At the completion of the invasion of
Iraq in the year 2003, prominent Jews were so elated at the spectacle of an
Arab country being so destroyed by America, they openly mused that their
problem now was to decide whether to direct America to press on toward the left
(into Syria) or press on toward the right (into Iran).
Successive revelations of this kind by
Jews have proved conclusively that the alliance of Israel and the Jewish
establishment in America is a syndicated criminal organization using America as
its military and financial base to implement a plan that was concocted eons ago
by the so-called Elders of Zion. Now, 15 years after the Jews started making
pronouncements with regard to their new plans for the Middle East, America
finds itself standing with one leg pinned down in Syria by the Jews and the
other leg being pushed in the direction of Iran by them.
Whereas in 2003, America had an easy
time recruiting a handful of allies at the start of its Iraq adventure, and at
bucking the will of everyone else in the world, it finds itself isolated today,
having scored spectacular defeats in the field of diplomacy and the exercise of
influence. This has prompted the non-Jewish silent majority of America and now
a deflated Jewish minority, to counsel America it must end its Middle Eastern
adventures, and get out of the region altogether despite what the leaders of
Israel want.
The extent of America's loss in terms
of (1) the damage it has sustained in the eyes of the world, (2) the loss of
trust that has taken place between it and its allies, and (3) the loss of
respect that its foes used to have for its ability to influence the big and small
nations –– are discussed in three articles that explain what must be revealed
to the American public in simple, clear and honest language.
One article came under the title:
“America Must Realize It Has No Say in Syria's Future” and the subtitle: “The
reality on the ground is that there is no good reason for a continued U.S.
Military presence.” The article was written by Doug Bandow and published in the
National Interest on October 12, 2018. Here is a condensed version of what Doug
Bandow says:
“Assad has won, and Washington has
lost. Assad survived because he had support from Alawites and from Christians.
There is broad support for the regime. The US is fixated on Assad. The Iraq
debacle shows how America can make a situation worse. The Assad government is
authoritarian, not totalitarian, and secular, not religious. US policy was
hopeless, inconsistent and confused. Washington flouted international law and
claimed the right to determine Syria's future. American forces still illegally
occupy Syrian land. The Trump wartime objectives have turned into pure fantasy.
Washington cannot force Hezbollah, Iran or Russia from Syria. It should bring
its forces home. Neither Iraq nor Syria has threatened America. Trump should
end Washington's latest Middle Eastern misadventure”.
A second article came under the title:
“War by Other Means” and the subtitle: “Some American officials appear to hope
that resumed sanctions on Iran will lead to a popular uprising. Have they
thought that through?” It was written by Carol Giacomo and published on October
13, 2018 in the New York Times. Here is a condensed version of what Carol
Giacomo says:
“Trump's gamble with Iran will reach
an inflection point when he reimposes sanctions on Tehran. These penalties
represent a break from America's European allies. Trump hopes to force Iran to
capitulate to [Jewish] demands. Iran continues to abide by its commitments, as
the IAEA has concluded in a dozen reports. The Europeans say the deal is in
their national security interest; they resent that Trump has upended it. They
will save the deal by developing a financial mechanism that will skirt American
sanctions by creating a way to move money in and out of Iran. Their plan
reflects the depth of allied outrages over trump. Could Trump's approach spark
regime change? Experts say Iran's government isn't expected to fall. America's
history of fomenting coups and overthrowing governments has not had happy
endings. If trump had stuck with the nuclear deal, he could have addressed
concerns over Iran's activities in the region. Instead, he alienated America's
allies and set the stage for a conflict that could spiral out of control”.
A third article came under the title:
“America Loses a UN Ambassador –– And Is Better Off for it” and the subtitle:
“Haley's appointment was seen as a welcome development in the early days of the
Trump administration, but she left a blemish on the country's human-rights
record.” It was written by Carolyn Kenney, and published on October 10, 2918 in
the National Interest. Here is a condensed version of what Carolyn Kenney says:
“During her tenure, Nikki Haley spoke
out against atrocities in Syria, North Korea, China, Myanmar, Yemen, Russia and
Saudi Arabia [but not Israel]. She was integral in the US decision to pull out
of UNESCO, claiming the organization was biased against Israel. She was also a
key voice in the US decision to pull out of the UN Human Rights Council, again
citing bias against Israel. Haley also supported the decision to cut all
funding to UNRWA––which provides lifesaving humanitarian services to millions
of Palestinian refugees in the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria”.
The truth will set you free, says the
universally accepted shibboleth. Well, it is time for the American people to be
set free from the Jewish grip that has one hand around their necks crimping
their vocal cords, and the other hand in their wallets cleaning them of their
cash.