Oh, so predictable it was, and so high schoolish

 There is an American ritual that's played out predictably, but is of such insignificance, it does not warrant great anticipation before it happens, nor does it call for celebration after it happens … except there is reason to talk about it this time.

 

The ritual is played out the moment that a Democratic President is elected in America. The event causes the warmongers, neocons, Pax Americanists, Zionists and the like, to scream in unison: Show you'll be capable of taking action when it will come to that! And the newly elected Democratic President would oblige by latching on to a flimsy excuse, and using it to bomb an Arab or a Muslim target. He then tells the chorus that was clamoring for blood to shut up and let him do his job. Satisfied they got their pint of blood, they shut up.

 

This is what happened with the bombing that Biden conducted in Syria not long ago. However, such events are so insignificant, they do not remain fresh in memory for long, the reason why I cannot describe them all. But there is one incident that had some significance because of what it could have triggered had luck not intervened and softened the blow. If memory serves me, it was right after Bill Clinton was elected that Muslim Foreign Ministers gathered in a Baghdad Hotel. Clinton was told to blow up the hotel, and he tried to do just that by sending a cruise missile to bomb the thing. Luck intervened, however, and the missile exploded a few feet away from the hotel, causing a large crater in the ground with little damage to the hotel itself. And this is how a war between the religions was avoided.

 

If anyone notices these things, it must be that they think of it as the high school mentality of American foreign policy, left as it was in the hands of the Jews who took command of it and began to throw their weight around. If you want to experience first-hand how high schoolish that is, two recent articles will give you a taste of it. You’ll remember it for a while before memory will fade away.

 

One article came under the title: “After Just One Month In Office, Biden Orders Airstrike In Syria,” written by Jordan Davidson, and published on February 26, 2021 in The Federalist. The other article came under the title: “Biden Fires a Warning Shot at Iran,” and the subtitle: “The US strike against Tehran's proxies in Syria indicates there will be no quick return to the 2015 nuclear deal.” It was written by Elliott Abrams, and published in National Review Online, also on February 26, 2021.

 

What you see in the Jordan Davidson article is not a discussion on the implication of the bombing, but a line of thought that goes like this: “See? He criticized Trump for doing it. He promised he'll never do it. And here he is, doing it. Ain't that somethin'? He's almost one of us now.” How much more high schoolish can it get?

 

As to the Elliott Abrams article, it shows that the author has tried to give a larger meaning to the bombing than was intended by the Biden administration. He first (kind of) congratulated Joe Biden for making the decision to bomb. He then spoke of his fears and hopes for what may come next. Here is a condensed version of the article's first part:

 

“After only a month in power, Biden has used military force in reaction to Iranian-sponsored attacks on Americans in Iraq. The strike hit Iraqi Shiite groups along the Iraqi-Syrian border. The Biden strike is a message to Iran. He chose a limited strike inside Syria rather than Iraq. There is a logic to this choice. First, US attacks inside Iraq would complicate life for Prime Minister Kadhimi, and spur the forces hostile to any US presence to demand that all US forces be expelled. Second, should Biden need to hit Iranian-backed forces again, this limited strike allows him to say he tried restraint and it failed”.

 

By describing the attack without criticizing it, and then expressing understanding as to why it was conducted the way it was, Elliott Abrams went as far as he could to congratulate President Biden. And now, here is a condensed version of the second part of the Elliott Abrams article:

 

“But the strike inside Syria and at Iranian proxies may also send the message that the US will never hit Iran's proxies inside Iraq and that it will never hit Iran. Sooner or later these attacks will kill Americans. That's when the president will face the need to punish Iran and establish deterrence. The very least that can be said about President Biden's second month in power is that we are seeing any dreams of a quick return to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, and a quick resolution to US-Iranian confrontations dissolve before our eyes. The President's refusal to lift the sanctions and his willingness to use force against Iranian proxies suggest a more realistic assessment of Iran than many feared”.

 

As can be seen, Elliott Abrams's fears are these: Biden will never hit Iranians in Iraq or Iran. There may not be a quick return to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, but unfortunately this will happen.

 

And the following are his hopes: He relishes the idea that sooner or later, Americans will get killed, and Biden will be forced to punish Iran. He hopes that confrontation between America and Iran will never dissolve. And he hopes that Biden will continue to use the military to hit Iran with lethal force.

America must cease being a Democracy of cowardly Thieves

 If you rob a bank, a store or a private home, you're a thief. If you team up with someone, and working together, commit robbery, you are both thieves.

 

If your friend stays at home, you do the robbery and hide the spoils in his place, you're a thief and he is an accessory to thievery. If he finances your operation and gives you the material and logistical support you need to carry out the heist, he is the enabler of the operation, and will most likely be charged with crimes that exceed what you'll be facing.

 

Do you know why he is liable to face a more severe punishment than you? Because he'll be viewed as a coward by the police, the prosecutors and the judges who will handle the case. These people will instinctively be inclined to see him as an accomplice to the crime; one who is as guilty as you for the robbery, in addition to being the cowardly individual that’s hiding behind you, thinking he can be safe this way.

 

What's this about, you ask? Well, let me tell you. It's about the relationship in which America finds itself with the group of fanatic Jews who are telling it how she must treat them, treat Israel and treat the rest of the world. This is especially true when it comes to the subjects that relate to the theft of Palestine by Jews who go there from around the world, especially America, to steal from people that cannot defend themselves.

 

They are financed, armed, logistically supported and protected by America, which is what makes the superpower the cowardly enabler of crimes committed against the Palestinian people by the multitude of foreigners who were raised in the morality of gore, blood and mayhem as horrifying as the worst you'll find in the Old Testament, the book they think of as their bible.

 

To find out how the fanatic Jews of America were able to transform that country from being the shiny light on the hill to the purveyor of darkness around the globe, you may want to read and study the article that came under the title: “Why We Should Care About Palestinian Unilateralism at the ICC,” and the subtitle: “If the American media and the US government truly want to combat unbridled unilateralism that undermines peace, then highlighting the Palestinians' legal warfare against Israel is the first place to start.” It was written by Eitan Fischberger and published on February 25, 2021 in The National Interest.

