiliates. His advice to me was to do what other publications did in the past, which is to sell the business to them for a couple million dollars -- and I'll be set for life.

I laughed the suggestion off and did not sell the newspaper. Later, I missed the opportunity to sell the office supplies business. But my friend must have taken his own advice, sold for a good price, got out of here to go fly and sail the world. Sonafagun!

Now, almost ten years later, I wonder how many enterprises were bought by Staples, put out of business and their employees laid off. And how much money the likes of Mitt Romney made out of such practices.

Perhaps, Karl Rove could impress upon Mitt Romney to release all his tax returns. It would be fun to go through them and find out.

Maybe there too, I'll have the opportunity to exclaim sonafagun!

Bark Of A Wannabe Commander-in-Chief

On July 24, 2012, the eve of his departure to Israel and a couple of other places, Mitt Romney who is running to be president of the United States of America and commander-in-chief of its armed forces, gave a speech to the veterans of foreign wars at the annual convention held in Reno. The first thing that he said after the customary salutation and acknowledgments was that the veterans of foreign wars number more than two million. Wow! Two million? You don't have to be an American, and you don't have to be a veteran to be affected by the enormity of this number. Thus, you expect to hear the wannabe commander-in-chief say something about it; say whether or not he understands the needs of these people and whether or not he has plans for them.

But you hear nothing like that from this candidate even though on the day before, Barack Obama who is the sitting President, was at the same convention telling the same veterans how well he understands their problems, how deeply committed he was to solving them and what he has done already to alleviate their hurt as well as attend to their needs. Not surprisingly, the list he enumerated was no less massive than the number of veterans. It included the medical attention that many of these people need. The pension reforms that some are entitled to and deserve to have. The retraining for a gainful employment in the new economy that some of them desperately need. The hiring of veterans that the government has done, can still do and will do. And the encouragement that the Administration is doing to get the private sector to hire veterans.

None of this gave Mitt Romney a hint as to what was expected of him. Instead, he told the veterans they have “a special place in America's heart” without telling them how this will translate into maintaining the programs that were started by the sitting President, or telling them how he will improve on those that may need improvement. Ignoring all that, Romney told the veterans only this: “Our veterans are part of a proud tradition that stretches back to the battlefields of Lexington and Concord--” Which led him to say the following a little later on: “But we owe our veterans ... more than just an accounting of our successes. They deserve a fair and frank assessment of the whole picture – of where we are and where we want to be.”

That's it? you say to yourself. He came to tell the veterans: we love you with all our hearts, and here is what we want you to do in the future. Is that all he came to tell the veterans? Apparently yes, but he has a preamble to begin with. It is this: “the last few years have been a time of declining influence and missed opportunities.” What are these? you ask. And he says they are the bad economy, the inability to shape world events, the loss of confidence among allies and loss of respect among adversaries. But he hints this is small potato because: “most importantly, has the most severe security threat facing America and our friends, a nuclear-armed Iran, become more or less likely?”

He assures the audience: “These clear measures are the ultimate tests of American leadership.” He chides the sitting President for not living up to them and lists a litany of the latter's failures. Following that, he concludes: “The world is dangerous, destructive, chaotic. And the two men running to be your commander-in-chief must offer their answers.” Oh finally, you think to yourself, he is going to say something concrete. Here it comes: “Like a watchman in the night, we must remain at our post --” What? Like a watchman in the night? Hey Mitt, cut the platitudes and show us the meat. Where's the meat?

But there is no meat because all he has to offer are more platitudes which he interlaces with a series of anti-Obama diatribes. He keeps throwing the platitudes and the diatribes till he hits the subject of Iran, the nation he earlier characterized as being the most severe security threat facing America and its friends. And this is what he says on that subject: “the president faltered when the Iranian people were looking for support in their struggle against the ayatollahs.” He calls that moment a moral and strategic opportunity which the President should have seized to offer “unequivocal voice … affirming their right to be free.”

Well, those of us who are old enough to remember what happened during the Hungarian uprising in the Nineteen Fifties and a few more uprisings after that -- when the Americans and other Western European powers offered unequivocal voice affirming the right of the people in revolt to be free -- will never again want to hear the voice of a president or anyone else cheering someone and leading them to keep fighting past the point of exhaustion. This may be in the strategic interest of America in the short run but it is detrimental to it in the long run, and criminal in every sense of the word from the moral standpoint. It is criminal because it gives people a false hope and invites them to commit suicide which may embarrass the oppressors but also creates a reason for the cheerleaders to celebrate a cowardly victory. You sacrifice thousands of innocent lives for the opportunity to beat your breast like a gorilla?

Yet, we keep hearing voices that relentlessly call on the American president to do just that. And we keep reading the same message being hammered over and over in the print publications. So we ask: Who are the people responsible for this? And what do they really want? Well, these are the people who make-up the Jewish lobby in America. What they want is serve their numerous causes, foremost among which are the wealth, power and glory of Israel. Don't they already get what they want from America? Yes they do. But they have an insatiable hunger for something else; something they can never get enough of.

To see this in the starkest possible of ways, we turn our attention to a later moment on that day -- a few hours after Romney had finished giving his speech. It happened on the CNN show called “The Situation Room” with Wolf Blitzer where two guests, one from the Obama campaign and one from the Romney campaign bickered about who will be better for Israel. The Obama representative said the President has armed Israel to the teeth, has financed it to the hilt, defended it in every forum around the world, provided for its protection against any possible attack and so on and so forth. Yes, said the man from the Romney campaign, the President did do all these things but he missed out on the most important thing. What's that? you ask. Obama did not speak out well enough about Israel, said the man.

