Jewish Noise-making Machine roaring again

Absent a clear direction from the political boiler room of the Likud Party's headquarter in occupied Palestine; Steven A. Cook has followed the example that was set by the mob of Jewish pundits in doing his analysis of President Trump's reconciliation with the Muslim World, especially Saudi Arabia.

He first meanders all over the intellectual landscape, groping for a theme he can catch and transform into a mantra that other Jews can use to impress the Congress of the United States, and annoy everyone else. You get a sense of all that when you go over the article he wrote under the title: “What Did We Learn From Trump's Encounter With the Saudi Monarchy?” and the subtitle: “While Trump's visit to the famously repressive Saudi Kingdom was quite a show, U.S. policy looks awfully familiar.” It was published on the website of Salon Magazine, and reprinted on May 27, 2017 on the website of the Washington Institute.

Steven Cook signals his hesitation with the first sentence he writes, which happens to be a question: “What is there to say that has not already been said?” He goes from there to ask three more questions, thus composes an opening paragraph that's nothing more than a pile of anti-Saudi defamation. By now the reader will have gotten the sense that Cook's not-so-subtle message consists of declaring his unhappiness at the reconciliation that President Trump just forged with Saudi Arabia.

Addressing an audience at large he hopes is substantial (as would any writer) Cook nevertheless begins to develop a preoccupation for the two destinations that make up the honored guests on the list of the Jewish pundits. They are Washington's White House and the Congress of the United States. And this consideration is what guides him now on how to proceed with writing the rest of the article.

Because he wants to tell Washington that cozying up to Saudi Arabia is a bad idea, he decides that the best way to do it is to say that Donald Trump has changed nothing from what Barack Obama was doing, except for the change in tone. The going wisdom being that every administration which takes over from the opposing party reverses the previous course, Cook thought he stumbled on a winning approach to writing his article.

And so, he goes on to tell how Trump has preserved everything that Obama left behind. He discusses “the new Global Center for Combating Extremist Ideology,” saying it “is merely picking up where Obama left off.” He also discusses “Trump's plan for the Terrorist Financing Targeting Center,” saying that “Obama pursued terrorist financing with vigor.” As to the arms package with Saudi Arabia worth $110 billion of beautiful weapons, Cook says that “part of the deal was done under Obama.” Finally, Cook takes up the subject of the Iran nuclear deal. He says that “the White House issued waivers regarding Iranian sanctions, in keeping with the nuclear deal”.

At this point, Steven Cook must have scratched his head furiously trying to think up more ways with which to impress upon the White House and the Congress that getting too close to the Arabs is a bad idea. He found a way. In fact, the find must have elated him because it gave him the opportunity to call the Arab leaders “bastards,” something he would have longed for since the moment he wrote his first article.

Here is how he proceeded: “In 1979, Commentary magazine published Jeane Kirkpatrick's essay “Dictatorships and Double Standards,” in which she argued that what matters is whether or not a foreign leader was on America's side. Cook takes it from there and argues that Donald Trump has embraced this point of view when he told the Arab leaders assembled in Riyadh: “We are not here to lecture or tell other people how to live, what to do, who to be, or how to worship”.

And so, Steven Cook comments as follows: “In other words, many [that] had gathered to hear the president may have been dictatorial bastards, but at least they shared his interest in bombing the Islamic State”.

The problem with all this, says Cook, is that even if the narrative sounds good to some people, “when it comes to defeating extremism and transnational terrorists, Trump is making a mistake by giving the leaders of some of the most repressive governments license to crack down on their people even more”.

And this is where Steven Cook reveals the bankruptcy of his theory which happens to be the concoction that came out the political boiler room of the Likud Party's headquarter long ago, and was disseminated by the mob of Jewish pundits in America and throughout the English speaking world.

As to the civilized world that's almost completely free of Jewish influence, its thinking people are busy figuring out why terrorism that's often attributed to Muslim kids, is prevalent in Belgium, Britain, China, France, Russia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Turkey and the United States.

Because they are not hampered by the incessant noise-making machine of the pestering Jews, the thinking people of the civilized world stand a good chance at finding the answer.

When this happens, the Americans will once again be left behind. And they will continue to struggle to offset another kind of deficit plaguing the operation of their ship of state.

That's the moral deficit which is generated by their embrace of the intellectual dishonesty that's at the roots of Jewish thought.