 

Steeped in the habit of using America like a hammer with which to kneecap the victims they plan to plunder rather than sit with to negotiate and make equitable deals, Eitan Fischberger is calling on the moral prostitutes that fill America's media and political circles to get ready once again to do the same whorish dance of liberal democratic cowardice that has been sending America down the tube to the Jewish sewer.

 

The occasion this time, is that the Palestinians got fed-up waiting for America to stop helping Israel maintain the occupation, the end of which was supposed to happen eons ago as stipulated in the Oslo Accords. Having tried all other alternatives to convince Israel it was time to get out of their homes, the Palestinians latched onto the alternative of last resort. They went to court seeking relief.

 

And that's when Jewish Central commissioned Eitan Fischberger, telling him to call on the army of moral prostitutes in America, instructing it to get ready for yet another kneecap operation. The aim this time is to protect Israel from having to explain its demonic reasons for maintaining the occupation, which it will be required to do when the International Criminal Court begins the proceedings.

 

What you'll discover in the article are the methods used by the Jews to drag America into their sewer. Here is a condensed version of a pertinent passage highlighting one such method:

 

“The mainstream American media have echoed claims that Israeli unilateralism undermines the cause of peace. However, unlike the swift remarks issued by the media and administration regarding potential Israeli settlement expansion in the West bank, they have been reticent about the Palestinians' unilateral actions at the ICC, which recently determined it had jurisdiction to investigate Israel's settlement activity, despite Israel not having joined the Court”.

 

To appreciate what Fischberger is communicating here, imagine a home invasion in the messed-up kingdom of mutilated logic. The kingdom is patrolled by the self-appointed sheriff named America. He is called to the home in question where he finds that the perpetual thief has occupied half the house, and battling its owners for the rest of it. The sheriff tells both sides to cease fighting, and to refrain from taking any unilateral action that might restart the fight. And he promises that soon, very soon, he'll find an equitable resolution to the situation.

 

The owners waited and waited and waited for that resolution, but saw no sign that one was forthcoming. Tired of waiting, they decided to take their case to court. So, guess what happened? The perpetual thief complained that refraining from taking a unilateral action did not mean stop fighting; it meant do not take the case to court. And he wants the self-appointed sheriff to help kneecap the owners on their way to court, before they get there.

 

There was a time when the politico-journalistic dumbos of America were so impressed by that kind of logic, they would destroy America's reputation throughout the world to give the Jews anything they asked for. Apparently, this is no longer the case. But just in case; let us pray they don't have a relapse.

She is Proof that Madness is contagious

 Is it possible that someone visiting a sanatorium often and spending time there, will catch the ongoing mental illness and become mad? Apparently, it is.

 

There is evidence to that effect in the article that Victoria Coates has written under the title: “Biden administration shouldn't be negotiating with Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA,)” and the subtitle: “It should designate MFA as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), using the facts.” The article was published on February 23, 2021 in The Washington Times.

 

Considering that most of the world and the majority of the American electorate have thought of the Donald Trump administration as a madhouse, and considering that Victoria Coates is now exhibiting signs of madness, it stands to reason that she caught the mental illness by frequenting the White House. The alternative to this deduction is to think that Trump's residence and workplace was sane till Victoria Coates started to visit the building where she was supposed to do work, and perhaps play political games too.

 

Whatever Victoria Coates was doing, she could have transmitted the disease to the other dwellers, effectively turning the White House into a real Madhouse. But, like the saying goes, where's the beef? The answer to that question is to be found in the following condensed passage, excerpted from Coates's article:

 

“Recent reports reveal that Obama administration officials worked actively to preserve the Obama nuclear deal. On three occasions, John Kerry met with Javed Zarif to persuade him to keep the deal on life support so a future Democrat administration could return to compliance with it. Now that Joe Biden is in office, the new administration needs to understand the region in 2021 is not what it was when the deal was struck in 2015. Rather than seeing things for what they were six years ago; they may want to engage in a reality check before entering into any agreements”.

 

So, the first thing that Victoria Coates wants to do now, is tell the Biden administration that things are so different today from what they were six years ago, what was kosher then is no longer kosher today because things have changed much –– and changed for the worse. She adds: And if you don't believe me, Mr. President, consider that those of us who worked for Donald Trump have been saying all along that the nuclear deal was so bad, it should never have been negotiated. However, when proven wrong by a situation that was made worse by our actions, we recognized that we spread falsehoods over many years. And this should be your proof that we are correct now in saying that what was good then, is no good today.

 

In other words, she is saying: “What we did yesterday was so bad, it made matters worse. To fix things, we must not stop doing what we used to do, but must continue doing it.” And if this is not enough to convince you, dear reader, that the woman is a nutcase, look what else she has written to buttress the argument that things are worse today than they were before Donald Trump pulled out of the nuclear deal. In fact, not only did Trump do that, as she admits, he also instituted the infamous maximum pressure campaign against Iran. Here is an abbreviated passage of what Victoria Coates wrote in this regard:

 

“Decision-makers in the Iranian regime have aggressively ramped up terrorist activities in recent years. In 2019, the Trump administration listed the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, the first time the US had so sanctioned an official foreign military. The February 16, 2021 attack on the International Airport in Erbil, as well as subsequent attacks on Balad Air base in Erbil and on our Embassy in Baghdad, are a deliberate escalation of IRGC terrorist activities”.

 

She is here admitting that Donald Trump's policies have backfired, making things worse than they were before. So then, what does she recommend? Believe it or not, her wacky logic has led her to recommend with a straight face, that the Biden administration should refrain from returning to the nuclear deal.

 

Having seen and studied all of that, is there anything in Victoria Coates's article that suggests what it is that sends some people so far off the mark, they are considered crazy to a dangerous level? The answer is, yes there is. To see it, consider this excerpt:

 

“There is pressure on the new administration to remove the IRGC from the FTO list as an incentive to bring Iran to the negotiating table. However, taking this step would only reward and incentivize more terrorism”.

 

Looking at the low intensity war that's ongoing between America and Iran, sane people see a kind of symmetry between the two combatants. They may be unequal when it comes to military strength, but each has the same rights and obligations under the rules of warfare.

 

But this is not how the crazies see things. It is that they have been indoctrinated in the belief that, “when we fight them, we engage in legitimate warfare. When they respond, they engage in illegitimate terrorism”.