What's this all about? you ask. What's going on here? Well, what is going on now is something that has been going on for thousands of years. These people believe they are the chosen children of God. That God used to appear to mortals in the old days but He no longer does so now. In His absence, they must be worshiped like He would have been. This is why they worked on a number of insane pastors, and convinced them to go on television and tell their flocks of emotionally worn out sheep to worship the Jew as a God.

But what good does that do to the agenda of the Jewish lobby? Well, my dear, here is the answer unfolding before your very eyes on the television screen. You see representatives of the two campaigns, each pledging to better serve the Jewish state. The fact is that when a notion is hammered into the head of the children of America that they can only say good things about the Jews and Israel, and never criticize them, the children grow up to become the natural slaves of the Jews and of Israelis without the need to place shackles around their necks or their ankles. They, on their own, will impose the state of slavery on themselves because they will see it as the natural thing to do.

Thus, for the Obama representative to boast that the President has armed Israel to the teeth, financed it to the hilt, defended it in every forum around the world, provided for its protection against any possible attack and the rest of it -- does not compare to the reality that the Wolf Blitzer Situation Room is more powerful that the Situation Room at the White House from where the nation of America was meant to be run. There is nothing that the President can do that Blitzer cannot undo if the first dares to act on something in a way that goes contrary to the interests of Israel or the Jewish causes. Get it through your heads, folks; it is not an accident or a joke that they chose to call that television show the Situation Room. They conceived this thing to allow them to run America and the world from it because they consider the elected President to be only a figurehead with the real power being in the kingdom of Israel while Wolf Blitzer in America acts as the executive viceroy.

Do you think Romney understands any of this? Of course he does, and he is willing to give them exactly what they want. Look what he said in his speech: “I will leave … on a trip … that will take me to … Israel … I think of this administration's shabby treatment of one of our finest friends. President Obama is fond of lecturing Israel's leaders.” The reference here is to the day when Netanyahu lectured the President in the White House and practically urinated on his rug to then go and get 29 standing ovations in the Congress for a job well done.

Well done? No there is better than that, says Romney: it may look like Netanyahu lectured Obama but because Obama did not, in response, kiss Netanyahu's ring, it is as if he lectured his guest. I shall strive to do better than that because Israel is not a leech sucking our blood; it is our finest friend. I shall arm Israel to the teeth, finance it to the hilt, defend it in every forum around the world, provide for its protection against any possible attack and more than that, I shall praise it and praise the Jews like the gods that they are.

Romney dispenses with a few more platitudes which include the promise to involve America in another hemorrhaging war in the Middle East such as going against Iran, for example. He then ends the speech with this bark: Believe in America.

And the people are asking: Whose America? That of King Netanyahu or his viceroy Wolf Blitzer?

Agenda Of The Emissaries From Hell

Reports have it that during the month of June in the year 2012, House Representative of the American Congress Michelle Bachmann and four of her colleagues wrote a letter to the inspector general at the State Department calling on him to investigate an American born female Muslim employee who happens to hold a high position at the State Department. They made this call on the basis of the woman's origin and her family connections and not on the basis of anything she did or said which goes contrary to American ideals. Almost immediately after the news was made public, the individuals who knew the woman well such as Senator John McCain came to her defense on the floor of the House of Representatives, repudiating Michelle Bachmann and her four sidekicks – collectively referred to as the quintet.

Had this case gone the way that such cases normally go in a country that is supposed to be as civilized as America, the matter would have ended here. Alas, it did not because there was a powerful reason behind the hysteria that followed – there was the Jewish lobby supervising it. The lobby stirred up the hysteria by directly organizing it in some cases, and by indirectly inspiring its development in other cases. Two articles published on July 21, 2012 demonstrate how this has worked. The first article was written by Andrew C. McCarthy, appearing in National Review Online under the title: “Questions about Huma Abedin” and the subtitle: “A State Department adviser has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.” The second article was written by Nonie Darwish, appearing in American Thinker under the title: “Egyptian Reformists Alarmed By Hillary and Obama.”

McCarthy's article is a long one. It begins with an attack on Senator John McCain who, only a year ago, had expressed fear about the Egyptian political party known as the Muslim Brotherhood, but is now defending the woman accused of being related to people who may have dealt with members of that political party. Given that no accusation was leveled against the American born Muslim woman, the normal civilized way to handle a case like this would be to call on witnesses to come and testify as to the character of the woman especially that she has been working for the American Government since the year 1996 -- a good sixteen years now.

You would think that Andrew McCarthy who is a lawyer would know this. And you would have expected that when the quintet asked the inspector general to look into the matter and report to the Congress, McCarthy would have advised them to hold their horses. In fact, had he been truthful to his profession and respectful of it, he would have taken the position that since McCain testified on the floor of the Congress as to the impeccable character of the woman; an opinion that was echoed by countless other witnesses, the legal requirements for this case had been fulfilled. And he would have advised that any action beyond this point will be viewed as an illegal abuse of the investigative powers of the Congress; a move aimed at persecuting an American citizen to satisfy the hate motives of a handful of demented people.

But this is not what Andrew McCarthy did. Instead, he wrote the following: “For … merely asking the State Department's inspector general to look into it and report to the Congress – which is part of the IG's duties under the statute that created his position – McCain & Co. (i.e., his fans in the left-wing media and his admirers in the Republican establishment) are screaming 'smear' and 'McCarthyism.'” As can be seen, he started a legal argument but finished it by trying to score political points thus demonstrating both ignorance of the spirit of the law and the contempt which he has for his profession.

As if this were not enough, he goes on to do something that is truly astounding. First, he says that during the tenure of that woman as top adviser to the State Department, there has been a policy shift which the House members have the right to investigate. What? What do you, bird brains, believe an adviser is hired to do? Simply advise that the status quo be maintained by refraining from initiating a policy shift of any kind? Why not hire a robot that does not think, or a computer that displays all possible situations that would maintain the status quo, or hire a bird with an IQ that surpasses the collective IQ of the quintet – an easy thing to do? No wonder the Congress of the United States is so paralyzed and so paralyzing of the nation's business.

