Tuesday, December 18, 2012

They Are At It Yet Again


December 18, 2012 has been a bad day for common sense because it is the day that the Wall Street Journal chose to inflict its brand of logic on the world yet again. On that day, the journal published two pieces, one by its columnist and editorial writer Bret Stephens who wrote under the title: “Chuck Hagels' Jewish Problem” and the subtitle: “The would-be secretary of defense has some curious views.” The other is an op-ed piece by the trio Charles Robb, Dennis Ross and Michael Makovsky, that came under the title: “The Economic Cost of a Nuclear Iran” and the subtitle: “Sanctions and U.S. military force carry risks, but Teheran with a bomb would wreak havoc on global markets.”

Bret Stephens says that Chuck Hagel has a chance of being appointed secretary of defense, and opines that it would be a bad idea. Why is that? you ask, and he responds: “because a 'Jewish lobby,' as far as I'm aware, doesn't exist.” But what does that do? you ask. And he responds with this: It proves prejudice on the part of Hagel, something that has an odor that is especially ripe now because the Jewish lobby does not exist. See the logic? Therefore, Hagels' pronouncement to the effect that “the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here” has by the Stephens logic a bothersome olfactory element to it. Get it now?

He then uses a great deal of publishing space to try and differentiate between the “Jewish lobby” and the “Israel lobby” as if this were relevant to the current discussion especially when you consider the fact that “creative ambiguity” is an invention that was used as a weapon over the decades, one that is in use even today to muddy all discussions about “them” whomever they are, and wherever they hide.

The fact is that the rabbis, the members of the Jewish propaganda machine and their cohorts have worked hard to blur the lines between Semitic, Yiddish, Jewish, Israeli, Zionist and every possible combination thereof to make the point that if and when non-Jews decide to take up a related subject, they better be prepared to say good things and only good things because if they don't, they will be denounced as anti-Semites, put on a watch list and attacked relentlessly.

Stephens also minimizes the purported effectiveness of the Jewish vote by citing the fact that in Hagel's State of Nebraska, there are only 6,100 Jews in a population of 1.8 million people. And he quarrels with his use of the word “intimidates … because it suggests that legislators ... adopt positions … out of personal fear. Just what does that Jewish Lobby have on them?”

Good Question, Bret! But guess what, my dear reader. He answers his own question at the end of the piece. Speaking of the 63% of Jewish Americans who voted for Mr. Obama last month, he says this: “...maybe some of these voters could speak up now … [they] like to fancy their voice carries weight in their party … prove it.”

And the author is seconded in his effort by the Wall Street Journal that chose to publish on the same page the Robb, Ross and Makovsky piece. These are members of the notorious Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a septic tanks that pretends to be a think tank. And if Stephens is still asking the question: “Just what does that Jewish Lobby have on them?” he better have a talk with Charles Robb whose long list of scandals involves such things as adultery he lied about, allegations of drug use and breach of fiduciary trust. They blackmailed him, Bret, and they got him to bark the nonsense on their behalf.

So then, what are these three clowns saying now? They already suggested on previous occasions that Uncle Sam should get into the business of raping Iran while making things look like the Israeli eunuch is doing the screwing. This way, they said, the world will come to believe that Israel is a stud and not the eunuch that it is. And the clowns went on to say that Israel needs to cultivate the image of stud because it needs a deterrent that will make everybody fear it, and thus remain peaceful.

You see, my friend, these sort of ideas don't come out of nowhere. They begin as horrible things and mutate to become other horrible things. For example, rapists justify what they do by saying that rape is the ultimate act of love. Out of this group comes another group that says its members rape only to safeguard virginity. This is like Hitler saying war is the ultimate act of civilization. And now we have a Semitic, Yiddish, Jewish, Israeli, Zionist group that says when America maintains Israel as an ongoing crime against humanity, it does humanity good because it saves it from itself. It's all made of the same screwed up material that takes on different shapes, forms and colors.

And what else does the trio of clowns want to do? It wants to do a group masturbation of the intellect, and do it in public. Look what they do to ejaculate their moral syphilis into the heads, hearts and souls of America's legislators: “Living with a nuclear Iran is … like the fiscal cliff, this is a matter of … economic … security.” As you can see, the first thing they do is connect the fiscal cliff with the question of Iran.

Then to make themselves believable, they assure us that: “We led a … task force … that examined the energy-related costs of inaction.” Inaction here means America refraining from bombing Iran. But see how the masturbation goes? People are worked up about the fiscal cliff, and while the energy is still floating in the air, they tap into the subject to suck some of its excitement. This way, they hope to render their readers excited enough to attain orgasm about what they will say next.

And what they found, they say, is the unfolding of five possible scenarios, the worst case being “a Saudi-Iran nuclear exchange.” The first thing that comes to mind is that Iran – which is well ahead of Saudi Arabia in this field – has taken more than 20 years to get to where it is today, and still has no bomb, let alone an arsenal to risk a nuclear exchange with a neighbor.

What that means is that Saudi Arabia will not have a bomb, let alone an arsenal for a generation or two should the government there decide to embark on such a program which it has not done. But if it does, the energy situation in the world will be so different by then, any assumption we make today will be like predicting the weather forty years into the future. Only Jewish masturbators of the Intellect would attempt to make such a prediction.

Go play with yourselves somewhere else, kids; your pornography is disgusting the rest of us.