 

This says that indoctrination has bifurcated the logic capability of these people. When they see two individuals fight –– one they like and one they don’t –– they do not see two humans. They see one human fighting something, perhaps a subhuman.

 

It must be said this is a doctrine that was injected into the American culture of equality and meritocracy by the Judeo-Yiddish culture of exclusiveness. The reality is that the Americans no longer see each other as indivisible, and going through life on a single track.

 

Rather, the Americans see life rolling on two tracks: There is the track on which I, and my kind travel. And there is the track on which my enemies travel.

 

What they do not see is the abyss at the end of the track they are on.

Advocating endless wars by speculation and false analogy

 When they started preaching to the choir, the full membership of the choir became intrigued and attentive. When the preaching became repetitive and tedious, it happened that one by one, the choir turned their backs on the tired and incoherent preachers.

 

This should help understand how it happened that standing against endless wars has gained such momentum that Clifford D. May had no choice but to take a risk with reviving arguments that were debunked many times over, and repeat them endlessly. He did so recently in a column he wrote under the title: “Biden must deter and not appease Moscow, Beijing, Tehran, and Pyongyang,” and the subtitle: “Concessions don't actually conciliate despots.” It was published on February 23, 2021 in The Washington Times.

 

Once again, to advance the theory that endless wars are good for America and the world, Clifford May has relied on the false analogies that apply to Israel rather than its enemies. He also relied on the speculations that were generated in most part by the comical foundation (sometimes referred to as FDD) which he created to make the world laugh at the way that democracies are supposedly defended.

 

Until the situation changed, there was no push-back in the past against Clifford May and those like him for mentioning the events that unfolded in the 1930s, and mutilating history in the process. These folks were taking liberty to say and endlessly repeat that Hitler attacking his neighbors and annexing their lands was imitated in modern times, not by Israel that keeps attacking its neighbors and annexing their lands, but the neighbors who run to the United Nations (UN) asking for relief, rather than accept the reality the Jews are superior to the Palestinians, like say the morons whom the Jews hire to repeat such horrible things. Apparently, they thought that these pronouncements made the Jews of Israel eligible to push the Palestinians out of their homes using American weapons, while being protected in the UN Security Council by the American veto of disgrace.

 

In fact, repeating the false analogy, is how Clifford May started his newest column. He began it by asking a question: “We all disprove of appeasement, right?” He went on to explain that appeasement was the result of Chamberlain meeting Hitler and making concessions to him. And all the horrors that happened after that, says Clifford May, happened because of that single act of appeasement. He went on to say that today, America under Joe Biden, is planning to appease most of the world powers, not because any of them is annexing the lands of others, but because they are calling on America to stay home and stop feeding the Israeli war machine that keeps expanding Israel’s size with the territory it grabs from the neighbors.

 

And then, in a sleight of hand that is truly amazing, Clifford May used the saying attributed to Winston Churchill about feeding a crocodile in the hope that it will eat you last. And he made it sound like appeasing the world by leaving everyone alone, America may be the last that the mythical crocodile will want to eat … but will eat, make no mistake about that.

 

Clifford May concocted the above analogy oblivious of what people like yours truly and others have warned, which is that America is feeding the Judeo-Israeli crocodile with Palestinians who cannot defend themselves in Palestine, while feeding the crocodilian Jewish organizations with citizens of Arab and Muslim descent that have no means to defend themselves in North America. The warning was to the effect that blacklisting was done of Arabs and Muslims who wish to contribute to the cultural, political and diplomatic life of the country. It also entailed the harassment and kneecapping that's done––not directly by the Jews––but by government-bankrolled lackeys of the Jews such as those operating in the security apparatus of the country, who are bribed to do the dirty work for the Jews.

 

For too long, the governments of North America, not only let the Jews make a mockery of the adage, equal justice and protection for all, but played along with the Jewish organizations to win favors with what they thought was a Jewish voting bloc that will support them at election time. The result has been that the Jewish vote counted for no more than the dropping of a bird in national elections, but the effect of the governments playing the Jewish game has resulted in the strangulation of the system of governance they call liberal democracy when in reality, the system is no longer liberal or democratic but despotic and rabbinic-autocratic.

 

As to Clifford May's reliance on speculation to arrive at the conclusions that he did, what he relied on came in the form of a report that was prepared by a character who was called a pile of rotten meat because of the policies he advocated. Clifford May also relied on a report that was prepared by none other than the comical foundation he continues to run. Here is what he said on both occasions:

 

1.         Sen. Tom Cotton released a report on 'Targeted Decoupling and the Economic Long War' with Beijing. It should be required reading within the Biden administration.

 

2.         The quotes are from 'Defending Forward. Securing America by Projecting Military Power Abroad,' a recently released FDD monograph that should be required reading within the Biden administration as well.

 

Thus, speculation and false analogies seem to be the new way by which Clifford May and those like him, will continue to advocate the involvement of America in endless wars that benefit Israel and the ego of Jews who take pride in making America do the work while they collect the spoils.

A Commonsense Citizenship Loyalty Test

 Suppose you're a consummate tinkerer, and one day it occurs to you that you should commercialize your talent and monetize your inventions by mass producing the products you invent, and selling them.

 

You start a company and take the necessary precautions to keep your inventions secret till the products are ready to go on the market.

 

Despite all of this, and despite patenting your products before they go out of the plant, it becomes evident that your rival knows enough about what you're doing, he comes up with a similar product at the same time as you or at times, even a day before you. Knowing that he does not have a Research and Development department that comes close to yours, you suspect that someone in your company is so disloyal that he or she is giving your secrets to your rival. They would be doing it despite the fact that they all signed a pledge not to discuss the work they do with anyone outside the walls of the company.

 

You know there are only three individuals in your company that have the knowledge to betray you, and so you devise a number of little tricks to find out which of the three it is. You come up with no result and realize that you were not cut out to do this kind of work, thus hire a firm of professional investigators to come up with answers. Unfortunately, however, they too come up with no evidence that would incriminate any of your suspected employees. What now?