Second, McCarthy writes the following: “When I was a prosecutor, the Justice Department would not have let me take a case that involved friends of my family … it's that government is supposed to avoid the appearance of impropriety – legitimacy hinges on the public's belief that actions are taken on merit, not burdened by palpable conflicts of interest.” A little later on, he reminds his readers that “the Left wanted to keep Samuel Alito off the Supreme Court because, 40 years ago, he was a member of 'Concerned Alumni of Princeton.'” It is clear now that this man does not grasp the fact that politics and the law are not managed or executed in the same way. You don't hire an adviser on foreign affairs under the criteria by which you assign a case to a prosecutor, or the criteria by which you hire a Justice for the Supreme Court. Besides, Alito was hired despite his perceived shortcomings. Why is this guy McCarthy still a member of the bar?

Having clobbered his domestic enemies and placed his friends on a pedestal, he now turns his attention to international affairs where he sees enemies who have the will and the ability to affect America's interests if dealt with normally and in accordance with international standards. Thus, he lets it be known by the tone he adopts throughout the article that these people must be viewed as mortal enemies, dealt with and treated accordingly. That is, they must be attacked and fought against till they are completely destroyed. He also reveals that his fear stems from the belief that they want to impose Sharia law on the world, including the United States.

To get a perspective as to how this fear has developed, we need to remember that there was a time when people like him were told Sharia law was bad for America because it advocates a system of financing that is so destructive, it has the potential to take down the world financial system. Then, in the year 2008, the American financial institution Lehman Brothers collapsed followed by other institutions, all of which were done-in by the heavy burden of borrowing, something that Sharia financing seeks to avoid where and when possible. Shortly after the collapse of the American system, the Arab and Muslim countries came to the rescue by contributing mightily to the effort that redressed it.

And the American people saw – as did the whole world – that the once maligned Arabs and Muslims were the people who helped restore America's system back to health, thus giving the country a second chance. They did so because they are good people who may also have a system of financing with good features in it that should never be dismissed offhand. In the end, it was such developments that ended the attacks of the professional haters on Sharia financing. What happened after that, however, is that these same people started to look for reasons by which to keep the hate going.

To get a sense of what that is, I leave the McCarthy article for a moment to look at the Nonie Darwish article. She is of Egyptian origin and a convert from Islam to Christianity. The story she tells as to why she converted is that she felt bad because her father was an intelligence officer operating in Gaza for the Egyptian government. She said this much at a time when the Palestinians and the Israelis were battling each other in Gaza – and this made her a convenient tool in the hands of the Jewish propaganda machine. Notice that even though she was born a Muslim and grew up as such, she never said she was circumcised and never complained about it. This contrasts sharply with the way that the subject of female circumcision is handled these days by Jewish propaganda machine which is using the subject to keep maligning the Arabs and the Muslims.

So then, what is Nonie Darwish writing about now? Here is how she begins her article: “I am witnessing an unprecedented alarm from Egyptian reformists who represent the almost half of the Egyptians who reject the Muslim Brotherhood as a moderate political group.” The reference here is to the last election where the party of the Brotherhood received 51.5% of the popular vote leaving 48.5% to everyone else, almost half of that to the more fundamentalist Muslim party. Thus, what she calls reformists can claim at best to represent only a quarter of the electorate and not half as she reports. And these are the people who lost the election. No wonder they are not happy with the result which is only human.

Where you, as a reader, become alarmed is where you see her insolent listing of the Jewish talking points in a mishmash that would embarrass a preteen pupil. Here is an example of that baby talk edited for brevity and for clarity: “many reformists believe that Hillary and Obama have empowered the Brotherhood when Obama gave his famous speech in Cairo.” You see, my dear friend, female circumcision is not what bothers this woman; it is the speech that Obama gave in Cairo while refusing to “balance” things out by, for example, giving a speech -- guess where – in the Knesset which happens to be in occupied Jerusalem. To pull off a coup of this magnitude would be the single most important act that will realize the Judeo-Israeli dream of legitimizing the occupation.

Here is another blow to the brains of the readers: “The Arabic internet is full of accusations concerning American conspiracies to support the brotherhood, which of course mention Huma Abedin … and Dalia Mugahid.” Let me tell you something as bluntly as I can, my friend: This is a flushing right out of Foxman's toilet. I have been reading the Arabic internet and the mainstream publications for years, and I never encountered either of these two names. Of course, when you tell a lie of this magnitude this brazenly, you do it for a purpose – and the purpose here is to dangle the specter of Sharia Law in a way that scares people. This is what she tries to do on behalf of the Jewish propaganda machine; a point I shall tackle a little later on.

Another Jewish talking point is something she calls rumors. Here is that passage: “Islamists in every part of the US government including homeland security; mentioned not as a negative by Arabs but as a wonderful accomplishment after 9/11, and proof to many Muslims that terror works like magic on Americans.” The fact is that the people over there are too busy putting their lives together to worry about what goes on in America. On the other hand, the people over here are never left alone to look after themselves without the Jewish owned and operated media interrupting them to say: forget what you're doing and stand in a “bipartisan” way in awe of the Jew and in worship of him so as to better fulfill your never-ending obligations to Israel.

Nonie Darwish goes on to reprint a letter she says was given to Secretary of State Clinton by an Egyptian reformist in which he claims to represent the non-Islamist sons and daughters of Egypt and the 15 million Copts. Well, reading the letter is tiresome to begin with, and when you see the author double the number of Copts from less than 8 million to 15 million without displaying a hint of shame, you stop reading the thing because nonsense that is also of poor quality is never a good thing on which to waste your time.

