Schoolyard Antics at the Pinnacle of US Power

The pattern by which world Jews have managed to take over America and run it like their plantation has been clarified, and it is here for all to see. At the first sign that the American Secretary of State was taking steps to do what was good for America and the world … which would be to move away from the Jewish value system of war, death and destruction, he was savagely attacked by the Israeli newspapers.

And this was the signal that the Jewish propaganda machine in America – owned and operated by the Jews, their gentile mouthpieces and their running dogs – to start barking at the Secretary of State, and hound him till he felt compelled to commit the most pathetic, most sickening and most disgusting act you can imagine. He stood up and did what amounts to pledging allegiance to Israel by reminding his masters that no one has had a more pro-Israel voting record in the American Congress than he had when he was Senator.

And this opened the floodgate for the rats, skunks, and barking dogs in the American media, the political circles, the pundits of La La Land and the blabber-mouths of so-called think tanks, to come out and echo-repeat the refrain which expresses how wonderful it was to see the Palestinian people being butchered in Gaza by the American weapons supplied to Israel on demand. And so, Israel demanded to be replenished with more weapons, and America said: Yes, master, your wish is my command; you'll have the weapons on the double.

And you can get a sense as to the monumental role that the Jewish owned media are playing in America when you study the piece that was published in the New York Times on July 31, 2014. It was (supposedly) written by David Kirkpatrick who has lived in Egypt for some time now. It came under the title: “Arab Leaders, Viewing Hamas as Worse Than Israel, Stay Silent,” a title that was most certainly cooked up in New York for the purpose of distorting reality and misleading the readers.

The overall sense you get when you read this article is that the mentality behind it is the one to which America has descended since the Jews took over that country. It is the mentality of the schoolyard playing itself out at the pinnacle of American power, where everything is reduced to who loves whom, and who hates whom … coupled with the child-like notion of my friend's friend is my friend, and whatever else flows from there.

So now the question: How did this report get to be written in this form? Well, the first “sage” that Kirkpatrick quotes is none other than the smooth talking master distorter of the truth, Aaron David Miller who resides not in Cairo or another Arab city but is “a scholar at the Wilson Center in Washington.” In giving his opinion, he did his regular routine of starting with the description of his personal impression: (I have never seen a situation like this,) and building on it to project a monstrosity: (Arab states acquiescing in the death and destruction in Gaza.) This guy is a mental case that should be doing something else to earn his living.

The next “sage” that Kirkpatrick quotes is Khaled Elgindy who had a former life, but is now employed as “a fellow at the Brookings Institution [also] in Washington.” He does not seem to have said something that betrayed his Arab roots, but must have given a complex response explaining the multi-layered relationships that 300 million Arabs have with each other, and that the editors of the New York Times boiled down to the comment he made: “'Whose proxy war is it?' he asked.”

Another incident that Kirkpatrick has supposedly relied on to write the article is a diatribe against Hamas that was leveled by an Egyptian commentator on a talk show, picked up and rebroadcast by Israel's media into Gaza. He also quotes a disappointed storekeeper in Gaza where Kirkpatrick himself did not go. And finally, he quotes Martin Kramer, president of Shalem College in Jerusalem who supposedly said “No one in the Arab world is going to the Americans and telling them, stop it now,” whatever significance is supposed to reside in this. And all this, assuming that Kramer can prove none of the 300 million Arabs alive today ever contacted an American and voiced such opinion. It is all poppycock that is common currency in a schoolyard, and yet this is how superpower America is governed these days under Jewish management.

Of all the failed states in the world that America wants to fix, the most dangerous to humanity is America itself. It is the one it must fix before trying to fix others.

The Lie Machine cracks under its Weight

Suppose someone new moves into the neighborhood and you want to be nice to him, so you go knock at his door, and tell him you want to organize a house warming party to welcome him into the neighborhood. You say you'll do it for him if he'll tell you when it will be convenient to have it.

He says he appreciates the gesture, and invites you into the house to talk about it while sipping on a drink. You go into the living room where you pour yourselves a drink each, and start talking. It does not take him long before he starts telling you about the difficult moments he has gone through in life. There were many, he says, but the three biggest ones were the following:

First, it was the superintendent who kicked him out of the building because the other tenants could not stand him for one reason or another – each tenant having a reason of his own. Second, it was the manager who kicked him out of the company because his colleagues could not stand him for one reason or another – each colleague having a reason of his own. Third, it was the nightclub bouncer who threw him out of the joint because the other patrons could not stand him for one reason or another – each patron having a reason of his own.

Having decided on a date for the house warming party, you quickly finish your drink and get up to go home. On your way there, you think about what has just transpired, and wonder if you should go head with the party. If the man is a pain in the ass the way that he described himself, you do not like the idea of having someone like him in the neighborhood. And you can tell that when the other neighbors will find out what he is like, they'll let you know how they feel about what you have done.

Well, that was a metaphor which can be used to explain what comes in Dennis Prager's article: “The Genocide Libel” which also came under the subtitle: “In Europe and Latin America, Israel is now accused of genocide.” It was published in National Review Online on July 29, 2014. And then, it happened that in the early hours of the next day, a series of events began to unfold … demonstrating how close to reality that metaphor has been, and how badly out of touch with reality Dennis Prager is.

Here is that story. Dawn was breaking on what had been a quiet night where stood a school used by the United Nations to house 3,300 internally displaced refugees in Gaza. People began to wake up, and while preparing for the morning prayer, the quiet of the night was shattered by three shells fired on the school by the Israeli army in a deliberate genocidal act to kill as many innocent Palestinians as possible. Something similar happened several times before, and the Jewish machine of lies and distortion got away with murder by producing tons of lies, and getting its echo repeaters to repeat them.

Encouraged by the success of that machine to win the backing of the depraved American politicians who welcome the extermination of the Palestinians under the guise of fighting terrorism, the commanders of the Israeli army initiated a policy of murdering Palestinians anywhere they found them, whether or not the Israelis had an alibi behind which to hide and deny responsibility for what happened. And the shelling of that school was their first foray on the path to committing wholesale war crimes, and crimes against humanity under the policy they just formulated.

And so, when you go over the article, you see that Prager begins it by lamenting: “In order to justify killing Jews, Jew-haters throughout history made up libels about the Jews that were so awful that they justified the mass murder of Jews.” Well, this sounds like the neighbor that moved in, and brought with him a history which is not all that savory. It makes you wander if the author of the article is trying to solicit your pity, or trying to warn you that he, as a Jew, is a very unsavory character.

In any case, true or false, what is happening now is nothing like the history he is telling. On the contrary, it is the Jews who are in control of the megaphones, and they have been libeling everyone, especially the Palestinians whom they slaughter whenever they can. But that's not all because the Jews also attack and crucify every American peacemaker who tries to bring peace to them – from Jimmy Carter to John Kerry and everyone in-between.

In fact, they are so confident that they can now get away with anything, they do not try to explain why it is that they claim there was shooting around the school at the time they fired the murderous shells, when the truth is that the people in the school woke up to the sounds of the shells exploding around them. The Israelis as well as the Jews and gentiles who lie and distort reality for them, thumb their noses at the world while the Jewish murder machine goes on with the business of murdering innocent people.