 

It is approaching the noon hour, you just got the news that the investigators have nothing to report, and you are frustrated. You decide to take a break, go for a two-martini lunch and invite your secretary to come along. She is aware of what you've been doing lately but does not have the full story. So, you talk to her about it, and she says you went about this thing the wrong way. You ask how she would have done it, and she says you did not have to do anything. She explains, it is so because on a daily basis, the culprit is revealing himself. How is that? you ask, and she says one of the three you suspect, never stops criticizing you or the company while at the same time praising your rival. He must be the one stabbing you in the back.

 

And that, my dear reader, is a metaphor reflecting the Jewish members of the mob who never stop promoting Israel while criticizing America for refusing to boost Israel's interests more than it does, fearing that it might hurt its own people. These Jews are the disloyal traitors who reveal themselves with every word they write and every one they utter on the electronic and cyber media. Two examples follow.

 

The first example is an editorial of the Washington Examiner that came under the title: “Biden Bends to the ayatollah,” published on February 23, 2021. Here are excerpts from that piece of work:

 

“Press secretary Jen Psaki said, 'obviously, diplomacy is a priority.' There is great folly on display here. America is so desperate for the ayatollah's favor that it will tolerate his murder of US citizens. Unfortunately, that's just the start. What on Earth is the Biden administration thinking? Biden is dancing to Iran's tune, and squandering the leverage bequeathed to him by his predecessor. Biden is offering the country a gift and having nothing to show for it”.

 

No one that is a true patriot speaks of his country in this tone of voice, painting a picture of its leaders that is so demeaning, you would think he/she is describing the affairs of a primitive colony that has ceased to behave as well as it should, and needs to be re-educated.

 

The second example is a caustic article by Dominic Green that came under the title: “Biden is set to repeat Obama's Mideast failures –– and wipe out US influence,” published on February 21, 2021 in The New York Post. Here are excerpts from that diatribe:

 

“Who lost Israel? This time, America will be losing the region as a whole. Team Biden is bent on reviving the Iran deal at all costs. The costs include turn away from the Jewish state. The Obama-Bidenites will accept any humiliation from Tehran and call it a diplomatic breakthrough. Team Biden inherits the ignorance and arrogance that led to Obama having his nose rubbed in the desert sand by Ayatollah Khamenei. The prime minister of Israel has had to wait for his call from Biden. Netanyahu would prefer to deal with Putin than with Biden. The question is more like, 'Is the US losing the entire Middle East?' And the answer is yes. That prospect alarms American Jews. Israel will be fine without Washington. The United States won't be fine: It will be reduced to a decaying, irrelevant power”.

 

This is in-your-face denigration of America done in a manner that is so clear and deliberate, the author means to convey the truth about never seeing himself as a loyal citizen of America because his heart has always been in Israel. And all this, despite the fact that he always lived in America, demanded and received the protection, as well as all the rights and privileges he has been getting under the pretense of being a loyal citizen.

 

America needs to stop being a sucker in the service of those that have been rejected by humanity everywhere they went, whenever they went.

To them, every Fight is a Fight to the Death

 What's the difference between getting the hint and getting the message? You get a hint when something that is subtle does not escape your attention. You get the message when something addressed to you must be forcefully stated to catch your attention.

 

What if the thing still does not catch your attention? In this case, there is a short story that tells how normal people view the situation. Because it is believed that the mule is the most difficult animal to alert, the way to catch its attention, is to hit it on the head with a two by four … so goes the story.

 

Okay; that's good to know. But what if that does not catch someone's attention either? Well then, in this case, the chances are that you're trying to catch the attention of a Jew. And let me tell you, that's a tough nut to crack. However, you must differentiate between the rank-and-file Jews who are making the effort to join the human race by being like everyone else, and the fanatic Jews who continue to believe they were chosen by God to own the planet and everything in it.

 

The latter kind are tuned to their inner voice at the exclusion of everything else. They hear the talk that has indoctrinated them since childhood, and believe it is the voice of God. And no matter what you do to catch their attention, you can be certain they will not turn away from what they believe is God, to listen to you.

 

The way this attitude is expressed in real life, is that the people who embrace it, continually demand being accorded the privileges enjoyed by others, but not the obligations that come with them. This is why you see the mob of Jewish pundits and the foot soldiers they command, always demand the enactment of Jew-specific laws granting them new privileges. They ask for it on the ground that they are a special case, and that such laws will help foster a better understanding between them and the rest of society. They keep demanding, in fact, despite knowing that nobody is fooled by such assertions and that everyone knows these laws cause the opposite effect of what they are expected to accomplish.

 

Instead of doing what normal people do, which is to accept the inevitable, get used to it and put the ordeal behind them, the fanatic Jews keep fighting to the death. They always work on having the laws that do not suit them repealed or at least amended. And as you may have guessed, the law is not the only practice the Jews seek to refashion and make it serve their causes. There is the matter of foreign policy, which they feel is in their purview; a field they believe they are obligated to redo from top to bottom. This is especially true in their view because Israel has been added to the list of their responsibilities.

 

This brings us to an editorial of National Review Online (NRO). It came under the title: “Biden's Policy of Weakness Toward Iran,” and was published on February 21, 2021. The subject discussed by the editors is a complicated one because it is about survival. It involved half a dozen major powers who acted on behalf of humanity, and worked to resolve a nuclear issue that has been festering for at least a decade.

 

When you have a situation as delicate and as complicated as this, the last thing you want to do is add to the stress that's already burdening the negotiators. You want them to have a clear mind so that they can work calmly and arrive at the appropriate decisions. But it is obvious that the negotiators' peace of mind was not what the NRO editors had in mind. When you go over their piece of work, you are haunted by the image of Roman soldiers whipping slaves chained to the deck of a ship, and screaming at them: Faster, faster. Ramming speed, ramming speed.

 

The Jews have opposed the nuclear deal from the moment that 5 permanent members of the Security Council and Iran, started to negotiate. The Jews opposed the deal after it was signed, sealed and delivered. They took advantage of a deficiency in the system of governance called liberal democracy, and had one administration pull out of a deal that a previous administration spent much time and effort realizing for the sake of the human race, and all life forms on Planet Earth. 

 

And now that the mischievous administration has been tossed out of power by the voters, a move that brought back to power the administration that negotiated the deal, the NRO editors are at it again trying to fight to the death against the will of the billions who want nothing more than to live a nuclear free healthy life.