We now return to the McCarthy article. Talking about Huma Abedin's mother, he says the following: “[she] led the International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child (IICWC) [which] defends such practices as female genital mutilation.” Notice that female circumcision became female genital mutilation, something that the women in sub-Saharan Africa called for in part because of the work that was done by such organizations as the IICWC.

My first encounter with this subject happened sometime in the late Eighties of the Twentieth Century or thereabout. I was in the company of men, some of whom were lawyers. The name of a woman lawyer came up during the conversation, and one of the men asked me if I knew her. I said I did not, and he said I should get to know her. I asked why and he said she wrote a book about Egypt. He gave me the title which roughly translates from the French into English as: “From the St Lawrence to the Nile.” I thought it was a novel, and so I went to a bookstore and asked for it. They did not have it because it was out of print, but they said they will call me as soon as they locate a used copy. A few days later they called me to say they had a copy, and I went to get it.

It was a small work that pretended to be a novel but that was, in reality, an essay or a manifesto whose motives were difficult for me to discern at the time. Constructed around a thin plot line, the main thrust of the story is to make the point that Egypt is plagued by female circumcision; with all the negative propaganda that comes with this style of writing. Well, I never met the author of the book but I managed to gather enough information about her to know why she wrote that manifesto. She -- like a few other French speaking lawyers (mostly females) -- got into trouble with the legal establishment of Quebec which, to be truthful, is paternalistic, tribal and corrupt. The French lawyers who get into trouble with it run to the English speaking lawyers and ask for protection. As it happens these lawyers are mostly Jewish, and they demand a payment for extending their protection. That woman's payment was the writing of a book to stir up the hate against Egypt.

I then did some research on circumcision (both male and female) and discovered that the practice was started by the pharaohs of ancient Egypt. The royals liked sex so much, they wanted the sexual act to last as long as possible. By some fluke, they discovered that this can be achieved when the man and the woman are circumcised, and so they circumcised themselves, something that the commoners were not allowed to do. But the Jews who wanted to go out in the world and be pharaohs over humanity, picked up the tradition and modified it somewhat. Unlike Egypt where even a woman could be queen, the Jews were so paternalistic and so authoritarian, the men were treated like royals while the women were discouraged from seeking circumcision.

Right now, the debate is raging around the world concerning both the male and female circumcisions. There are the pros and the cons on both sides of the argument. Where in the underdeveloped places that still perform the operation outside the hospital, circumcision is regarded as genital mutilation. Where in the developed places, the operation is performed in a hospital, circumcision is regarded as less risky than say, abortion. All of these people are having their internal debates, and what they are saying to those in America who always have an ignorant advice to give on every subject they cannot differentiate from their assholes is this: Go practice your politics of the genitals somewhere else, and keep your noses away from the clitoris of our little girls. You have enough trouble with your own child molesters; don't you (bleep) come here and mess up the lives of our children.

Rather than heed this admonition, the Jewish propaganda machine -- using mouthpieces like Andrew McCarthy and other bird brains -- are falsely telling their audiences that circumcision is part of Sharia law when, in fact, it is not. But they go on to scare people by saying that circumcision will be imposed on everyone if Muslim Americans are not barred from holding high positions in the government, something that used to be done to Jews which now, the Jews want to see done to their enemy of the day because it would satisfy their weird sense of balance.

And so, we ask the question: What is really motivating this woman Michelle Bachmann for doing what she is doing? The first thing that comes to mind is the fact that she spent time in a kibbutz which reminds us of something that happened when Golda Meir – called the mother of Israel -- was in charge of things in that place. Then as now, the Jewish leaders in America were trying to paint Israel as the perfect place where nothing wrong is ever done; where nothing bad ever happens. The trouble was that neither CNN nor Fox News existed at the time, thus the journalists of America were free to report what they saw and not what they were told to say they saw.

These journalists reported that Israel was full of prostitutes who were young and attractive and mostly from Eastern Europe. A day or two later, Golda Meir popped in front of the cameras to tell the world that Israel was going through a financial crisis. Those who love Israel could help by coming to the country as tourists, she said. And she added that Israel was full of young and pretty girls who would be eager to enchant them. Many people around the world viewed this episode as the mother of Israel seeking to sell her daughters for money the way that Joseph was sold by his brothers to a bunch of desert marauders for a handful of silver pieces only to be freed in Egypt, and hired to work in a palace where he did very well for himself.

Shortly after that came another horror story out of Israel. First, adult men went to America and told about life in the Kibbutz where sex is truly a communal affair. It is a place where mothers have sex with their sons, where fathers have sex with their daughters and where every child is taught to masturbate at an early age. In short, the kibbutz turned out to be the incubator of sex deviation where young and attractive foreign girls were encouraged to go and see for themselves how wonderful life is in Israel. And the kibbutz was also the place that supplied the streets of Israel with young and attractive prostitutes.

To this day no one knows what role Michelle Bachmann played in the hellhole they call the kibbutz of the Jewish state. But when all is said and done, she will never hide the fact that she tried to masturbate her intellect to the White House only to end up masturbating her way to oblivion.

Whatever happened to her when she was young, she is now a disgusting creature and shall so remain for ever and ever.

The Hideous Hand Of Horror And Hoaxes

On July 20, 2012, the President of the United States of America, Barack Obama, published an article in the Wall Street Journal under the title: “Taking the Cyberattack Threat Seriously” and the subtitle: “In a future conflict, an adversary unable to match our military supremacy on the battlefield might seek to exploit our computer vulnerabilities here at home.” In fact, this subtitle is only part of a paragraph you encounter in the article which goes on to say this: “Taking down vital banking systems could trigger a financial crisis. The lack of clean water or functioning hospitals could spark a public health emergency … the loss of electricity can bring businesses, cities and entire regions to a standstill.”