Thus, no one should be surprised to see Dennis Prager write: “we are living through as enormous a libel – directed against the Jewish state: Israel is committing genocide of Palestinians and is morally identical to the Nazi regime.”

It is simply that he does not realize how false that statement is because he is an integral part of the machine that lies and distorts.

Of moral Equivalence and double Standard

Apparently there are people in France who believe that Bernard-Henry Levy is a bona fide philosopher. So be it if that is what turns them on; who am I to object? But what I can do is go over his latest article, and say a few words about its content – what passes for philosophy, or at least pretends to be.

The way I ordinarily read a text is to quick read it once to get a sense of what it contains. I then read it again but at a lower speed this time, and pause where I meet dense passages over which I mull, and begin the process of formulating an opinion. But something happened with the Levy article that was a little out of the ordinary. It is that from the beginning to the end – at whatever speed I read the thing – it struck me as being nothing less than an orgy of Dershowism.

Let me explain. Alan Dershowitz is a lawyer that used to speak for Israel. The most infamous idea he ever came up with, was that Israel had the right to do to the Palestinians anything that anyone had ever done to someone. I have never before stuck the suffix “ism” at the end of someone's name, and I used to scoff at Tom Friedman of the New York Times whom, I believe, invented this trick. But I did not know what else to do in the face of an article that drips with the Dershowitz non-philosophy.

Part of Levy's beef is that the crowds that demonstrated in Paris not long ago chanting “Palestine will overcome” and “Israel, assassin” were nowhere to be seen when other incidences (as bloody as in Palestine if not more, according to Levy) took place elsewhere in the world at other times. He mentions Syria, Iraq, Sudan, Chechnya and Bosnia, but glaringly and surprisingly omits Libya where the horror in there is in the process of metastasizing while promising to do more damage to world peace than any of the incidences he mentions. And his point is that Israel has the right to do to the Palestinians what the respective governments in those places did to their people or to their neighbors. Sheer Dershowism.

That was one part of Levy's beef. The other part is his complaint that the only reason the demonstrators came out and marched in the streets of Paris, of the other cities in Europe and elsewhere, is that there is what he calls an odious double standard. He points out that “anti-Semitic slogans have marred most European demonstrations 'in support of the people of Gaza.'” And here too, another glaring omission hits the eye. It is South Africa at the time when apartheid was the governing regime in that country, and demonstrators everywhere in the world came out and protested vehemently.

The indigenous Blacks in South Africa were treated badly by the White minority that was not indigenous to the land, and the world convulsed. Imagine what the world would have done if every 2 or 3 years the White government had sent the air force to bomb say, Soweto … killing one Black for every 1,000 of them in the country. That is, if the government had periodically killed 40,000 Blacks in 3 weeks. Can you imagine this? It would have been the equivalent to what is happening in Palestine today. But why did this escape Bernard-Henry Levy's imagination – not to say his query?

Well, it escaped levy for the same reason that he did not mention Libya. You know why? It was a necessity for him more than it was a convenience. He omitted Libya for a personal reason. It is that he was one of the architects who planned the Libyan horror. He incited the French government to get involved in the scheme, a move that dragged America into it as well … and the rest is history. A sordid history.

As to South Africa, the argument is a little more complex. To bring South Africa into a debate about Israel is to establish a kind of equivalence between Israel and South Africa. But to equate Israel, or any of the Jewish causes with those of mortals, is to bring the Jews down to the level of mortals. This is what the Jews reject by religious dogma because if they do not, they cease to be Jews.

To them, the Jew has the right to everything that everyone else has – otherwise it would be a double standard – but when it comes to obligation, he cannot be compared to someone else because this would establish a kind of equivalence between him and the other; something that can never be.

This is why a Jew like Bernard-Henry Levy can never come up with a philosophical argument that makes sense. These people are handicapped by their system of values, a reality that compels them to always imitate others and never do something original.

The New-York Tel-Aviv Axis of Genocide

On July 29, 2014, Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal came up with a column under the title: “Palestine Makes You Dumb” and the subtitle: “To argue the Palestinian side, in the Gaza war, is to make the case for barbarism.” On the same day, the rest of the Journal's editorial board came up with a piece under the title: “The Gaza Cease-fire Fiasco” and the subtitle: “Kerry and Obama give both sides reason to keep fighting.”

Stephens begins his column by protesting that when it comes to avoiding casualties, you cannot compare what Israel is doing in Gaza with what America is doing in Afghanistan because Israel's work is superior in this realm. He then declares suspect the number of Palestinians who were killed.

As to the editors of the Journal, they make the point that Israel wants to degrade the military capabilities of Hamas but that John Kerry messed up the situation by agreeing to a plan that would give Hamas all that it wanted. Because of this, Hamas will now count on America pressuring Israel to stop before achieving its goal. The result will be that both sides will want to continue fighting longer than would have been the case.

Well, there is enough in these two essays to show the people of the world how it is that a handful of Jews were able to control America to the extent that they did, bringing the planet close to the edge of the precipice several times since the end of WW II. What Israel is doing in Gaza today is use America's power and prestige to commit genocide and get away with it.

And the Jews have been able to accomplish all of this because they managed to paralyze the nation as far as the business of the nation is concerned. They then mobilized all of its potential to serve the interests of Israel which have always been war, war, war. What follows is an attempt to explain the events in Gaza in a manner that sheds light on the claims made by Stephens and the rest of the Journal's editors, and refutes them.

There is no doubt about it, Israel has embarked on a campaign to kill as many Palestinians as it can, and it is doing it in a way that is studded with Jewish ambiguities. This is to say, Israel is committing genocidal acts in the open, but then sort of denies that it is responsible for them. And while doing this, its propaganda machine gets into full gear to spread patently absurd lies about the events that clearly constitute war crimes.

The Israelis and their Jewish and non-Jewish supporters use a couple of in-your-face approaches to tell the world they have nothing but contempt for anyone who dares to question their right to murder Palestinians. First, when something happens and civilians die as a result, they seem to know instantly that Hamas was responsible for what happened. Second, if the evidence is to the effect that only Israel could have been responsible, they say they cannot be sure, which is why they need time to investigate … and this usually takes days if not weeks.

It happened not long ago that some weapons were discovered by employees of the United Nations in a building that was abandoned at the time, but had served as a school once before. And this was enough for the Israelis to use as excuse, and plan a most diabolic scheme to kill Palestinians. What they did was eye the most densely populated school in Gaza – one that was used as a shelter by the UN – and told the world body to evacuate the building because they were going to conduct an operation there.

At the moment that the UN started the process of evacuating the children who were by now in the open courtyard and without anything to shield them, the Israelis sent an anti-personnel bomb called airburst that killed scores of the children and injured many more. These bombs are designed to explode in the air before they reach the ground, and their purpose is to kill as many people as possible. Their shrapnel leave an unmistakable pattern, called signature, on the ground and the surrounding structures such that their use cannot be denied.

