Most people know what it means that
someone wants to 'have it both ways.' It means that when faced with having to
choose between taking A or taking B, that someone insists on taking both A and
B. Sometimes the saying translates into 'having his cake and eat it too'.
But there is a lesser known way in which
the concept that's involved in here, manifests itself in real life. It is known
to people that had the unpleasant experience of negotiating with Jews. In a
normal negotiation each side itemizes what they want. Where there is
coincidence between the two sides, the corresponding items are taken off the
table. And the give-and-take begins regarding the remaining items.
What happens in a negotiation that
succeeds, is that each side drops some demands, modifies other demands and
scales down still other demands … all that is done to accommodate the
interlocutor that's sitting at the other side of the table. The process of
dropping, modifying and scaling down happens when one side asks the other,
something to this effect: What do you want in return for scaling down the item
that says: 'in case of an accident, we pay 100 percent the cost of repairs?'
And the other side says something like this: 'I will take 50 percent if you
scale down the item that says we'll be responsible for 100 percent of the
overruns.' This process is called reciprocation.
Usually, negotiations take place between
two parties that come into the talks in good faith. And here is the rub; it
almost never happens when one party is a Jew. Pretending to negotiate a deal,
the Jews come to sound you out. They sit at the table yet put nothing on the
table. What they do, is question you about every one of your items to see what
you're willing to drop, what you're willing to modify and what you're willing
to scale down. When they have all that information, they flood you with a
haggling diarrhea, and ask for a postponement of the talks to reassess the
situation.
What they do is study every one of your
items and see how they can develop––behind your back––an outside kind of
leverage by which to grab these items without giving anything in return;
without reciprocating. The people who know of this Jewish habit never negotiate
with them when the Jews have leverage. In fact, this is what happened in 1967
when Israel launched a Pearl Harbor style sneak attack on Egypt where it
occupied the Sinai, on Syria where it occupied the Golan Heights, and on Palestine
where it occupied Gaza and the West Bank.
Having the upper hand––leverage––the Jews
of Israel asked the Arabs to negotiate, and the Arabs promptly responded with
the famous “Three Nos,” one of which being no negotiation. Eventually the
Egyptians retook the Sinai by kicking the Jews out of it. The Syrians retook
most of the Golan by kicking the Jews out of most of it. And the Palestinians
retook Gaza but not the West Bank. Later, Israel attacked Lebanon, and got
kicked out of there too.
It's been more than 50 years that Israel
has occupied the West Bank, and negotiations to reach a deal have gone nowhere
during all that time. This proves that the Arabs were wise to give the Jews the
Three Nos. Had they said yes, they would still be bogged down in negotiations
till now, just like the West Bank Palestinians. They would also be living with
the prospect of talking about a deal that gets farther away the more they
negotiate, and living with the specter of deadly confrontations hovering over
their heads day in and day out.
You can see how the Jewish mentality works
to have created a morbid condition of this kind when you read the New York Post
editorial that came under the title: “Hamas is showing why peace is far out of
reach,” published on May 5, 2019.
What this editorial shows is that even
absent a history showing how useless it is to negotiate with the Jews, their
constant lying shows how unreliable and dishonest they are. Remember the war
they had with Gaza a few years ago when they said that despite being hit with
more than 10,000 rockets, Israel suffered no damage to property and not a
single fatality ... when credible independent analysis was showing more than
600 dead? The Jews gave credit to the so-called Iron Dome, which they said
intercepted all the rockets that headed toward a populated area.
Well, despite that America gave Israel
almost a billion dollars to make improvements to the non-existent Iron Dome,
and replenish the system with interceptors, the Jews could not repeat the lie
this time because it would not serve their purpose. That's because Israel is
going through a dangerous time and may soon need America's military protection.
Mounting a false braggadocio at this time could be fatal, which is why the Jews
felt compelled to tell the truth.
Here is what they said: “Israel's Iron
Dome defense system intercepted many rockets, but hits still killed at least
four”.
So here it is, a billion-dollar
improvement to a system that could not intercept 600 rockets. These caused a
great deal of damage to property and 4 fatalities, when a lesser system was said
to have intercepted more than 10,000 rockets, preventing these from causing a
single fatality or damage to property.