Given that America knows of the consequences of a cyberattack, and given that it worries about it to this extent, you ask the question: Why is it that America has launched the first ever cyberattack on Iran thus risk retaliation if not invite one? Well, in trying to answer the question, we first note that the attack was coordinated with Israel, and this immediately suggests the answer: America did what it did because it was not itself. In fact, America was possessed by what you might call the evil spirit of Israel which is the Jewish lobby in America. This is the problem, therefore -- it is that America is possessed by the Jewish lobby in the same way that some people believe a human body in need of exorcism can be possessed by the devil.

If so, what is this thing they call Jewish lobby and what does it want? Well, before we get to talk about the lobby, we need to know something about human nature. The reality is that human cultures are full of examples about individuals who warn of a danger that does not exist, thus bring about consequences that can be serious. There is, for example, the story of the kid who repeatedly cried wolf when there was no wolf around. And so, the never ending cries of the kid resulted in that the adults around him ceased to believe him. But then one day, a real wolf appeared on the scene, the kid cried wolf and nobody came to his rescue.

There is also the story of the hypochondriac who continually complained about a pain that turned out to have no underlying causes. Eventually, the man got so tired of his own complaints, he convinced himself that every pain he felt was psychosomatic in nature and dismissed it offhand. Then one day, he had a real heart attack that could have been treated but he neglected to call for help and thus died alone.

Last but not least, there is the story of the paranoid who believed he was targeted and pursued by all sorts of enemies who sought to harm him for no reason except that he is who he is. The suspicious mind of this character made life so miserable for the people around him, no one who came close to him wanted to remain in his vicinity for longer than it was absolutely necessary. That situation caused the character to live like a hermit with no one to fear but his shadow and his own reflection in the mirror.

Other examples abound concerning people whose specialty is to trade in fear. These would be the pastors and the gurus who keep predicting the end of the world even after they are proven wrong. And there are the professional alarmists who predict the return of the Ice Age then reverse themselves and predict the return of Global Warming. There are also the people whose expertise lies in predicting the crash of the stock markets, the collapse of the world economies or the disaster that computers will cause when they go crazy such as the time when these experts warned of the Y2K calamity that never came.

When we look closely at these cases, we find that the people involved in them are of the type that hungers for attention and cannot live without being under the gaze of someone. These individuals will do anything and everything they can to attract attention to themselves. Once they have it, they hold on to it so tightly, they render the people around them tired and disgusted to the point of avoiding them whenever they can. And while this is true of individuals, it can also happen that a group of people would develop a culture that forever seeks to attract attention to the group for whatever reason. A notorious example of this kind is the group calling itself Jewish; a name it has attributed to itself even though it has nothing in common with the ancient Hebrews who used to adhere to a religion by that name.

And so, generally speaking, the habit of seeking attention and the habit of spreading fear to draw attention can be viewed as being part of human nature. Thus, they can be seen to live at the core of what motivates the modern Jewish lobby in America, but it must also be said that they are not the only motivations at work here. Something else is there which makes the spirit of the lobby want to possess America the way that the devil possesses a human body and holds on to it as tightly as a parasite holds on to its host.

Here is one plausible explanation. For nearly two thousand years, the leaders (rabbis and otherwise) among these people made life miserable for their followers and for everyone that came into contact with them. They did so not only because they devised a culture combining the vice of the kid who cried wolf and the vice of the hypochondriac who suffered from pains that did not exist, but also because they added something more serious to the mix. What they did was add schizophrenia to the paranoia of imagining enemies that did not exist. And this was the demonic combination they injected into the minds, the hearts and the souls of their followers.

The combination has allowed the Jewish leaders to accomplish two things at the same time. It has allowed them to isolate the followers as if they lived inside the walls of a ghetto -- whether or not an actual physical wall separated the latter from the outside world -- and has allowed the leaders to rule with absolute authority. This last part is necessary to have because a period of indoctrination follows the period of isolation. And the parts that make up the syllabus of indoctrination are so contradictory, they must be force fed to the students like dogmas that cannot be challenged or they will be rejected by a healthy and ordinary mind.

The Jewish method of recruiting new followers and of securing their ironclad allegiance made it possible for the leaders to assemble armies of foot soldiers who would pay any personal price to serve the cause. A stark example of a foot soldier who grew up to become a leader then started to work at recruiting new foot soldiers for the cause can be seen in the article that was written by Jonah Goldberg and published in the National Review Online on July 13, 2012. It is titled: “Tilting at the U.N. Windmill” and has the subtitle: “Not everything the U.N. does is evil. Some of it is just incompetent.” Goldberg himself is the example.

You see in the first sentence of the article how he accomplishes three objectives. First, he sets himself and the potential new recruits apart from the rest of creation. Second, he stakes the United States as if it were already a ghetto without walls. Third, he sets the whole concoction as being above everyone else. Here is that sentence: “Those of us who believe the United States would be best served by pulling out of the United Nations and starting up a more morally and politically serious clubhouse for morally and politically serious nations are often accused of tilting at windmills.”

This done, he tells the potential recruits why they must set themselves apart from the rest of creation. He tells them in a roundabout way there are enemies out there they must fear and must resolve to fight. This is how he puts it: “The phrase 'tilting at windmills' … means to fight … 'Tilting is a jousting expression, in case you didn't know.'” He then goes on to tell them why they must be paranoid about the world around them. He starts the discussion like this: “let's review some recent evidence.” He does that with a laundry list of complaints but of course, he must also quote an authority or two on the subject. Who does he choose to quote? You guessed it; he chooses two very Jewish names, Steven Mosher and Gordon Crovitz.