When confronted with this evidence by a reporter, a high ranking member of the Israeli military said something to the effect that: yes, we did it. We knew all along it was us, and we had the proof during all that time. Following that interview, a flood of explanations from Israeli political characters followed over several days, all of them attempting to set the record straight. But what they did, in effect, is give a glimpse as to the state of Jewish logic. When you piece together what they said, you come up with the following:

“Guess what. The courtyard and the building of the school were empty when we bombed. Why else would we use an anti-personnel airburst bomb if we did not know there were no personnel in that place? You, gentiles have a logic that is screwed up. You think that anti-personnel bombs are used to kill personnel, which means kill people. We, Jews have a superior logic. We know that anti-personnel bombs are used when there are no people around. And this is what we did in that school. We used the airburst bomb when there were no children in that courtyard. Now, if some children died, it means that Hamas killed them. Get It? If you don't, which part do you fail to understand?”

And you would think they will stop here and not try to milk the situation further. But you would be wrong because this is not the Jewish way of doing things. These people have been pogrommed and holocausted since the beginning of time by every race everywhere on the planet precisely because they are incapable of knowing where to stop. Thus, when they gave their cockamamie explanations and nothing happened to them, they considered planning new diabolic schemes.

To this end, they eyed the most densely populated hospital in Gaza where people seek shelter when they are told to evacuate other places. The Israelis bombed the hospital killing more people, and the first thing they said was that they were absolutely certain Hamas did it. But when shown the evidence that only they could have done it, they said they cannot be sure, but that they will need time to investigate. The same worn out old song,

Shortly after that, they told people to leave a district near the border and go to the center of Gaza where they will be safe. When the people got to the destination, the Israelis bombed them right there. Then, when the night fell, the military started sending flares over an area of the city. Because these flares come in canisters that fall to the ground and cause considerable damage, someone with a megaphone went around telling people to stay home to be safe. Right away, the Jewish propaganda machine pointed to this incident, and told the American media that Hamas is urging the people to go home and stay where they will be bombed. And the media relayed the lie to their audiences.

The Jews do all of that to argue that the civilians who get killed die not because the Israeli military is doing the killing but because the Hamas people plan it this way. But the fact remains that Hamas does not go around doing what the Jews have been doing for decades which is to cry out: gimme compensation, gimme compensation because my folks were killed by someone I hate. Palestinians do not profit from their people getting killed; the Jews do. And because it is a Jewish dogma that they must accuse others of what they are, this is what we see them do.

Thus, what is happening in Gaza is Jewish genocide of the Palestinian people; a genocide that is enabled by America, the one hundred percent accomplice in this bizarre situation.

Of Hamas's Idiots, a useful one is Rich

The Rich you see in the title is Rich Lowry, the editor of National Review; presumably also National Review Online (NRO). He assembled a number of articles, including his own – all written on the subject of the ongoing war in Gaza, and had them published on July 25, 2014 in NRO. The title of his own article is: “Hamas's Useful Idiots.” And this discussion of mine aims to show that if Hamas has useful idiots, the most useful one will have to be Rich Lowry himself.

This observation is given legs when you look at the subtitle of his article. It says this: “In its propaganda war against Israel, Hamas will do whatever it takes.” Thus, he makes the point that Hamas has a strategy which is to pit Israel's military potential against humanity's suspicion – heretofore kept under wraps – that it is the Jews who will do whatever it takes to achieve – not something noble – but their illegitimate goals.

If that point can be proven, it will be possible to argue that Hamas, and the people of Gaza who went along with them, are justified in making the “ultimate” sacrifice they are now making. Look at it this way, an American soldier who throws himself on a hand grenade and dies protecting his comrades is called a hero; and he is decorated posthumously for his courage. Likewise, a society that takes the savage beating of a satanic culture to save the world from its evil is a society that will be revered for eternity.

And Rich Lowry confirms all of this while believing that he is saying something else. Look how he ends his piece after dishing out a pile of hooey, made of the yawn-provoking Jewish talking points: “Hamas's objective is, with support from fellow travelers and useful idiots the world over, to make Israel the new South Africa, toward the goal of its ultimate destruction. If it takes countless dead Palestinians to do it, so be it.” Well, let's give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he properly read the mind of the Hamas people.

In this case, look how much better off the world is now after the destruction of the old apartheid regime in South Africa, and the installation of the new multi-racial regime in that country. Likewise, imagine how much better off Palestine will be after the destruction of the existing Jewish-Satanic regime in what is referred to as Israel, and the installation of a new Muslim-Christian regime in the restored Land of Palestine.

As to how much humanity is benefiting from the sacrifices made by the Palestinian people, the equation boils down to one of its sides having the number of dead Palestinians, and the other side having the end of the Zionist paradigm. Just think about it; how many dead humans did it take to end the Nazi regime? If it was worth it then, it is even more so now.

We can only say in the name of all human beings – those living today and those who will come after us: Thank you, people of Palestine from the bottom of our hearts for what you are doing to save us from the plague that has stalked our species since almost the beginning of time.

Another article worth going over in the Rich Lowry infamous collection of July 25, 2014 came under the title: “Progressive Jews, Wake up” and the subtitle: “At pro-Hamas demonstrations in U.S. cities in recent weeks, anti-Semitism rises up and is heard.” It was written by Abraham H. Miller, a retired professor.

Just from the title of his article, and more so from reading the text itself, you are inclined to thank the heavens for the fact that this professor is now retired and no longer messing up the minds of students. For him to look at the rough relationship that the Jews have had with humanity for centuries, and speak of it in terms of “Progressive” versus whatever else, says that he should never have been allowed to teach.

Spend some time to analyze what he says. Of the 900 words or so he wrote, the last 400 begin like this: “Forgive me if I am not awed by progressive credentials, especially knowing that these are the people who helped put this administration in office.”

Already you can imagine how the rest of his argument sounds like. And when you actually read the words, you'll wonder what it is that made this man go off the edge, and how a repeat performance can be avoided.

Here is why the Pogroms and the Holocaust

The question has lingered for a long time as to why there has been pogroms of the Jews throughout history, and why there has been an attempted Final Solution in the form of a Holocaust that came close to being final but did not make it to the finish line. Well, the question is now being answered little by little, day after day by the Jews themselves whose actions give the clearest explanation that any historian could hope for.

The war on Gaza has been going on for nearly three weeks now, and the full extent of the Jewish capacity to commit horror has been shown to a world that used to refuse separating what it sees from what is so obvious, mainly that Israel would not be doing what it is doing were it not Jewish. Thousands upon thousands of pieces of writing in print publications, and as many appearances in the audio-visual media by Jews and their lackeys have painted a full canvas of the Jewish character, as the hoards of pundits spun the Jewish side of the story in a way that unmasked them without them realizing they were stripping themselves naked.

Some of what they wrote and said has been discussed on this website, and there is now an article that was written by Amos Yaldin who was for a time the chief of Israeli military intelligence. Written under the title: “To Save Gaza, Destroy Hamas,” the article was published on July 26, 2014 in the New York Times. The difference between this piece and all the other publications is that the man who headed Israel's intelligence is displaying the philosophy that has been motivating the Jews. Thus, while others – especially those that appear on the Fox News Channel – look not like human mouths uttering words but pipes discharging raw sewage laced with toxic radio active material, this article has a content that can be analyzed and not just discussed.