 

It is not too difficult to understand that after all what happened over the years, returning to the negotiating table will be an awkward undertaking. It is normal, therefore, that under such circumstances, the parties will begin talking their maximal positions before they sit down and compromise.

 

This is a time for the rest of us to keep quiet lest we derail the effort. The advice also applies to all those having a megaphone and the potential to cause mischief. But do you think the editors of NRO care about that? Not on your life. Look how they ended their editorial:

 

“Already, the Iranian foreign minister has reiterated his demands for sanctions relief as a prerequisite for any talks about US reentry into the deal. Unless Biden is forceful in pushing back on Iran's tests of his resolve, more will come”.

 

This is no time for outsiders to meddle. The two sides are engaged in the ritual dance that precedes getting to the table for a new round of hard negotiations. Leave them alone; they know what to do.

Time that you do the right Thing for the right Reasons, America

 It is human nature that when we speak of ourselves, we paint a picture that's prettier than we really are, especially if we believe no one knows of the dark side that we know exists in ourselves.

 

The same is true of organizations and nations. For example, spokespeople for an institution or a nation, only discuss the attractive side of what they represent while hiding the repulsive side. They do so even when they are confronted with questions concerning rumors that suggest there is more to the stories, they are telling than meets the eye.

 

Whereas this is normal, what begins to skew towards the abnormal, is the tendency of some individuals, institutions and nations to paint –– not the real picture of what they represent, or even a picture that's retouched and ameliorated but –– a completely reinvented picture of reality. A recent example of this tendency, is told by the following real story:

 

Evidence began to mount that the apparent rapprochement between a handful of Arab states and Israel, happened not because Donald Trump liaised between the two sides amicably, but because Trump saw the writing on the wall and feared losing re-election. To improve his chances at winning, he pressured Netanyahu of Israel to signal he'll accept the Arab Initiative that has been sitting on the table for nearly two decades. But none of that was told to the public. Instead, the fake story put out was to the effect that Donald Trump charmed both sides and made them love each other.

 

What really happened when Trump called Netanyahu, was that the latter detected Trump's panic and understood the urgency of the moment. He had no choice but to obey Trump's command without delay. However, the signal that Netanyahu sent out was done in bad faith, resulting in the suspension of activities in what they now call, “The Middle Eastern Realignment.” As to the suspension, it remains in force to this day despite the bribes that Trump has distributed among some Arab nations before leaving office.

 

Alarmed by the leaks that tell how the story has actually unfolded, the drivers of the Jewish propaganda machine changed the story they had been telling, lest they be labeled the lie machine. No, no, no, they now say, it was not Donald Trump who liaised between the two sides, it was Jared Kushner that mediated successfully between the two sides. And the machine does not explain how Kushner supposedly pulled the rabbit out of the hat.

 

This manner of handling the truth is such a prominent aspect of the Judeo-Yiddish culture, its American counterpart could not resist it––at least not in the political field––has adopted it and made it its own. You can see it utilized most poignantly in the places where the correct decision is taken for the wrong reasons. In fact, there is one such example we can parse.

 

However, let it be said at the outset that America and the world are lucky to have someone like Senator Chris Murphy who thinks as clearly as he does about the things that must be done to make the world a better place. He wrote an article to tell what America needs to do at this point in time, but as you'll see, while he is advocating the right thing, he is doing it based on stereotypes that have little or no resemblance to the situation on the ground.

 

The article that the Senator wrote came under the title: “America's Middle East Policy is Outdated and Dangerous,” and the subtitle: “A New Approach to the Gulf States Needs a Better Foundation.” It was published on February 19, 2021 in Foreign Affairs. You'll find that when it comes to the new relations America ought to have with the nations of the Persian Gulf, the Senator is advancing good and practical advice. The trouble is that he has an image of the region that is, in some of its parts, stereotypical and false. Here is a passage that gives an indication as to how off the mark, the Senator has been:

 

“Declining oil revenues mean these nations will need to make hard choices. Given the conflicts and state control of local economies, attracting foreign investment to the region is largely a fantasy. If the Gulf wants to attract international investment, it must address crackdowns on political dissent and the lack of the rule of law. Serious outside private investment is unlikely as long as these nations torture political prisoners, maintain a draconian guardian system, and constantly harass dissidents abroad. The long-standing social bargain of no taxation, but no representation either cannot last. As population growth outstrips oil revenues, royal families will no longer be able to afford that payoff. Once subsidies atrophy but repression remains, a disastrous storm of unrest will brew”.

 

It is apparent that much of what Senator Chris Murphy believes about the Arab regimes, is the product of the various propaganda machines that sought to paint the Arabs as a bunch of dupes (perhaps camel driving hillbillies) that found themselves sitting on a large pool of oil.

 

Senator Murphy sees them bathed in wealth, living the good life, and unaware that all this will someday come to an end. They are not doing anything to prepare for that day, which is why someone (most certainly an American) must whisper in their ears what will happen if they fail to prepare for a future, they are incapable of fathoming given their limited level of comprehension.

 

Too bad Ross Perot, who once ran as a third-party candidate, is not alive today because if he were, he would have told Senator Chris Murphy what he knows about the Arab rulers.

 

In fact, he was so impressed by their intellect, he described them as seeing several steps ahead before making a move. And that’s different from what Senator Murphy was told about the Arab leaders.

Bailey throws a false Accusation at Lucasfilm

 It has long been accepted by thoughtful people that left to the Jews, the phenomenon of anti-Jewish pogroms and holocausts will never be explained or understood in such a way as to start a process that will lead to the prevention of future pogroms and holocausts.

 

But why can't the rest of humanity explain this phenomenon, and start a debate that might highlight possible solutions, and go from there? Well, the reality is that this too was made impossible by the attitude of the Jews whose approach clearly indicates they will neither resolve the problem nor let others resolve it.

 

It happened that every time someone started a meaningful debate about the subject, the Jews came down on their head like the Sword of Damocles and canceled them, never to be heard from them again. And then it happened that the candidate to start a meaningful debate was a powerful organization; the kind that the Jews cannot cancel with a phony accusation, a scary blackmail or a visit to a hungry congressional zombie.