Another example to look at is that of John Bolton. It comes in an article written by him and published on July 17, 2012 in the Wall Street Journal. It has the title: “What America Gets for Its U.N. Blank Check” and the subtitle: “Bureaucrats give 'technical assistance' to Iran and North Korea.” Not to forget is the fact that Bolton used to be the US ambassador to the UN; the one who suggested that the top ten floors of the UN building in New York should be blown up or something to this effect. And of course, his article is an attack on that world body.

Like Goldberg, he picks an authority upon whom to rest his presentation. Who would that be? It is none other than the notorious Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. This is a woman who suffers from a feeling of guilt that runs so thickly in her veins; a woman who suffers from a fanaticism that runs so deeply in her bloodstream, it is said that a drop of her blood spilled in the oceans of the world would contaminate them so badly, all life forms in them would perish instantly. And the Jewish lobby is using her to the hilt so as to put America's power and wealth in the service of Israel and all the Jewish causes.

The wave that was stirred up by the Jewish lobby having the aim to pull America away from the United Nations, Bolton does his part in the article by attacking one of its agencies. He begins the article like this: “Leave it to a small, little-known agency to prove just how out of control the United Nations can get.” He goes on to tell the story of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) which delivered computer hardware to Iran and North Korea so as to beef up their patent offices thus improve their capabilities at catching potential offenders.

But is this why he and Ros-Lehtinen say the UN is out of control? Is this why they want to stop or reduce American funding to the world body if not pull out of it entirely? No, there is worse than that, they say. What is worse than that? you ask. And Bolton writes this: “Consider the audacity of Iran and North Korea, taking candy from babes.” Wow! They are taking candy from babes? How is that? you ask. Well, mm ... what was the question again? Oh yeah, I remember now, it's that candy from babes thing. Well, let me put it this way, says Bolton: “By evading sanctions within the U.N. temple itself, these nuclear proliferators show how to defeat … sanctions … through death by a thousand cuts.”

Hmm. Do you mean to say there is no more candy at the UN temple because somebody died by a thousand cuts? What exactly are you saying John Bolton? What exactly are you saying Ileana Ros-Lehtinen? Until you answer these questions let me tell you something because I do have something serious to say to you both. It is the following:

Computers used in a patent office are not of dual use. This is a sickly hoax put out by people like you, and the whole world knows it. These computers are ordinary machines that can be bought at any store in the developed world or the developing ones. Furthermore, America does not have a monopoly on advanced computer technology. Iran and North Korea certainly have computers for their space and nuclear programs which are a thousand times more sophisticated than the ones used in the patent office.

If you John Bolton, if you Jonah Goldberg as well as the countless other Jews who write about this subject want America to pull out of the UN, come right out and say so honestly. It is tiresome to see you try to cut the bond between them a thousand cuts like a toothless babe that is trying to chew on a piece of hard candy. In fact, what should happen now is for America to cut its ties with Israel, not cut it with the United Nations or anyone else in the world.

The time has come for all the relationships to mature and take on a normal allure. More importantly, it is time for Uncle Sam to end the habit of castrating himself by cutting his manhood into a thousand little pieces just to make Israel look more potent than it is.

It has not worked in the past and will never work in the future.

You Ain't Seen Nothin' Yet, Karl

It looks to me like Karl Rove's magic touch has been upstaged by the gamblers of Macao and the diehard crowd that believes God gave the “Holy Land” of Palestine to any kook who fantasizes he or she was chosen by Him to own that land because he or she chose to convert to a long defunct religion they still call Judaism. The reason why I see Karl's influence wane is that his original plan to have Mitt Romney only promise to make Israel his first foreign trip if and when elected President, has been pushed aside by the kooks who must be raising more money than him for the Romney campaign.

The way I see how the drama unfolded inside the Romney campaign is that the swarm of Jewish advisers who now surround Romney must have huddled together and decided to pull the foreign trick they pride themselves as being the only ones to possess. This way, they will score a spectacular coup; as spectacular as the Olympics, and thus sprint ahead of the Obama campaign. They said to themselves they can make their candidate look presidential by cooking up a foreign trip for him that will offset his apparent inexperience in foreign matters except for the fact he has shipped jobs overseas and has maintained secret bank accounts in foreign lands to evade American taxes.

I know from personal experience how much these people pride themselves on their ability to pull those foreign tricks because they tried on at least two big occasions to entice me to turn into a mouthpiece forever puking their filthy propaganda, by showing me how much they can control events not only in North America but around the world. They pulled it once when they told me to watch what will soon happen on the world stage. When I saw nothing happen that was out of the ordinary, they asked: Didn't you see that guy Cohen bump into Bill Clinton in Japan? I said what about it? They said, we fixed that; now Cohen who is a Republican will be Secretary of Defense in a Democratic government. Yawn.

And they pulled it a second time when they said they could fix it for me to win prizes all over the place from the Pulitzer to the Oscar to the Nobel. To show the extent of their prowess, they told me to watch what will happen in India. I was too busy at the time to watch the news and so, I was not aware of anything that happened in India. They had to tell me themselves what happened which is that they had a kid – apparently a Canadian – bump into then Prime Minister of Canada, Jean Chretien and yell at him that he is doing nothing to take up the cause of kids around the world who are forced into child labor. And my reaction was: Why was it necessary to have the encounter in India when it could have been organized here in Canada? They gave me no answer.

There were a few other minor occasions when they tried to pull similar filthy tricks on me. Apparently, however, Mitt Romney does not see them as filthy tricks having accepted to set aside the Rove plan for that of the Jewish cabal now advising him. You get this same feeling and you arrive at these same conclusions when you read Karl Rove's latest installment in the Wall Street Journal of July 19, 2012. It comes under the title: “Obama Gets Down and Dirty” and the subtitle: “The president's campaign puts out a steady stream of smears against Mitt Romney, including an insinuation that he committed a felony in an SEC filing.”