Sometimes, the best way to understand the philosophy motivating someone is to do what engineers do when they take possession of a piece of equipment that belongs to the opponent; they reverse-engineer it. That is, they start at the end of say, the circuit they study, and work their way backward to its beginning. Here too, we should start from a point that comes near the end of the article. This is it: “...support from the Arab countries would allow for more economic growth in Gaza and for a gradual lifting of the Israeli-Egyptian blockades. It could even open the way for a long-term, post-conflict “Marshall Plan” for Gaza, led by the Arab states and supported by Israel.”

The first thing we must note here is that there is no such a thing as the Israeli-Egyptian blockades because there is no Egyptian blockade of Gaza. Even under normal circumstances, Egypt – like any country – could close its border to anyone without it being a blockade. It would be a blockade if Egypt had closed the maritime and/or aviation routes to Gaza, which it did not whereas Israel did. But the most cynical thing here (a truly Jewish form of cynicism) is that the Israeli plan – one they repeatedly talked about and bragged about – was to make life so miserable for the Gazans that they would want to migrate to Egypt. This would have been like Mexico bombing the people near the American border to force them to flee into the United States, and then accuse America of blockading the refugees of Central and South America. No, the Mexican would not do that, but the Jews tried to do it, and bragged about it even before they completed the plan. Does this merit a pogrom? You judge.

The second thing we note is the talk about a Marshall Plan for Gaza that would involve the Arab countries, and be supported by Israel. Well, the discussion here is about Gaza, and this is why the reference is about Gaza. But this kind of talk started to bounce among the Jewish echo-repeaters with reference to the West Bank – even all of Palestine – since Netanyahu went on an Asian tour trying to drum up the kind of business deals that kept Israel afloat while it was allowed to suckle on the financial blood of Europeans and Americans. In contrast, the Asians who are no fools told the Jewish con artist to go play with himself somewhere else because they do not tolerate moral pornography even from a Jewish clown.

Unable to continue living off the Europeans and the Americans, rebuffed by the Asians who kicked him out of their sight, and still refusing to accept a twelve year old Arab offer to normalize relations with them in return for abandoning the Jewish terrorist dream of acquiring all of Palestine, Netanyahu and his cohorts cooked up a plan containing a promise to let Palestine flourish to its full potential provided that the Arabs agree to pay for the plan by handing the money to Israel that will administer it. What can be more Jewish than that? Well, are we close enough yet to calling for a pogrom?

And this brings us to the beginning of the article where the author says something to the effect that: here is how we assessed the situation in the past, and here is where we speculated about what we could be doing. But as it turned out, we were wrong on all counts in that we did the things which made the situation worse. So let's forget about the past, let's assess the situation once again, and let's speculate more than ever before, after which we should do the following...

And he sets out to tell what needs to be done – which, upon inspection, turns out to be the current Israeli position. And the world is asking these people: What makes you think it is kosher to destroy the organization now ruling Gaza, but not halal to destroy the organization now ruling Israel? Unless you can answer this question in a way that will satisfy the world, you'll be accused of calling for the next Holocaust.

Look who seeks a final Solution now

Michael Oren who was born to Jewish American parents, used to be Israel's ambassador to the United States of America because his parents migrated to occupied Palestine where he learned to become a Jewish kind of historian that is now telling America it is time to have a final solution for the Palestinian people. Of course, he did not come right out and said so anymore than the Nazis said it out loud about the Jews. But he said it metaphorically which is a style everyone knows how to translate into plain English. You'll find all that in his article titled: “Israel must be permitted to crush Hamas,” published on July 25, 2014 in the Washington Post.

This is how he put it in the text: “Israel must be permitted to crush Hamas in the Gaza Strip.” But everyone knows that Israel will not do in the Gaza Strip what it will not take to the West Bank eventually and seek to exterminate the Palestinians there too. For this to happen, he is asking what he calls the senior statesmen of the world to be “most helpful now by doing nothing.” Of course, when he says nothing, he means let Israel slaughter the Palestinian civilians by the logic that women and children must die so as to kill the freedom fighters that protect them. He says do nothing that will save the lives of these people at the same time that he is asking America to do all that is necessary to keep Israel afloat economically, militarily and diplomatically. It is a one-direction nothing because you are not permitted to equate the Jews with anyone.

However, nothing in what he said up to this point was so new to me that I wanted to write about. But then I hit this passage: “Israel responded … fighting against a deeply dug-in enemy.” Because I knew he was referring to the Palestinian resistance movement that is operating in tunnels underground, my memory went back 60 years to a time when, as a child, I learned something about the human condition as well as the mysterious ways by which history unfolds.

Sixty years ago, the parents of Michael Oren sat in New York wondering if they should try having a baby now or wait a little longer. At the same time, my parents had taken me and my siblings to a place called Djibouti (then a French colony) situated at the Horn of Africa where my father worked for the railway company. Two years or so after we got there, something happened that would be etched in my memory like a message chiseled in rocks.

What happened was that a French colleague of my father's used to come to our house every evening for several weeks, and would sit with my father beside the radio listening to Arabic news coming on short wave both from Cairo and from London. And every time the announcer pronounced the name Dien Bien Phu, I could see the Frenchman react facially and bodily as if a dagger had just pierced his heart. The man did not speak Arabic but he knew what Dien Bien Phu meant. That was the place in Vietnam where the French were taking a beating in a ferocious battle where his brother was sent to fight, and had not been heard from for some time. The Frenchman in our house did not trust the news agencies of his country telling him the truth of what was going on in that far away place, and this is why he asked my father to tell him what Cairo and London were saying about the ongoing battle.

I took interest in that war as I did ten years later when America got involved in Vietnam, and I was in Canada following the events not in Arabic or French but in English. This is when I learned where the word underground had come from. It came from the fact that a resistance movement always digs tunnels under the ground where it operates in relative safety away from the eyes of a superior military force. At first I thought that the Vietnamese had pioneered this method but then learned it was an old idea employed even by the French when they were fighting the Nazi occupation of France. If only I had known this bit of truth when tall Charles de Gaulle came to our school in Djibouti, and we lined up as he shook our tiny hands one by one. I would never have thought that a man as tall as him could fit into an underground tunnel.

And here we are in the year 2014, a man named Michael Oren, who wasn't born yet when all those things were happening, telling the senior statesmen of the world: “By letting Israel regain its security with regard to Gaza, the United States and its allies will be safeguarding their own.” Yes Michael, we heard this argument before when they spoke of the Domino Theory that never materialized, and Vietnam – after defeating America – became a good friend of America ... not the enemy that would bring about the end of civilization as we know it.

Go home, kid, and find a lollipop to chew on. You'll serve humanity better this way.

Paying with Life for an innocent Mistake

Imagine this story happening to you or to someone you know. The daughter reaches the age of 18; she is given a car and allowed to go out on her own. She goes to a bar where she meets old friends, and where she befriends a man she never met before. He keeps offering her drinks and she does not say no. It is late now; her friends leave but she stays for a while longer.

In the morning her parents go to her room and find that she did not come home last night. They telephone her friends who tell them what they saw the night before. They contact the police who begin a search and find her body three days later. The coroner determines she had been raped and bludgeoned to death. It is that she made a small mistake and paid for it with her life.