 

That organization turned out to be Lucasfilm that seems to have acted on the basis of, “You want to play the cancellation game? Well then, here is a cancellation for you.” Upon this, Lucasfilm fired an actress that saw similarities between the attack on conservatives in twenty first century America, and the attack on Jews in twentieth century Europe.

 

And this is where Beth Bailey picked up the thread, supposedly to continue the debate that was started by Lucasfilm about the events that have led to the Holocaust. But the bizarre thing is that Bailey picked up the thread not to continue developing the logic of the debate, but to accuse Lucasfilm of canceling the nascent debate/discussion. Here is how she did it: “The only thing Lucasfilm truly canceled was an opportunity for much-needed discussion about the Holocaust”.

 

That sentence, is what Beth Bailey inserted in the first paragraph of the article she wrote under the title: “Lucasfilm cancels an opportunity for Holocaust education,” and had it published on February 20, 2021 in The Washington Examiner. Bailey went from there to carry on with the one-sided kind of debate that the Jews will only tolerate. What kind is that, you ask? The kind you see here:

 

“A survey found that Holocaust education in the United States is lacking. More than 1 in 10 adults, and 1 in 5 millennials, had not heard of the Holocaust. 45% of adults and 49% of millennials could not name even one of the 40,000 camps and ghettos the Nazis operated during World War II. One-third of US adults and 41% of millennials believe fewer than 2 million Jews were killed during the Holocaust”.

 

As you can see, this is not meant to start a debate; it is more like a statement of claims for compensation that is yet to be filed. It is what Beth Bailey calls, “a much-needed discussion.” It is also a warning to anyone wishing to participate in this discussion, that to dare questioning or contradicting the number of Jewish victims approved by Jewish Central, will cause the Sword of Damocles to fall on your head. The same applies if you shrug off the significance of those numbers.

 

Now sensing that this is the sort of claim with the potential to make the American public resent the always acquisitive and never satisfied Jews, Beth Bailey sought to buy an insurance policy to protect against the State and Federal governments in America taking measures that will put a limit to Jewish appetite for more. To do so, she studied how Europe has dealt with a similar situation, and then warned against an American response that will most certainly resemble what she discovered was implemented in Europe. Here is how she formulated her warning:

 

“The Third Reich deprived Jews of their rights. Between 1933 and 1939, 400 official restrictions would oust Jews from German public life. By 1939, Jews could not sell guns or own carrier pigeons. They were prohibited from working in medicine, journalism, government service, and midwifery. They were barred from intermarrying with Aryans and were not allowed to attend public schools. They had to register all property worth more than 5,000 Reichsmarks, turn in all precious valuables, adopt the identifying middle names of Sara or Israel, and stamp their passports with the letter J”.

 

You don't need to be a genius to see why the Germans imposed those restrictions on the Jews. It is obvious that the latter were then playing the game that their descendants are playing today. That is, they pretended to be loyal German citizens while using the strategic positions they were in, to serve (not Israel which did not exist at the time) but the idea of Zionism itself. They did so by being singularly loyal to World Jewry, which was the Jewish Central of the era.

 

Looking at this history, anyone sane would conclude that the solution to the “Jewish problem” lies in the Jewish leaders and Jewish parents ending the indoctrination of their children with principles that make them grow up thinking they are different from others or worse, superior to others.

 

But whereas some parents are no longer indoctrinating their children, preferring instead to let them blend in the society where they find themselves, the Jewish leaders are adamantly opposed to such pivot.

 

Not only that, but the Jewish leaders are asking the State and Federal governments of America to surrender the children of the nation to the rabbis so that they can raise them as philo-Semitic lackeys dedicated to serve the Jews and the Jewish causes; while serving nobody else and nothing else.

He's back carrying a Bagful of crappy Ideas

 Elliott Abrams –– whose star rose during the W. Bush years doing nothing more than bake shit pies for anyone that was hungry to see Israel call the land of neighbors “disputed land,” and emulate the Nazi practice of annexing it –– is back after a stint in the Donald Trump bakery where he experimented with, and perfected a number of new recipes to satisfy the variety of shitmongers in the Washington Beltway.

 

Having made a mess of America's foreign policy in Latin America, trying to turn the legitimate president of Venezuela into a “disputed president,” Abrams has rejoined the mob of Jewish pundits at a time when the preoccupation in Washington under a Joe Biden administration, is nothing less than the desire to fix the mess left behind by Abrams and his cohorts at the State Department. 

 

To mark the return to his old incarnation, Elliott Abrams wrote: “The Deterrent Message Iran Needs to Hear,” an article that also came under the subtitle: “The Biden administration can't let the latest Iran-backed attack on American forces in Iraq go unanswered,” published on February 16, 2021 in National Review Online.

 

Here is one of the cockamamie new recipes Elliott Abrams came up with: Let those in the Middle East and everywhere in the world, know that anyone wishing to see a war erupt between America and Iran –– can provoke such a war by “putting American lives at risk.” A single act of this sort will cause America to attack Iran because the baker of stinky pies wants it decreed that from now on, Iran will be presumed to have planned the anti-American act whenever it comes, in whatever form it comes and whomever claims to have planned it and committed the act.

 

As to you, my friend, if you ever wondered why it is that every recipe Elliott Abrams has come up with, caused your nostrils to revolt, here is his explanation for the way that things usually turn out when his pies are fed to those who know and those who don’t:

 

“Which Iran-backed militia carried out the attack is irrelevant because Iran controls them all. Proof can be found in the way such attacks appear to have been called off by Iran in October. Back then, Iran seemed to fear that if an American were killed and President Trump reacted against Iran, Trump might gain popularity and win reelection. Attacks by Shia groups in the pre-election period did not fall off because they ran out of ammunition or decided to take vacations; there is no other explanation except decisions made in Tehran”.

 

You could not get a clearer picture as to how a diseased mind staggers from one blunder to another, than what Elliott Abrams has just given. Here you see how a sicko considers that something is proof enough to attack a country like Iran. He reaches such conclusion knowing that the act he proposes is certain to result in a disruption of the region that's several times more damaging than what the Syrian civil war has produced, not just in the Middle East but Europe as well.

