On February 12, 2013 the editors of the Wall Street Journal
(WSJ) did something, the range of which they could not have foreseen at the
time they did it. What they did was publish an article that was written by
Michael Oren, Israel's ambassador to the United States; and they published a
column by their own Bret Stephens.
The Oren article has the title: “Iran's Global Business Is
Murder Inc.” and the subtitle: “Bombings in capital cities, kidnappings, trade
in drugs and guns – Iranian exports, all. Now Tehran wants nukes.” As to the
Stephens column, it has the title: “Obama's Nuclear Fantasy” and the subtitle:
“The president is setting the stage for a world with more nukes in the wrong
hands.” As can be seen from the subtitles, the combined message is clear:
Tehran wants nukes … and [Obama] is setting the stage for nukes to fall in the
wrong hands.
Well, this is the message of the WSJ which is also the
message of Israel, of the Jewish leaders in America, and of World Jewry. Upon
realizing what the message says, the question that comes mind is this: What do
these people want? As soon as you start reading the Oren article, you realize
that Israel considers itself to be at war with Iran; and what these people want
is that America gets on the side of Israel to do to Iran what it did to Iraq.
Seen from their point of view, it all makes sense because
the Iranians are evil people while the Jews are saints. What the Iranians do is
objectionable; what the Jews do – even if they are of Iranian origin – is good.
Thus, if Israel does something that is surreptitious or spectacular, it is
proof of Jewish ingenuity. If Iran responds in a similar fashion, it is state
terrorism. Simply put, Israel is engaged in a legitimate war against Iran, but
Iran is engaged in acts of terrorism against Israel.
This is not the first time that a warring nation has
demonized the other side. A war of words running parallel to the hot war has
been the norm in every case. It has also been the norm that a nation at war has
tried to secure the help of other nations, inviting them to join in the effort
to vanquish the evil opponent for the good of all.
Perhaps the most notable of these moments came when Winston
Churchill called on the Americans not to let their guards down following the
victories of the Second World War because the Soviet Union – an ally up to now
– was going to pose the next big threat. He urged the Americans to keep their
powder dry, they did, and the consequences have been enormous.
The group formed by Israel, the American Jewish leaders and
World Jewry are duplicating this approach but with a difference. It is that
they play the game while maintaining three variations. The first is that the
world circumstances have changed but the Jewish group is refusing to take that
into consideration. The second variation is that the group is playing the game
in a way that is making Churchill turn in his grave. It is that you can
demonize the opponent all you want but when you lament that your soldiers and
those of your allies are being terrorized by the enemy in a war theater; you
insult your soldiers and those of your allies.
The third variation is that unlike Britain, Israel is not
now and has never been the empire upon which the sun never set. It is not now
and has never been the industrial power that invented, built or equipped its
military with the weapons that would sustain it in a war for some time without
the need to be resupplied by the ally it has enlisted on its side. Thus, Israel
could start a war and drag America into it within days, or see its people
perish in what will be called the holocaust that America let happen. The image
that emerges, therefore, is that of an Israel which is holding its own Jewish
population hostage, and forcing America into a horrendously demonic situation.
Come to think of it, Churchill is not only turning in his grave; he is also
throwing up.
So you ask: How did it happen that America got tangled up in
a situation like this in the first place? And you get the answer by reading the
Michael Oren article while subjecting it to a simple mathematical trick called
function. It is the power of inversion. That is, where you see the author
mention that Iran has done something bad, you think of it as Israel doing it.
For example, he begins the article like this: “A bomb explodes in Burgas … it
is Iran.” Right away, you think of it as: A bomb explodes in the King David
Hotel, and another bomb explodes inside the American embassy in Cairo … it is
the work of Jewish agents.
You keep going and get to read this: “...ammunition kills
countless Africans in civil wars … it is Iran.” And you think of it as:
ammunition kills countless Africans, South Americans and Sri Lankans in civil
wars … it is the work of Israeli and Jewish agents who sell weapons to both
sides in the conflicts they start themselves, and whose flames they fan in
conjunction with shadowy figures they recruit all over the world.
Then you encounter this passage: “Hezbollah chief says his
organization was founded to forge 'a greater Islamic republic governed by the
Master of Time [the Mahdi] and his rightful deputy, the Imam of Iran.'” And you
think of it as: The Zionist dream is to provoke the Armageddon that will bring
about the Rapture that will summon the Messiah who will make the Jews the
owners and masters of all creation. But for this to work, it will have to be a
one sided Armageddon where Israel will have all the weapons it needs, and
everyone else will be unarmed like the Palestinians are now.
As to the traffic in “drugs, ammunition and even
cigarettes,” nobody does that more often and more professionally than the Jews
who used to work for the Mossad or the Israel military, and have forged
connections in many places around the world. Not only do these people smuggle
drugs, ammunition and cigarettes; they also traffic in human organs, human
beings and child prostitutes.
Having completed the laundry list of Iranian mischief,
Michael Oren puts his conclusion on the table: “Tehran is enriching uranium and
rushing to achieve military nuclear capabilities … [it] needs only nuclear
weapons to complete the horrific picture.” And you think of it as: Israel wants
the world to believe it has military nuclear capabilities. True or false,
nobody cares but the Americans who are constantly threatened with the use of
these weapons if Israel does not get what it wants from America.
This is the horrific picture that Oren ought to be talking
about, not what the Jews say Tehran is doing – having said the same thing about
Iraq, an act that cost America thousands of dead soldiers, tens of thousands of
injured soldiers and trillions of dollars in direct and indirect cost.
And this, my friend, is how America got tangled up in this
demonic scheme.
Now you read the Bret Stephens column in which he says what
he says in a way that is less subtle and more honest than Michael Oren. Instead
of beating around the bush to say things in reverse, Stephens comes right out
and puts the argument honestly upside down. He basically says that by working to
have less nuclear weapons in the world as did the many presidents from Reagan
on to this day, Obama will end up having a world that contains more nuclear
weapons.
His conclusion is that America should build more nuclear
weapons to end up with a world that has less nuclear weapons. It is the Jewish
version of rape in the name of virginity.