Now imagine the criminal that did this thing being a serial murder-rapist committing the same act over and over again. Would you blame the girls who fall prey to him? Or would you blame him for taking advantage of small innocent mistakes that any girl would commit, to take advantage of them and do his awful deeds? Obviously, you will blame him and not the girls.

Well, if you think of this story as a metaphor for something similar that keeps happening on the international stage where the lives of thousands of people – mostly children – are lost every once in a while because a “moral” rapist that is protected by America is out there on the loose, you'll have to think of Israel.

Once again the Israelis bombed an Arab school full of children and their teachers after diligently preparing the groundwork to give two messages at the same time. First: yes we did it because we no longer believe in an eye for an eye, but now subscribe to the idea of a hundred eyes for one eye. Second: you cannot prove it in a way that we cannot mobilize America's power and prestige to have the proof recanted. There will always be a John Bolton out there we can draft to add insult to injury.

But what was the groundwork that they prepared so diligently? Well, it happened that two buildings were leased in Gaza by the UN to use as schools but were abandoned for a period of time. When the war erupted, Hamas stored a handful of rockets in them in what was to be a temporary measure. Someone discovered what happened, and the Israelis got wind of it. And like the serial rapist who would wait for a young woman to make a small mistake, they unleashed their army of echo-repeaters to keep repeating that Hamas was using their own people as human shield.

And they came out in America – congressional dog after congressional dog repeating that same refrain. And they came out – journalistic monkey after journalistic monkey repeating that same refrain. And they came out – mindless pundit after mindless pundit repeating that same refrain. And when the ether was saturated with that sickening refrain, Israel told the UN to evacuate a school in Gaza. And just as the evacuation was to start, the Israelis bombed the school so as to inflict maximum damage, and score the maximum number of deaths and injuries. So very cowardly! So very Jewish!

You can already see how the editors of the American media are preparing the groundwork to lawyer up a case to exonerate the moral serial rapist that is Israel. One such preparation can be found in the New York Times under the title: “Gaza's Mounting Death Toll,” published on July 25, 2014. Obviously, these editors see the American public as being the jury, and they want to convince it that Israel did nothing that someone else would not have done. To succeed, they paint Israel as an ordinary John Doe, and Hamas as evil incarnate.

But the truth will eventually come out, and like their habit, the Israelis and their supporters in America – Jews and gentiles alike – will thumb their noses at the American public that would have bankrolled their criminal activities, and they will chant: We conned you, we conned you. You paid us and we screwed you. You are America and we are those who fool you – time after time after time.

Menacing the Republic learning bad Lessons

When it comes to the social graces and to popular culture, there seems to be two ways by which people learn and retain knowledge. Most interesting is that the method by which learning is done is itself shaped by the culture that spawned it. In turn, the culture is affected most profoundly by the method of learning. Thus, culture and learning have a relationship that goes in both directions, making the two a symbiotic sort of living organism that has the ability to change with the passage of time.

Even though both methods are absorbed by osmosis, one may be called linear because it depends very much on rote and very little on the individual analyzing the lessons learned, even less on him adding value to what he has learned. When the same circumstances present themselves, he responds in the way that he saw others respond at the time that he was absorbing the social graces and the culture of his society.

The other method of learning may be called holistic because it depends very little on rote and very much on the individual analyzing the lessons learned, by adding valued to them and by integrating the whole into a single concept. When the same circumstances present themselves, he treats them as something he never saw before, and responds in a way that may not put what he learned into use, but a way that suggests innate creativity.

As to the difference between the two methods in terms of their impact on the individual, learning by rote makes him pick a word from all that is said to him. He associates that word with a learned response and reacts almost instantaneously to the situation at hand based on that one word ... which is why he appears thoughtless and disconnected. On the other hand, learning by holistic approach makes the individual mull over the entire situation before responding to it, an exercise that takes time and makes him look thoughtful, which he would be.

The American population had been a holistic and thoughtful one till it began to change some four decades ago to one that is linear and thoughtless. This happened because a newcomer injected into it what may be called anti-social and counter-cultural concepts. You can see an example of this when you study the article written by David French under the title: “Secretary Kerry's Hot-Mic Critique: He has No excuse,” published on July 21, 2014 in National Review Online.

This is what the Jews brought to America. It is that a trivial remark caused David French and his cohorts – Jews and gentiles alike – to explode in rage. This time it happened to John Kerry who spoke of the current situation in the Middle East, describing it as “hell of a pinpoint operation.” Before that it happened to Chuck Hagel who spoke of the Jewish lobby; before that it happened to Jimmy Carter who wrote a book about Israeli apartheid in Palestine. And the list continues. Each time it was a word or an expression that set off the ire of the Jews and their mouthpieces regardless of what else was contained in the message. They came out almost instantly and barked a refrain in unison as if they were robots that received a signal at the same time from Central Command.

And this is the approach to life that spread throughout the American society, pushing out and replacing the existing popular culture and the social graces that used to dominate the scene, such as we had known them in the 1960s and early 1970s. And the people of America – all of North America – gradually changed from approaching life and responding to its challenges in a holistic and thoughtful manner to a linear thoughtless one.

Taking an example to see where this might lead, we consider what happened in occupied Palestine. As in every occupation, the people under it were unhappy about some things. They let the Israelis know but instead of addressing the Palestinian concerns, the Israelis reacted as if to say to them they should love the Jews not dislike what they do. The Palestinians began to stage peaceful demonstrations, and the Israelis responded with tear gas and rubber bullets. The Palestinians learned to throw stones at the soldiers and did so, only to see the Israelis escalate with the use of armored carriers, tanks and live ammunition. In turn, the Palestinians escalated to the point where they now lob rockets at the Israelis.

Now look to see how far David French took his mechanical-like rhetoric in response to John Kerry's private but open-mic remark, and ask yourself a simple question: What kind of mental disease is that which prompts someone to react with such ferocity to a remark that is as harmless as that?

You may not know what the disease is called but you will know where the diseased will take America unless he is stopped right here and right now.

Hamas may succeed where America failed

America has created a monster it cannot control; Hamas is taming that monster. It all started when bit by bit the agents of World Jewry infiltrated the American institutions and took them over from the inside, hiring only their own kind and keeping at bay the people who showed signs they cannot be coerced into toeing the Jewish line.

Once in command of the strategic institutions, the Jews mobilized the superpower, and turned it into everything they dreamed about for thousands of years – from sugar daddy to nanny to bodyguard to lawyer to companion and so on and so forth. And they put all that to the service of Israel, the Jewish base of operations after which Usama Bin Laden fashioned the Islamic base of operations known by its Arabic name Qaeda which translates literally into the English word Base.

Meanwhile as a Jewish Qaeda, Israel began its sojourn in the Middle East by introducing to the region a concept heretofore unknown to it: terrorism. The Jews began by hitting the British soldiers and civilians who were then the occupying power in Palestine. When this bloody business was completed, the Jews turned their guns and their bombs on the unarmed Palestinians, and followed that with the business of looting their land and their properties – criminal acts that continue to this day.

And the more that the Jews of Israel wanted something they could not get from the Palestinians or the neighboring Arab states, the more they ran to America and cried: gimme, gimme, gimme. And America gave to the Israelis the money, the weapons, the protection and the diplomatic cover they asked for to accomplish whatever mission they had in mind, and get whatever they wanted. Eventually the Arab states developed the means to defend themselves, and were able to take back what Israel had grabbed from them.