 

What you see in Abrams's picture, is him deciding to attribute to Iran what did not happen so that he may use the non-event as proof that Tehran controls every individual in Iraq. His stated intent has been to make Iran responsible for anything and everything that happens in Iraq. To get there, Abrams pretended to know with absolute certainty what stirs up the motivation of each player in the ongoing drama of his imagination. Here is a description of what he says is motivating each player:

 

(1) The fear that fills the hearts of Iran's rulers who know more than any American pollster what the voters of America feel, and how they will vote. (2) The analysis that volatile Donald Trump would have made, and the conclusion he would have reached, prompting him to attack Iran regardless of the consequences. (3) The ease with which millions of Americans can be transformed into single-issue voters by an act that Iran can commit as easily as lifting a finger.

 

But having gone through the contorted reasoning that a screwed-up mind can come up with, Elliott Abrams has tried to buttress his argument by repeating it. In so doing, he demonstrated that the pattern of militia attacks in Iraq is that they take place once every month or two. And that pattern did not change between election day in November of 2020 and the February attack in 2021. It happened that one attack took place while Donald Trump was president, and another attack while Joe Biden was president. Thus, Elliott Abrams has managed to expose and defeat his own lie while trying to embellish it.

 

So, the baker of shit pies is back, and he will again make every healthy nostril, revolt by the stinky smell of his craft. Whether he is in power such as he was during the Bush and Trump eras, or whether he is among the mob of Jewish pundits when he is out of power, he created a legacy forged in decisions that turned out to be ill-advised, and theories that turned out to be baseless.

 

Lest his effort seep through to the oval office from under the door when no one is watching, those guarding that office must diligently watch for and smell for any shit pie that’s trying to contaminate their environment.

Playing the game of cannibalistic revanchism

 Do you remember the old story about the prostitute who lives in a gated, upscale suburban neighborhood while earning a good living working as a prostitute in the red-light district of the big city?

 

She does not want the neighbors to know she is a prostitute, and to make sure they never will, she regularly points the finger at a stranger that happens to walk by, and accuses her of not being a virgin. With this trick, the prostitute cements in the minds of her neighbors, the idea that she is herself a virgin. And because they believe she is a virgin the neighbors never guess she may be a prostitute.

 

That would be the kind of social game that a physical prostitute would want to play. But let it be known that something similar happens among the moral prostitutes of the world. There happens to be plenty of them within the mob of Jewish American pundits who fill the editorial rooms of the nation's media outlets. You'll find a few of the quintessential kind at the New York Post, who once again have proven how solidly they occupy the highest designation of the oldest trade.

 

Their latest display of the prowess with which they were endowed when it comes to misrepresenting the reality of a situation –– has come in the form of a piece that was written under the title: “New hate-mongering scandals at the UN agency that Biden means to send millions.” It was penned by none other than the editors themselves, and published on February 17, 2021 in the miserable rag they call New York Post.

 

Well, my friend, let that simmer in your head for a moment, and recall the fact that when the Germans occupied France, an ordeal that lasted only two years, the French men who were caught collaborating with the Germans, faced the firing squad, whereas the women had their heads shaved. Also, bear in mind that when there was a vocal peace movement in Israel, the male members of the group were called Fascists and Nazis, whereas the female members were called, Arafat's prostitutes.

 

Why is this important to recall at this time, you ask? It's important because the editors of the New York Post begin their discussion with a paragraph that goes like this: “President Biden means to reinstate funding to UNRWA, an agency that teaches Palestinian children to hate the enemy Israel and that Jihad [Arabic for striving to improve the self] is the road to glory”.

 

First of all, we note that in a war situation, nobody loves their enemy. The French did not like the Germans during the Second World War, and the Israelis do not like the Palestinians to this day. It must therefore be that when the editors of the Post accuse the Palestinians of hating the Jews, they are acting like the red-light prostitute who lives in an upscale neighborhood and wants to be thought of as a virgin.

 

Still, you want to be fair to the editors of the Post, and so you decide to read the rest of their piece so as to assess how virulent the teaching they refer to has been, and perhaps see justification in their apparent outrage. But guess what, my friend. You won't believe what you'll see with your eyes for, here is what the editorial crackpots consider to be Palestinian teaching of hate:

 

“A math problem asks the number of martyrs from the first intifada. An exercise includes the sentences, 'the occupier commits torture' and 'we are an occupied people.' A lesson has kids write a text saying, our Arab relatives have sadly recognized our enemies and began interacting with them. Also, one day our enemies will be banished, God willing, as failing losers. A history lesson asks students to name a Palestinian village destroyed by the Israeli occupation. Israel is referred to as the enemy, the Israeli occupation or the Zionist occupation. No maps in the materials even show the Jewish state”.

 

And this is what the Jewish pundits of America have been blowing their entrails out of their bellies, hollering into the ears of the Beltway zombies, the phony cry that the Palestinian Authority and UNRWA are teaching the children of Palestine how to grow up and become terrorists.

 

And this is the mentality that has prompted the savage mob to conclude their editorial with these words of infamy: “Donald Trump was right to cut off funding to UNRWA, which devotes most of its budget to education. Biden ought to rethink his plan to reverse that: These hatemongers don't deserve a dime”.

 

Now think about something that is extremely serious, but before you do that, I recommend that you fill the bathtub with warm water in case your spine chills to near the absolute zero temperature, and turns frail like the wings of a butterfly.

 

Here comes the chilling part: Some States in the American Union were persuaded by the mob to hand the children of the state to the horrible creatures for the purpose of teaching them subjects that relate to the Holocaust.

 

Do you know what this is about, my friend? It's about the Jewish cultural requirement to always seek cannibalistic revanchism when they lose a round.

 

The best example of that, is when they lost the battle trying to convince Bush 41 that he should invade Iraq. When he didn't, they waited till they could get his feeble-minded son––known as the W––elected president, and had him invade Iraq.

 

Well, the Jews of the mob feel they are losing the America they thought they had conquered for good. And so, they now seek to have a revanchist round by raising America's children to a feeble-minded state, and have them do to the world what the W did to Iraq and the Middle East.

 

And there are plenty of feeble-minded Ws in the corridors of American political power, who will say: Yes, master Jew. We hear and we obey.

