There are two ways to determine whether or not someone is
living in a state of hysteria. The first is to watch for the obvious
manifestation of frantic gestures, loud sounds and nonsensical utterances that
the person under observation may express. The second is to gauge by how much
that person is removed from reality.
Those are the tools we'll use to determine whether or not
Noah Pollak and many like him are in a state of hysteria – be it a visible
hysteria or a muted one. He wrote an article under the title: “Obama's Claim of
War If Congress Rejects Iran Deal Doesn't Pass Laugh Test,” published on July
17, 2015 in the Weekly Standard. And this will be the starting point from which
we'll try to understand what these people are up to.
It is important to do so given that people like him have
spilled rivers of ink, and spent countless hours on the audio-visual media,
telling their audiences about the need to bomb Iran into the Stone Age to save
the world from a repeat of the 1938 tragedy … and they are doing it even now.
Yet, here they are, at the very same time accusing President Obama of deception
for reminding them of what they were advocating then, and what they are saying
now. That's the tangled mess which makes these people perfect candidates for
probing their mental state, and for studying the role that their religion is
playing to make them so confused and so confusing.
It is bad enough to live in an alternate universe, but to
live in two of them at the same time makes of these people the cultural time
bombs they turned out to be on the American scene. Look what Pollak is doing in
his article. He first accuses Obama of “borderline political blackmail [for]
accusing them of being warmongers.” A short while later, he writes this: “there
are several options for avoiding war: A military threat that is actually
credible.” Well, my friend, only a dangerously affected mind can live in a
universe where an actually credible military threat exists and at the same
time, live in a second universe where the risk of war is avoided.
To argue that possibility, Pollak makes a case in three
points.
First, he plunges into the debate at the point where his
side is advocating the launch of a war against Iran while the opposite side continues
to reject the idea. Here he is talking about an eventuality where the deal with
Iran is rejected: “One
scenario is that Iran
decides to race to a bomb, forcing airstrikes on nuclear facilities. But
President Obama has already all but ruled out airstrikes, claiming that there
is no military solution to the problem.” This is the reality he lives in one of
the universes.
Second, to make the point that “the president has a serious
credibility problem,” Pollak reminds the readers that he repeatedly said: “No
deal is better than a bad deal.” Since the President made clear he will not go
to war, the statement meant he will continue to pressure Iran for more
concessions. But now that he is talking about the possibility of war, he put
his credibility on the line, says Pollak. Well, the problem with this line of
reasoning stems from the fact that his universes are nothing more than snapshot
pictures where time is frozen, and evolution is non-existent.
The fact is that those who call on the Congress to reject
the Iran
nuclear deal have also argued that this will be the step to pave the way for a
future President to turn the credible threat of war into the reality of war.
Obama will not bomb Iran ,
but the next President – if a Republican like these people hope he will be –
will encounter a hysterical Jewish mob that will hound him to repeat the W.
Bush performance, and go on a military rampage that will send Iran back into the cave. Whether or
not this will happen remains to be seen. But if history is a guide, the risk is
there, which is what President Obama was referring to … and Pollak could not
grasp.
Third, not only does the author of the article live in
several universes at the same time – all being snapshot universes where time is
frozen and evolution non-existent – these universes contain no human beings
capable of making decisions for themselves. Oblivious of a world where things
are moving in the direction of establishing normal relations with Iran whatever
the American Congress decides, Pollak writes the following:
“There are UN resolutions and US and EU laws that comprise
the sanctions regime, and there is no clause written into them stipulating that
congressional rejection of a deal rescinds the sanctions regime … Yet we are
now to believe that when it comes to enforcing sanctions, the President is
compelled to accept the violation of dozens of laws with impunity … This
doesn't pass the laugh test.”
If only there was a magical potion that would help us
circumvent the religious barrier which keeps the Jews from evolving, we could
ram into their skulls the reality that people at the EU, and people at the UN will
not be dictated to by America or by its Jews because these people have a mind
of their own and will enforce or rescind their own laws as they see fit.
Period.