However, the Palestinians were not so lucky as to have the essential requisites with which to stop and repel the throngs of Jewish terrorists who had come to invade their homes and take them. In time, the Palestinians lost their homeland to the Jews who changed the name from Palestine to Israel. By this time, America itself had effectively become a Jewish colony, and where the interests of America and Israel clashed, Israel won hands down. It happened because the Jews had managed to monopolize speech which they exercised freely, but denied it to anyone that did not treat Israel and all Jewish matters the way that the North Koreans treat their so-called dear leader.

And this brings us to the Wall Street Journal, a publication that used to be venerated before it was taken over by the Jews and turned into a mouthpiece as well as a doormat for them. It has done its part, as much as any publication to promote the principle of Jewish supremacy over everyone, especially over America which it jealously maintains subservient to the Jewish masters.

A telling expression of that reality can be seen in the piece that the editors of the Journal wrote under the title: “Let Israel Decide” and the subtitle: “A premature Gaza cease-fire would help Hamas.” It was published on July 23, 2014. The title itself captures the essence of the reality that has been in effect for several decades. It is that Israel makes the decisions even when everything that keeps it afloat comes to it from America.

What tells the reader how it was possible for the Jews to establish themselves as supreme masters over the American people can be seen in the few words that appear in the second paragraph of the editorial. Talking about the Jews and the Palestinians, the editors complain: “Obama and Kerry have adopted this ostensibly even-handed trope.” As always, they here reiterate that the Jews must never be equated with others, and their affairs must never be weighed on the same scale with those of others. Their message is that the Jews are unique, apart and superior to everyone – including America.

But who are they talking to? Not the Palestinians. Not the neighboring Arabs. Not the Muslims. They are talking to Americans. And now that a third generation of American kids has grown listening to this refrain without push back, they came to believe it. Thus, while kids everywhere in the world are growing up free, American kids are growing up believing that freedom is to grow up groveling to a Jewish master.

American parents should have tried to liberate their children from having to grow up subservient to the Jews by humiliating the latter. The parents never did that, so they must now pray that Hamas will be able to humiliate the Jews of Israel, and give America's children a chance to grow up free like everyone else.

As many dead Israelis as Palestinians

People who know their way around the Israeli institutions and can legitimately navigate them via the internet, got reams of data they were not too sure what to do with, so they passed them on to me to correlate and crunch. I did so, and the result has been a rough estimate of what Israel is suffering in terms of lost lives and injuries as a result of its war against Hamas over the past dozen days or so.

Given that the war has been ongoing for that length of time, the numbers I have are preliminary, sometimes not clear as to what they refer, and not always apparent to which day they belong. And so, it is near to impossible to tell what happened on each day of the war, but possible to have an overall view of what happened in the aggregate. This done, you can tell what happened on average each day of the war when you divide the sums by the number of days.

What I can tell is that approximately 250 people would normally die every day in Israel from old age, diseases, accidents, crimes and what have you. This number suddenly increased by anywhere between 10 percent and 20 percent during each day of the war. This means somewhere between 35 and 50 extra people died each and every day. This can only be due to the war but the trouble is that the Israelis do not want to admit Hamas is having any success with its rockets, so they did not designate a category under the rubric of war casualties.

What they did instead is assign each death to an existing category such as heart attack, accident, suffocation and what have you. In total, it is safe to say that there has been somewhere between 400 and 600 fatalities attributable to the war, which is a number comparable to what the Palestinians have suffered.

As to the number of injured, I could not extract that from the data I was handed. But it is realistic to say that for every one that died there would have been 3 to 5 injured. Thus, the number of injured can be estimated as falling between 1,000 and 3,000 with varying degrees of severity … some of whom will eventually succumb to their injuries and die.

Like they say, the first casualty of war is the truth which does not seem to apply to the Palestinians who are disarmingly open and up front. But the saying does apply to the Jews whose DNA is powered by the motto: the lie, the damned lie and nothing but the lie.

There is one thing, however, they cannot keep doing for ever. It is that they can mutilate history for a short period of time but not forever. Sooner or later, the truth will come out, and the emperor will be seen not to wear clothes; worse … to have been castrated.

The Fires are not only in France, NYT

The editors of the New York Times came up with a piece they wrote under the title: “Fires of Hatred in France” and published it on July 23, 2014. It is a banal little thing so devoid of substance; it reminds me of the way that some people used to talk about Chinese food. They used to say, you can eat all you want from this stuff but you'll never feel that you're full.

I don't hear someone talk like that anymore perhaps because people have become health conscious, and have learned to appreciate meals that are not very dense. Well, if light food is good for your physical health, I can assure you that an editorial as light-weight as that of the New York Times is not good for your mental health. I hope people will not get used to that kind of presentation, but I'm not holding my breath because the signs I see all around me are not very encouraging.

The truth is that the situation which the editors describe as happening in France – without telling that the same thing is happening in other places too – robs the subject of its substance. The reality is that the situation is being repeated throughout Europe and in many places around the globe. Everywhere people are protesting Israel's aggression against Palestine the way that they protested against America during the Vietnam War, and again during the second Iraq War. These worldwide protests are the natural expression of humanity to what is basically a savage manifestation of man's basest of instincts – the lust for blood.

The reason why people throughout the Western World and elsewhere take to the streets when it comes to the United States of America as opposed to say, Russia or China or some other country is because these people feel that their governments and their media conspire to keep them in the dark with regard to America's crimes. They sense that because America is big and powerful, their governments and their media shy away from “telling it like it is.” In response, they go into the streets and express that sentiment in a way that their governments and their media cannot ignore.

Much the same applies to Israel with the exception that the people who protest do so because they sense that their own governments and their media are controlled by the Jews. They reckon that this is why Israel is allowed to get away with murder, and why their own governments and their media feed them lies about it. These views are further reinforced by the manner with which the governments react to their protests, however peaceful they may be. In fact, the people are left to protest against America all they want, and the media would even write a few favorable things about them. By contrast, the people see nothing but hostility from the government and from the media when they protest against Israel.

The editors of the New York Times tell what happened in France, admitting that things went peacefully till the time that the demonstrators were intercepted by members of the Jewish Defense League when apparently, all hell broke loose. Then, say the editors: “France's interior minister banned demonstrations that had already been approved.” Given that this pins the blame on the Jews, something the editors could not tolerate, they shifted the blame to the demonstrators with a sleight of hand. This is what they did: “many protesters stayed home, some defied the ban … others came bent on violence, including spewing virulent anti-Semitic views.” All of a sudden, the Jewish aggressors became the victims of anti-Semitic spewing.

And because there was no way they were going to talk about a subject like that without mentioning Auschwitz, the editors of the Times found a way to mention the place, after which they ended the editorial with these remarks: “A demonstration supporting Palestinians is set to take place on Wednesday [today]. It must be possible to have safe demonstrations while offering zero tolerance for agitators of any stripe.”

Too bad. This is such a dense subject, they could have written more about it, something that would have been welcomed at this time. Events are unfolding rapidly in the Middle East, and the world is reacting to them by reacting to the Jews. And all that the editors of the New York Times could come up with is the proverbial bowl of rice with no meat and no potato. Where's the beef, NYT?

