The fatal Defect in the Jewish Character

Although John Bolton professes not to be a Jew, his thinking and his activities display the distinct Jewish pattern that has led the Jews to their doom throughout history and in all the places where they dwelt on this planet.

He has displayed that pattern in his writings and in all the tasks he took charge of in public, as if he were the embodiment of Jewish fanaticism. Whereas some Jews who attain prominence get there by developing subtle safeguards that shield their true character while ascending, Bolton has reached prominence by flashing the jarring side of his character as if to say to the world: hit me if you want but I'm proud to be more of a Jew than any Jew you'll ever meet.

He displays the most extreme side of his fanaticism in his latest writing; an article that came under the title: “What 'snapback' mechanism in the Iranian deal?” and the subtitle: “It's a 'fatal defect under a different walnut shell.'” It was published on June 13, 2015 in the Pittsburgh Tribune. If you ever wanted to know what fatal defect in the Jewish character has led these people to live in misery for thousands of years, the answer is in this article because it is written in-your-face, stripped of safeguards to shield it – or rather shield the world from its effect.

The first sentence makes up the first paragraph of the article, and it already contains two key words: reportedly and apparently. In other words, the author professes not to be certain of what he's talking about, but is certain of what he's saying. That's because he is talking about some vague notion regarding a nuclear deal that does not really worry him. But what he is saying concerns Iran which is a rising power that has the potential to stand as an obstacle against the Jews using the American military to dominate the region.

Here is what he says offends him as a non-Jew imbued with extreme Jewish fanaticism: “Allegations of Iranian violations would be referred to a committee of the Perm Five, Germany and (surprise!) Iran. This committee would decide whether Iran breached the final agreement, and, therefore, whether the sanctions would come back into effect.” This non-Jew says he is surprised that the world is working with the Iranians as if they were normal people and not the new Jews of the planet.

You see, my friend, John Bolton is a lawyer. As such, he knows that in every international agreement where disputes may arise, a tribunal is set-up and staffed by people from the countries involved, and to which can be added members from other countries. When the tribunal is seized by one party or the other, it looks into the matter and adjudicates it on the basis that the two sides are equal, having the same rights and the same obligations. Not so in this case, argues John Bolton. With Iran in the mix, it cannot be a normal case.

To explain his point, he gets into a long polemic about the nature of the Perm Five, as he calls them. They include Russia and China that have a veto in the Security Council, the body that will be called upon to snapback the sanctions. And for the case to get this far in the first place, we must assume that the tribunal had decided that Iran did breach the agreement. This is something that will not happen, says Bolton, because: “Allowing Tehran any say in a committee reviewing its own violations is roughly equivalent to providing Al Capone a seat in the jury room.” This is why, in Bolton’s eyes, the Iranians must be treated like the new Jews of the planet.

Having brushed aside the effectiveness of the Perm Five and Germany, and having demonized the Iranians, Bolton turns against his own country – assuming he still considers himself an American. He says that the State Department has a bias against finding breaches of arms-control agreements because it would mean that the agreement was flawed to begin with. He also faults President Obama who – Bolton predicts – will take the path of least resistance to the end of his term.

What might happen, considering all these conditions, says Bolton, is that Russia and China 'could' gridlock the committee (tribunal). They 'could' contest the evidence of a violation. And if proof positive of violation is presented, they 'could' argue to the State Department that more talks is the way to proceed.

And if the Obama Administration believes that the tribunal is a way to get around the vetoes of Russia and China, he has an example that should cause it, and cause the public to think twice. It is that during the 1950s, most of the Third World countries were colonized by the allies of America, and were not represented in the General Assembly of the United Nations. Unopposed, America had it its way in the Assembly most of the time.

When a dispute arose as to whom between mainland China and Taiwan had a right to represent the Chinese people in the Security Council, the Soviets began frustrating America's efforts opposing North Korea's aggression. To get around that, Dean Acheson made it possible for the General Assembly to preempt the Security Council when it was hopelessly deadlocked. For a while, this move worked for America.

But it was a mistake in the long run, says Bolton, because something happened that changed the calculus. It is that the Third World colonies were liberated, and they sent representatives to the General Assembly. They now form a majority which opposes much of what the Jews order America to do in the world. Thus, the Acheson gimmick backfired on America and the Jews.

The moral of this story, says Bolton, is that even though Acheson understood the risk of what he was doing, he thought it a problem for his successors. And so, referring to the tribunal that may thwart a Russian or a Chinese veto at this time but then backfire on America at a future date, Bolton concludes that “We should not make that mistake again.” Well then, what does he mean by that?

In the same way that some people in America are having second thoughts about the wisdom of the Voting Rights Act which enforces the one-man-one-vote paradigm, Bolton who dedicated his life to the imposition of Jewish supremacy on humanity, laments the Acheson move that was instrumental in bringing the one-vote-one-country paradigm to the General Assembly of the United Nations. He calls it a mistake that must never be repeated.

John Bolton is a fanatic non-Jew who is more of a Jew than any you'll ever meet. He is also carrying all the character defects that these people suffer from. He is hopeless, and shall so remain forever.