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.