A golden Rope to hang an Icon

Thane Rosenbaum is a name I don't remember hearing about before. But he just wrote an article which I read, and almost immediately felt he deserves an award that will represent his great achievement in grabbing a rope and hanging himself with it. Since he stands at the pinnacle of those who do so, he must be viewed as an icon, and his trophy must be a rope made of gold.

In a Wall Street Journal article dated July 22, 2014, that came under the title: “Hamas's Civilian Death Strategy” and the subtitle: “Gazans shelter terrorists and their weapons in their homes, right beside sofas and dirty diapers,” Rosenbaum writes that “Hamas is playing the long game of moral revulsion.” These people do what they do, he says, by putting their children where the Israelis are about to bomb so that the children die when the bombing happens, and the Hamas people score a propaganda victory.

Well, it is a good thing that Rosenbaum never applied for the job of propaganda planner with the kibbutz crowd because these people know a thing or two about using people, especially children, to score propaganda points. What the kibbutz propagandists know is that the face of a child in distress is more poignant to a viewing audience than a dead child. In fact, if you look at the face of a child that has died, what comes to your mind is the pain that the mother must be feeling. You too will feel sympathy for her, but tears will most likely not come down your cheek. Look, however, at the expression of fear and bewilderment on the face of a child, and you'll most likely shed tears.

Having children in basements where they were safe but frightened when the bombs exploded nearby, produced the kind of footage that won the kibbutz crowd the sympathy of many around the world. By that same sort of human response – as mysterious as it is – the sight of a frightened child grabbing the hand of its mother and running alongside her, or one that is being tossed onto a cart drawn by a donkey, or one that is shoved into the back seat of a car – have a more powerful impact on a viewing audience than a dead body, be it that of an adult or that of a child.

Thus, if the Hamas people wanted to win the sympathy of the world, they must be doing a good job because they are not interfering with what the Journalists are doing which is to photograph the people who flee the bombed up places more than they do the people that died. And when people flee the places that are being bombed or about to be bombed, they do not serve as human shield. Thus, the accusation that Hamas is using them as shields is not just a lie or even a damned lie; it is worse than that because it is a Jewish lie.

As if these moronic accusations were not enough, Rosenbaum and other characters of his ilk come up with all kinds of stories relating to what Hamas is doing even though they are not on the scene, cannot claim they saw any of what they say has happened, and have no proof to back what they claim. One such example would be this: “When Israel warned them of impending attacks, the inhabitants defiantly refused to leave.” Sometimes they call this sort of thing, rumors and yet, they always treat them as if they were gospel truths.

Not only that, but they build on them as well. And what they do is no joke because this guy Rosenbaum has gone as far as to legitimize and advocate the deliberate wiping out of the entire population of Palestine both in Gaza and in the West bank. Read the following unedited passage and see for yourself:

“On some basic level, you forfeit your right to be called civilians when you freely elect members of a terrorist organization as statesmen, invite them to dinner with blood on their hands and allow them to set up shop in your living room as their base of operations. At that point you begin to look a lot more like conscripted soldiers than innocent civilians. And you have wittingly made yourself targets.”

To me this is a call to genocide, and I wonder what the editors of the Wall Street Journal think of it. It seems that the Journal hangs itself every once in a while, leaving the world to wonder how many times it must hang itself before it expires for good.

And to think that this mad man Thane Rosenbaum is a professor at a law school makes me wonder what it is about the Americans which makes them believe they have the best universities in the world.

Krauthammer's Truth in a Kafkaesque Universe

This discussion is about an article written by Charles Krauthammer but I wish to start with something that may sound unrelated at first but actually has a connection, if tenuous, with the subject that Krauthammer is tackling in an article that came under the title: “The truth about Gaza” and the subtitle: “Rarely does international politics present a moment of such moral clarity.” It was published on July 18, 2014 in National Review Online.

It may have been a coincidence but it was under the Jimmy Carter Administration that America developed the neutron bomb – Carter being a nuclear physicist and also a pacifist. But these are the contradictions under which the world sometimes operates, a puzzle that is rendered all the more perplexing by the fact that the neutron bomb is a device which kills people but leaves all installations intact.

The connection between that reality and what happens in Gaza at this time is that America – which shoulders one hundred percent the responsibility of the horror that is committed there – is now urging the Israelis who are using American-made explosives and the means to deliver them, to do the reverse of what it would have done had a war erupted between NATO and the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War. America is now telling Israel it is okay to destroy the installations in Gaza but not kill the people.

There is a reason for this reversal, of course. It is that the standoff between the two camps during the Cold War was seen as one between equals whereas the current standoff between the Palestinians and the Israelis is seen more and more for what it really is; a struggle between the dispossessed people of Palestine on one side, and superpower America operating under the control of World Jewry conniving with the powerful Jewish lobby in America, on the other side.

And whereas the realities of the situation in Europe during the Cold War were to the effect that the Soviets were occupying Eastern Europe, the realities in the Middle East today are to the effect that the Zionists are occupying a good chunk of Palestine and looking forward to grabbing more of it. Thus, an America that could legitimately plot to kill Soviet troops while maintaining all installations intact for the indigenous people of Eastern Europe to retake what belonged to them; that same America could not make a similar claim today or help the Zionists add more to their criminal activities while standing on America's shoulders.

And this is why Charles Krauthammer who is as smart if not a little smarter than his peers has looked into the mud of international politics and thought he was seeing moral clarity. His problem in understanding what is happening in Palestine has many sides, and he expresses one of those sides this way: “Apologists for Hamas attribute the bloodlust to the Israeli occupation and blockade. Occupation? There is not a soldier, not a settler, not a single Israeli in Gaza.”

Yes, Charles, there are no Jews in Gaza since the Palestinians kicked them out of there. But Gaza alone is not all of Palestine. The truth is that the government that is in place in Gaza today was elected by all the people of Palestine and given the mandate to liberate every inch of the land … which includes the West Bank. And as long as there are soldiers, settlers or Israelis in the West Bank, the first duty of the government is to work for the liberation of all Palestine, and fight if necessary.

As to the blockade, Krauthammer says this: “Israel wanted this new Palestinian state to succeed. To help the Gaza economy, Israel gave the Palestinians its 3,000 greenhouses that had produced fruit and flowers for export.” The truth is that Gaza is a part of the land of milk and honey and a part of the Fertile Crescent, renowned since the beginning of time. And this is because the land is situated in the right place, producing the right kind of crops. It does not need greenhouses. The reason why the settlers built the greenhouses was to produce the kind of crops that would sell in Europe and the rich nations of Asia such as flowers and herbs. These being crops that the people of Gaza had no use for; they did not need the greenhouses. They took them apart to make use of the land on which they stood.

The government in Gaza had a better idea with regard to the economy it wanted to build. It was one that had the earmarks of a hybrid between Singapore and Dubai. And the rich Arab countries were preparing to finance this Palestinian dream when the Israelis understood it will cause a revolt among the inhabitants of the West Bank where they will demand to be free so as to become like Gaza. Thus, Israel started a program of periodically destroying what the Gazans were building, even instituted a blockade to prevent them from conducting commerce with the rest of the world.

