We set aside for now the Jews who say they must never be
equated with non-Jews because it is shown in their Old Testament that they, and
they alone, gave and took with God, quarreled with Him and demanded that He do
things their way, which He did … though reluctantly. Thus, we accept that the
Jews are a breed apart, and will therefore be excluded from most of the
discussion that follows.
As to the rest of us mortals, it must be said that we all
behave more or less the same way when something serious happens which causes us
to worry about something. Of course there are cultural differences that nuance
our behavior at the margin, but the core in all of us remains the same, and
causes us to generate the same human responses to the things that affect our
well being, our lives and our very existence.
Take, for example, the killing of the late President John
Kennedy. To this day there are people who believe he was assassinated by a
variety of players ranging from individuals who did not like him personally to
the Mafia that did not like his love affair with a certain Hollywood actress,
to the Cuban leaders who wanted to avenge the Bay of Pigs, to the Soviet Union
that did not like his going to the moon before them … or whatever.
There are also conspiracy theories that relate to the 9/11
tragedy, put out by Americans – some very prominent – who believe that their
own government caused the tragedy for one reason or another. And there are
people who believe they have electronic circuits planted under the skin in
their buttocks, allowing black helicopters owned and operated by the government
to track their every move. And these people are so serious about their beliefs,
they arm themselves and train to fight a federal government they are certain
will come to disarm them.
Is there something similar to that sort of behavior in other
cultures? Yes, there are. For example, the North Koreans believe that the South
is conspiring with America
to attack them if and when they weaken. The Russians believe that the Americans
are out to humiliate them. The Sunnis believe that the Shiites don't like them
and vice versa. Lindsey Graham believes that ISIS is plotting to attack America . The
Pope believes that the devil is crapping capitalist dumps on every continent …
and so on and so forth. And there is also the Jews who believe the whole world
is against them, but enough said about these guys – or should I say these
rivals to God?
The question now is this: What nuances may color the behavior
of different cultures, differently? To be brief in answering this question, we
concentrate on two cultures only, and discuss their differences. Looking at the
current American culture, which is heavily influenced by the Jewish culture, we
notice that every argument concerning the local scene is boiled down to a
partisan consideration. For example, nothing is said by members of the “Right”
that does not end with: Hate Obama. Similarly, nothing is said by the members
of the “Left” that does not end with: Blame it on the Right. This is what the
Jews have done to the once venerated system of Liberal Democracy.
So the question: How does that Liberal Democracy respond to
something which happens on the international scene that both the Right and the
Left might agree on? For example, given that both wings of America 's political culture are dominated by
those same Jews, how does each wing respond to something like say, the tragedy
of the Russian passenger plane that fell from the sky in Egypt 's Sinai Desert
Because the fundamental tenet of the Jewish religion is to
hate Egypt, and to wish it to perish with plagues inflicted on it by a God that
has not yet responded to Jewish demands that He do so, the two wings of the
American media go full throttle attacking Egypt for anything and everything
that happens which may involve that country directly or indirectly.
The preferred Jewish approach to attacking someone being to
look in the mirror and pick out the worst that they see in themselves and
attribute it to their chosen enemy of the day, they incessantly do that to
Egypt which they consider to be their enemy of every day. Thus, they command
the American media – the Left and the Right – never to cease accusing the
Egyptians of seeing a conspiracy that is plotted against them by someone. It is
as if they want the world to believe the Egyptians see an anti-Semite under
every desk, out to get them.
In addition, a trick that the Jews and their lackeys often
use to make it sound like they speak with authority is to invoke a past
incident which turns out to be a fictitious thing that never happened, or an
incident that did happen, but the meaning of which they twist and spin
mercilessly to suit their current purpose. Applying this trick to Egypt , they say
that the Egyptians are doing now something they did before – perhaps out of
habit. This sounds authoritative, does it not?
Yes, it would normally sound authoritative, except this
time. And you find out what happened this time when you read two articles, both
of which were written by members of the Left in America . The first article came
under the title: “Conspiracy theories abound in the wake of Metrojet 9268
tragedy,” written by Ben Wedeman and published on November 13, 2015 on the CNN
website. The second came under the title: “Egyptian Leaders Blame a Familiar
Foe, Conspiracy, but Citizens Are Dubious,” written by David D. Kirkpatrick and
published on November 15, 2015 in the New York Times.
Whereas you find in the Ben Wedeman article a complaint that
“while investigators in the Sinai continue to comb through the wreckage of the
Russian jetliner, many [non-officials] in Egypt's capital have already figured
out who was behind the crash … [Egyptian] officials have lashed out at
western[ers] for suggesting a bomb might have brought down the plane,” you find
in the David Kirkpatrick article a ready acceptance that “[only] two weeks
after the crash, most of the world has concluded it was most likely a bombing.”
That is, Egyptians have no right to speculate about what may have happened,
whereas the rest of the world does.
But why do people of the CNN and the Times variety embrace
such ideas, and why do they let themselves be governed by them? The answer to
that question was not given succinctly by our two authors, but was given by
someone verbally at an earlier time. It is this: “Why don't the Egyptians just
come right out and admit it was a terrorist bomb?” Well, my friend, there is
something profound in this. It tells of people who are so fearful of what they
were told to do and have done, they wish the Egyptians would join them in
saying the thing that may turn out to be false. They wish for this to happen so
that they save face if the investigation ultimately proves it was not a bomb.
In fact, that fear is corroborated by what Wedeman and
Kirkpatrick neglected to mention. The Jewish trick requires that they mention
the Egyptian plane which fell from the sky more than a decade ago, and tell
their audiences that the Egyptians continue to refuse admitting it was pilot
suicide … no surprise, therefore, that they are doing the same thing again. But
why neglect to say this thing now when it was the popular thing to say only
days ago?