Here is an example that is solid proof one must be a mental
case to think the way that Jews are trained to think. Be they recent Jews,
old-timers, practicing Jews or pretenders, when they go through the drill of
training how to be a Jew, they remove the part of the brain that gives human
beings the ability to behave rationally. And they start making judgments the
way that only a mental case can make them.
To understand the example, we must first recall an old
theory that used to be called Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). When it
became clear to NATO and to the Warsaw Pact nations that each side had enough
nuclear weapons to destroy not only the other but the entire planet several
times over, they expressed the desire to end the arms race.
They negotiated and reached the conclusion that to deter
both sides, each side should retain the capability to absorb a first strike and
still retaliate with enough force to severely damage the other. This meant that
each side could only have so much of an offensive force and so much of a
defensive shield. They signed a treaty to that effect, and this is how any
attempt to add to one's defenses was considered a violation of the treaty.
That was then, and had to do with the two alliances only.
Today, in the absence of such treaty, leaders that feel their nation is
threatened, have the obligation to take the necessary measures to defend their
people. Yes, there are those – such as the Jews – who profess that the best
defense is an offense, thus arm themselves offensively and attack the
defenseless anywhere they find them. But the Jews are the exception that comes
nowhere near being the rule, thus have been shunned by humanity throughout
history everywhere they went.
The Jews aside, the leaders of a regular nation such as Iran have every
right to strengthen their defensive shield, and so they did. Considering that Iran was
repeatedly threatened by none other than the Jews and their American puppets,
their decision can only be considered a rational choice. In fact, the Iranians
bought the best defensive shield that money can buy, and guess what happened;
the Jews hollered foul. They called on their American echo repeaters to join
the shouting, but when the latter did not perform as well as expected, the Jews
moaned their song of sorrow.
You can see an expression of all that in black and white by
examining two pieces on the subject. The first is an article that came under
the title: “Obama Official Excuses Iranian Missile Deployment Near Nuclear Facility,”
written by Jenna Lifhits and published on August 30, 2016 in the Weekly
Standard. The second is an editorial that came under the title: “The mullah's
missiles” and the subtitle: “Iran
does nothing to assure West of its true nuclear aims,” published on August 31,
2016 in the New York Daily News.
What is striking about these two pieces is that they report
and they comment on the same event yet sound like they were on two different
planets. Taking different paths, however, they still reach the same conclusion,
which is that Iran did a bad thing, and the Obama administration did not
respond as well as it should.
Here is how that went. The editors of the Daily News say:
“The State Department has declared itself 'concerned' that Iran has
deployed sophisticated Russian surface-to-air missiles to defend its Fordow
facility.” By contrast, Jenna Lifhits of the Weekly Standard heard this: “A top
aide to President Obama forgave Iran 's
deployment of an advanced missile defense system around one of its nuclear facilities”.
Also, despite the fact that a security adviser to the White
House had explained: “It's not prohibited under any U.N. Security Council
resolution because it's a defensive system,” Lifhits says this: “The
administration has not sanctioned the sale, despite being able to do so by
law”.
Despite all that confusion – or perhaps because of it – the
editors of the New York Daily News saw fit to complain that “the mullahs have
given themselves an insurance policy,” and they don't like it one bit.
Moreover, to show that when it comes to talking absurd, the
Congress of the United States
can outdo even the Daily News, Senator Mark Kirk said this: “The administration
is failing to enforce U.S.
laws that mandate sanctions against countries that export destabilizing
advanced conventional weapons to Iran .” This is contrived
sensationalism, a specialty of that man, but a true reflection of a Congress in
a state of Jewish disarray.
What must be said about this cacophony is that all these
people wish to enforce the MAD doctrine on Iran without the mutual part. To
borrow from a Zen saying, they want to hear the sound of one hand clapping, and
want to see the tango performed solo by Iran .