Thus, starting with the wrong premise, Krauthammer put together a fantastic story about a “Kafkaesque ethical inversions [where] Hamas' depravity begins to make sense.” If he knew what he was talking about, he would have realized that the depravity belonged to the Israelis and not the Palestinians. And he would have understood why the world is standing on the side of Hamas via the auspices of the UN.

The grotesque Face of a useless Culture

There are many ways that a culture can show its grotesque face, and every culture on this planet has, at one time or another, shown how ugly it can get. The Jewish culture has not been an exception especially that it has loitered around for a long time, has repeatedly metamorphosed into different forms, and has always kept the one characteristic which gave its ugliness a distinct look and a unique character.

Like the virus that cannot duplicate itself but enters the cell and tricks it into producing more of its kind, the Jew whose main characteristic is to live like a parasitic virus has infiltrated almost every society he met since the beginning of time, and has caused each of them to renew his strength, even add to it. This condition lasted till the immune system of the society woke up and vanquished the intruding parasite. But this did not happen quietly because a struggle has always ensued, and turned the society into a feverish body for a while before the existence of the Jewish parasite was dealt a solution that often came close to being final.

You can tell that the Jewish cycle of [infiltrate – control – abuse – self-destruct] is nearing the end of this run because you can see the Palestinian representatives get on the media of the world, including the American, and talk like civilized beings whereas Netanyahu and everyone speaking for him and for Israel get on the same media and speak of the Palestinians like Fox News speaks of Obama, which reminds you of the pipes that continually discharge raw sewage laced with radio active toxic waste.

What reinforces the view that the cycle is coming close to the end, is a shriek emanating from a place that can only puzzle you. To understand why this is so, it must be said that the final solution was never fully implemented because there has always been people that told the Jews they had gone too far, and must back off before they reach the point of no return. The Jews listened and lived, but unfortunately pushed their luck too far again and provoked other pogroms and a holocaust. But the shriek this time is indicating something even more ominous, perhaps presaging that a more final solution is at hand.

You can see all that and read about it in the July 18, 2014 edition of the New York Post. It came in an editorial that has the title: “Let Israel do its job” and where you'll encounter this passage: “Obama recognizes Israel's right to defend itself but has cautioned Netanyahu...” This being the expression that has come to mean Israel has the right to hang itself, you wonder if Obama has not gotten so tired of these characters, he is inviting them to solve the matter of their burdensome existence in one final swoop, and do it all by themselves.

But that's not all because the title of the editorial echoes a similar sentiment. When the editors of the New York Post write something under a title that says let Israel do its job, they don't mean Israel had a job to do but neglected doing it; they mean to say that America gave Israel the means to do something that can be horrible and told it: If you get out of line, we'll finish you off before you finish the job. And if the reader wants to know: What is that job? Here it is in the words of the editors: “Gaza would have been flattened by now.”

The truth is that anyone given a large amount of the right kind of chemicals can flatten anything he wishes to destroy. It may be a matter of bravado for the emotionally disturbed to brag about possessing such power, but it is the responsibility of those providing the chemicals to restrain the sick and the mental, cautioning them about their uses the way that Obama cautioned Netanyahu.

In other words, the message is out there: You can hang yourself, Israel, if that's what you want to do, but don't try committing the crime that America will be held responsible for because if you try to pull a stunt like this, we'll do away with you before you have the chance to hurt someone else badly.

And when the editors of the New York Post plead to let Israel do its job, they mean to say let it push the envelope past the edge of the precipice, and then respond to its crimes accordingly. This way humanity will dispose of the matter once and for all … and will never again have to worry about implementing yet another partial solution in the hope that the more comprehensive one will not be too far behind.

Yes, humanity is by and large a civilized society but when pushed beyond the limit of its endurance there is no telling what it will do to alleviate the pain.

Screwy Logic leading to screwy Editorial

You start reading the New York Times editorial that came under the title: “Israel's War in Gaza,” published on July 19, 2014 and something happens to you. Knowing quite a bit about the subject already, a passage you encounter in the second paragraph blows your mind. Here is that passage: “the Hamas bombardments which are indiscriminately lobbed at Israeli population centers.” You stop reading and marvel at this affront to logic.

You try to resume reading the article but cannot because the absurdity of the passage is so overwhelming; it suspends the mental faculties in charge of your reading skills, and switches your brain to the faculties which are in charge of reverie.  And so, you go into a reverie mode in which you imagine the following exchange between a supporter of the Jewish causes (J) and a representative of the World community (W) as the two begin to discuss the Palestinian situation:

W:   What is it you've been saying about Hamas?

J:   They are evil and we are saintly.

W:   How do you know they are evil? And what makes you think you are saintly?

J:   They lob rockets indiscriminately; we lob rockets surgically.

W:   You mean you both have precision rockets but they lob them indiscriminately, and you lob them precisely at chosen targets?

J:   No, they don't have precision rockets; they don't have the money to pay for them. In fact, they don't have the money to pay for what they use now which is cheap stuff given to them by others. They also make some rockets themselves in a basement-like operation. Real amateurish stuff.

W:   Well then, if their rockets hit places indiscriminately, it must be because they are unguided cheap stuff, and not because this is the intention of Hamas.

J:   No, no. The truth is: they have bad intentions, and we know that from other things.

W:   But tell me this, how much damage do they cause?

J:   Nil. Zero. Zilch. Nothing. No damage at all. It is amateur hour when it comes to the launch of their rockets.

W:   So then, why are you upset?

J:   Because they have bad intentions, and we know that from other things.

W:   And you say your intentions are saintly?

J:  Yes of course. You are exactly right. We are saintly because we have good intentions. Saintly intentions.

W:   And you say this is the case because your rockets – like their rockets – cause no damage and kill nobody?

J:   No, no. You're wrong there. It is not exactly that. You are way off.

W:   No, you say? What do your rockets do then?

J:   They cause damage and they kill.

W:   But I thought you said they were precise.

J:   They are.

W:   Why then do they cause damage and kill? Is this what you want, or is it that you don't know how to use them?

J:   Oh yes, we know how to use them. We use them as intended, and they do what is expected of them. They cause damage and they kill.

W:   You cause damage and kill deliberately?

J:   Yes, yes.

W:   And you say you have good and saintly intentions?

J:   Yes... yes, of course.

W:   You kill those who cannot kill you because you have saintly intentions? For what reason do you kill?

J:   I told you; it is because they have bad intentions, and we know that from other things not from the launch of their rockets.

W:   So then, why do you say they launch indiscriminately?

J:   What's wrong with you? Don't you understand when I say we know they have bad intentions from other things?

W:   But how can I tell that you have saintly intentions from what you're telling me?

J:   What I have been telling you is not enough for you to judge me by. You must Judge me by the other things I do that you do not see.

W:   So here we are discussing the situation in Palestine, and you tell me to believe that Hamas has evil intentions because I must judge them not from what I see but what you're telling me. And when it comes to you, I must not judge you from what I see but what you're saying about yourself?

J:   Yes, exactly that.

W:   Well, let me ask you a question: What do you take me for? A moronic American legislator? Or maybe a retarded editor at the New York Times?