The thing is that matters have become so bad in the governance of business that even a minor director – perhaps one in twenty on the board of a company – can no longer say: I didn't know what was going on because I am a director on a dozen other boards, and I never had the time to ask the proper questions. And the reaction of the SEC and other policing authorities is that he or she should have found the time to know what they were getting into or make a clean break with that company and perhaps a few of the other companies as well.

Thus, for Mr. Romney to claim that he didn't know what was going on at Bain because it only took him two or three years to extricate himself from that company while claiming to the SEC that he remained its CEO, chairman, and president is to tax anyone's credulity. Hey Karl, I have a Brooklyn Bridge to sell you and a Santa Claus to bump into somewhere in Timbuktu who may arrange for you to meet Moses who has a couple of tablets containing the ten newest commandments on how to run a godly, clean political campaign. Interested?

And guess what – if it turns out that the tax returns Romney is hiding from the public show he was making tons of money during that period of time; yet he never bothered to ask a single question, the electorate will laugh him out of the country and send him to stay permanently in Israel or in Macao. There is no more a place in America for someone – felon or not – to sell his country short so as to implement the treasonous plan of World Jewry.

The Jewish Shrink And The American Psycho

Following the Joe McCarthy episode of the mid Twentieth Century in the United States of America, the Jewish leaders reckoned that they will be better off stabbing the other Joe in the back, and turning away from his Stalinist order of world domination by Communist ideology. Instead, they embraced the “democratic” order of things wondering what the agenda will turn out to be but not worrying too much for now. And they did all this even though they had no idea then anymore than they do now what the word democracy stood for.

To the casual observer, things looked quiet for twenty years after that but this was a deception -- a veritable optical illusion. In fact, while nothing extraordinary appeared to take place to the naked eye, the trained eyes that could see below the surface of things saw the preparations that were made by the Jewish leaders to first dominate America then go from there and seek to dominate the whole world as per the grand old design of their ancient mentors.

Thus, while America continued to march confidently and optimistically toward a future it believed was its own, the Jewish leaders were quietly plotting to make sure that the country's potential in all fields of endeavor will be put not in the service of the real people of America but the service of Israel -- their pet project then as it is today – and the service of Jews everywhere in the world. In fact, those leaders have managed to accomplish so much for their causes that America's apparent confidence and optimism gradually transformed from a state of certainty to that of a serious question mark.

The future was beginning to cloud for America as the Jewish leaders went on to do what they were doing between the mid-Sixties of the Twentieth Century and the early part of the Twenty-First Century. They did it relentlessly and without respite during the good times when America was soaring like an eagle, and they did it during the bad times when America was suffering like a wounded bird. It is that the ball they had their eyes on was not America but Israel and only Israel.

To appreciate what happened in that period, we need to visualize a quintessential Jew interacting on the same stage with a quintessential American. The Jew will have to be well versed in psychiatry given that much of the Jewish activities were based on the playing of psychological games. As to the American, he will have to be above average in intelligence and academic achievement, and he will have to be spoiled enough by the good life he has led so far as to be utterly naïve when it comes to the hard realities of everyday living, let alone the sort of games that the Jewish leaders were playing.

Lucky for us, it happened that on July 12, 2012 the magazine National Review Online published two articles that do the job for us. The first was written by the former Jewish psychiatrist, Charles Krauthammer under the title: “The Islamist Ascendency” and the subtitle: “We are in the third stage of modern Arab political history.” The second article was written by the American Victor Davis Hanson under the title: “The World Is Changing Minute by Minute” and the subtitle: “Technological breakthroughs and unforeseen political upheavals are upending the conventional wisdom.”

This last word “wisdom” is a key word in both articles because it tells something about the state of mind of the two authors. Hanson used it to mock the pessimistic predictions that were made in the past. Krauthammer used it to express a wish that the Arab world will be westernized – whatever that means. Unlike some of the authors we encounter in the popular press these days, our two authors are intelligent and talented on many levels. Still, even though we do not detect a contradiction in what they are saying about the future of America and the West in their respective articles, we detect something which indicates that each of them is coming from a point of view far removed from the other. And this says that they must have held contradictory views at some point; views they kept inside and may never have expressed openly in the past.

Having described himself as being to the right of Attila the Hun, and having advocated the indiscriminate sending to Guantanamo Bay of all the people he dislikes, Krauthammer has demonstrated by what ruthless spirit he was motivated. And he made it clear he felt comfortable with that, a situation that lasted till the moment that things began to change. This is when he realized that going after a bunch of unruly Arab kids who love to play hide and seek with the self-proclaimed policeman of the world was not going to save the Jews from whatever existential threat he believed was menacing them. And so he mellowed -- perhaps thinking to himself that he had finally acquired the wisdom that escaped him when he was younger.

But Krauthammer the Hun (German) -- who says he is from a French descent more than he is a Kraut (German) despite the sound of his name – had always been the apocalyptic horseman who personally led the charge against the Arabs, describing them (in different ways and different words) as being more vile than any monster you can imagine. And this was the steady diet on which Victor Hanson and those of his generation were feeding as they grew up. Thus, while the creator of the distorted image of the Arabs now seems to denounce his own creation – at least temporarily and for the occasion -- Victor Hanson the disciple is keeping alive the old image of the Arabs while mocking the people (like himself) who used to be terrified by it. Go figure.

And so – surprise, surprise -- not to fear the Arabs anymore is what the disciple is urging at this time. In this sense, he too has mellowed but for a reason that is diametrically opposed to that of Krauthammer. In fact, while the latter sees wisdom in trying to win the Arabs to the side of the Jews and of Israel rather than further antagonize them, Hanson believes that America's old glory is destined to come back to where it belongs despite the Arabs and all the others enemies. You cannot help but see here a difference in the way that each of them tackles the same subject while standing on the same stage. As you will see, Krauthammer who used to practice psychiatry is choosing to take up and navigate a realistic road while Hanson, his moral disciple is choosing to fantasize about the road ahead.

What Krauthammer does is use recent events to argue: “That the Arab Spring is a misnomer. This is an Islamist ascendancy, likely to dominate Arab politics for a generation.” But while going from the introduction he started with earlier to come to this conclusion, he passes by a point in the middle where he equates moderation with being westernized. Even though this is not a very clear concept, it is a misstep that demolishes his argument and voids his presentation because no one has been more immoderate than the Westerners. To wit, he and countless other people like himself have long argued that the problem with the most violent and most despotic of the Arab rulers such as the Baathists of Iraq and of Syria, is that they learned the Western ways too well and have applied them faithfully. And this guy wants all the Arabs to be westernized? Go figure.

The old argument went on to say that those Arab leaders learned all there was to learn about the full spectrum of Western despotism -- ranging from Communism on the far Left to Fascism on the far Right -- and they behaved as badly as the characters they imitated. But Krauthammer now seems to repudiate this theory. Why so? Because it suits his new argument -- nothing more profound than this. It is an approach that is so predictable; you should expect him to change his mind again when the new stance will have become stale and no longer serving the purpose for which it was imagined.

Anyway, Krauthammer concludes that Islam – which has been touted as the answer to the Arabs' lack of progress – is no answer at all, and he predicts that if moderate Islam radicalizes “it too will fail and bring on yet another future Arab Spring where democracy might actually be the answer … and thus achieve by evolution an authentic Arab-Islamic democratic norm.” A very hopeful note on which to end a column for an Attila of the French Kraut variety. Who would have thought that Chuck will one day be so nice as to write such kind words about the Arabs?

We now look at the work of the disciple, Victor Hanson. He begins with this introductory sentence: “We are witnessing a seismic shift in global affairs.” He then goes on to list the pessimistic views – fed, as he says, by the old conventional wisdom -- which used to make America and Israel look weak and getting weaker, while making their enemies look strong and getting stronger. But he gleefully dismisses all of that with the following: “But none of that conventional wisdom now seems very wise – largely because of a number of technological breakthroughs and equally unforeseen political upheavals.”

This said, he explains the last part of his statement. He tells that “the euro zone is unraveling” while “the Arab Middle East is now in a free fall.” How sweet those unforeseen political upheavals! But there is more. There are the technological breakthroughs: “Horizontal drilling and fracking have made oil shale and tar sands rich sources of oil and natural gas, so much so that the United States may prove to posses the largest store of fossil-fuel reserves in the world.” And lest we forget Israel, he reminds us of this: “Even more surreal, tiny oil-poor Israel, thanks to vast new offshore finds, has been reinvented as a potential energy giant in the Middle East.”

Well, the one thing I am not going to do is debate a speculative fantasy with the speculator that created it. I know from experience this would be a thankless task. Rather, I have my own point of view concerning the three subjects he mentions, and they are as follows: First, the euro zone may unravel in the sense that some of the countries will get out of the arrangement but this will not be the end of Europe. In any case, even if this were to happen, how will that serve America's purpose? Please explain.

Second, globalization did not start with the high-tech boom; it started six or seven decades before that with the energy boom. And ever since that time, energy has been a global phenomenon and will remain so regardless as to where it will be dug out and where it will be used. This will be everywhere, in fact, because the whole world will eventually become industrialized. And the result is that no one nation will have such a clear advantage over everyone else, it could impose its will on the whole world. Not even the America in Hanson's fantasy world.

Third, many of the wars and skirmishes that happened in the Middle East came about because Israel tried to steal Arab water. When technological breakthroughs made it possible to desalinate sea water at a reasonable price, the Israelis found it cheaper to get water by this method than get it through wars. Likewise, an energy self-sufficient Israel will minimize the need for America to pimp for it or threaten the neighbors who refuse to conjugate with it economically, politically or otherwise.

The trouble, however, has always been that every time Israel tried to invite the big companies to come and drill in Israel, the Israelis did what they do best which is to tell an ounce of truth and back it with a ton of verbal manure. This always had the corrosive effect of jinxing the effort. Thus, if not for the sake of those of us who had it up to here with Israeli manure, I implore Hanson for the sake of the Israelis to keep quiet and not jinx the project yet again. Hold back on your dancing in the street till they get the gas out, Vic. In the meantime, keep your fingers crossed, your mouth shut and just watch.

To those of us, old timers, who saw the growth of the Jewish influence in America and are aware of the devastating effect it has had on what used to be a superpower now reduced in the words of Victor Hanson to a pile of “pathologies – massive budget and trade deficits, mounting debt, strategic vulnerability … a litigious and indulgent America settled for a run-down LAX and creaking Amtrak relics,” it looks like history is trying to repeat itself. But the silver lining is that history may not succeed this time.

It is that like the old days, a number of Jewish leaders are still trying to suck the goodness out of America and still trying to divert it to Israel and to every group of Jews wherever they may be. Like the old days, the leaders do what they do relentlessly, and they do it without respite in good times and in bad times except that the times are so bad now, the American people will not be lulled into complacency anymore. It will be impossible to repeat history under the current conditions.

Sooner or later, the result of the Jewish activities will be that the leaders will have learned to mellow as did Krauthammer; but more than that, they will know they have to stay mellowed. Those who do not will be hammered by a population that is increasingly turning weary of the Jewish antics. What will make this happen is the fact that the American people are now able to decipher those antics more easily than ever before, and they do not like what they uncover.

As to the disciples who are so imbued with the Zionist philosophical manure they cannot shake it off, they will no longer represent the quintessential American and will wither away because America will have moved away from them.

If lucky, these people will quietly be retired to the pasture for the psychologically irretrievable where they will live a comfortable life surrounded by fantasies of their creation to entertain themselves.