WHO & UNHRC rid of the world's only colonial despotic regime

 Under normal circumstances you'd rejoice if the difficult child you begot would leave home as a teen, thus relieve you of having to spend countless years turning a little demon into a big angel.

 

For complex reasons, however, the United Nations (UN) that begot Israel, cannot bring itself to rejoice seeing its creation drift away like a wayward child who relishes the vagabond life. It is that we live in a hypersensitive epoch where the nerves of the system that allows us to function as a single organism, are exposed and liable to react destructively to the slightest provocation.

 

Still, the UN came into existence to fulfill a task that was dictated by the events which marred the first half of the twentieth century. It was to offer a forum for everyone –– regardless of who they are –– to be at the table as equals even if A thought that B was a charlatan who shouldn't be there, and B thought that A was a charlatan who shouldn't be there.

 

Of course, this does not preclude the nations of the world from dealing with each other anyway they see fit, once they are outside the halls of the UN. But the iron rule has been that the delegates must check their prejudices at the door before entering the building where one system of governance cannot pretend to be superior to another. And neither can one member reprimanded another while praising the self.

 

That mentality being the disease that turned the first half of the twentieth century into a bloodbath, to bring it into the halls of the UN would be to defeat the purpose for which the world organization was created. And yet, despite the fact that it was the UN that created Israel out of pity, it was Israel that started to point the finger at others, accusing them of being unfit to remain members of the UN agencies. Worse, Israel has tried to drag others into its demonic schemes, and has succeeded in dragging America some of the time. This happened during the moments when that country was administered by a braindead zombie.

 

But how did Israel convince even a braindead to go along with its schemes? We can see how this was accomplished when we read the article that came under the title: “Despots dominate the WHO and the UNHRC,” and the subtitle: “American engagement alone cannot fix the UN agencies.” The article was written by Clifford D. May and published on February 16, 2021 in The Washington Times.

 

You'll find that the writer has used a good part of the article at the start of his discussion to accuse, insult, put down or denigrate the nations which are on Israel's blacklist. He did so, having ignored those that used to be on the list for not being “liberal enough,” even though they haven't changed one iota since that time. Well, to be accurate, it must be specified that they did change, but only in the sense that they are now willing to shake hands with a Jew whereas they were not in the past.

 

And so, it is with that level of intellectual knavery that Clifford May moved on to the second part of his presentation. Mindful that President Joe Biden has made the decision to rejoin WHO and UNHRC and that he will not back off, Clifford May began that part of his presentation with this question: “Why not demand reforms in exchange for American participation?” And he elaborated on the idea as follows:

 

“Why not insist that the UNHRC stop treating Israel as its whipping boy, year after year issuing more condemnatory resolutions against the Jewish state than any other country? The UNHRC aims to de-legitimize Israel, even as Iran's rulers threaten and incite genocide against that nation –– a violation of international law about which the UNHRC is silent”.

 

What you see in that passage are the four steps the Jews utilize in one form or another to impress the feeble minds of the American political establishment, causing them to dance to the tune of the Jew who comes singing to them contrived rhymes of endless flattery.

 

The first step consists of complaining that Israel is being treated differently from the others. The Jews do this to hide the fact that Israel is behaving differently from everyone else. Their ultimate aim is that they want the world to ignore the reality that Israel has revived the abhorrent practice of colonialism, and the Nazi practice of annexing the lands of neighbors.

 

The second step is to throw into the conversation a meaningless concept that distracts the already enfeebled minds of the Washington Beltway, causing them to fall into a state of stupor, thus become susceptible to believe that the UN which created Israel, is trying to delegitimize Israel ... whatever that means.

 

The third step it to put out lies of the kind that accuse others of what the Jews see when they look in the mirror. Thus, whereas they are the ones who constantly talk about bombing Iran, and the ones who constantly incite the Americans to maintain all options on the table, the Jews falsely accuse Iran of issuing threats and incitements.

 

Fourth, they accuse Iran of violating international law when the reality is that it is Israel that’s swimming in a sea of law violations.

 

Clifford May ends his discussion by asking this question: “You think most people around the world see through the lies?” It seems he is worried people around the world might see what he and those of his ilk see when they look in the mirror.

Neocon Style broken Logic right out of Hell

 Let me ask you something: What do you take away from a proposition that goes like this: “We lose more Americans in traffic accidents every day than have died engaging in this activity … or that one”?

 

Well, any sane person answering this question will say that the proposition implies, it is kosher to engage in one activity or another if it results in a smaller number of dead Americans than “we” lose in traffic accidents every day. And so, you ask yourself, “Is this a proper criterion by which to weigh the correctness of engaging in activities known to result in dead Americans”?

 

A sane person would think to himself: No; that’s not proper. In fact, this is nothing short of madness, and anyone making a suggestion of this sort should be told to seek the help of a mental health professional. Well then, maybe someone should talk to Gary Anderson. It is that he spoke the unspeakable in an article he wrote under the title: “Time for the U.S. to reconsider peace deal in Afghanistan,” published on February 15, 2021 in The Washington Times.

 

Adhering to the Pax Americana agenda of the neocons, which recommends the stationing of American troops everywhere in the world, especially the Arab and Muslim countries, Gary Anderson was so horrified by the thought that President Joe Biden might withdraw the troops from Afghanistan, he found the argument he thought will convince the President to keep the troops where they are. And so, Gary Anderson wrote that because more Americans die in American traffic than die in the Afghan war, it stands to his kind of reason that American troops should stay in Afghanistan.

 

This is such an astounding thing to say, it could be that Gary Anderson invoked the crazy argument because another argument that's already in circulation, has gotten nowhere trying to spread nonsense. And so, Anderson used the crazy argument anyway, but it too fell flat. As you’ll see, it is a two-parts contention, and here is how goes the first part of the argument that describes it:

 

“The US agreed to a peace deal in Afghanistan with the understanding that the Taliban would break relations with al Qaeda before we would withdraw the remainder of our troops. The Taliban have not held up their part of the bargain, and we should halt all further troop reductions until they fulfill their part of the agreement; it is as simple as that”.

 

And here is how the second part of the argument goes:

 

“We have built a working democracy –– however imperfect –– in Afghanistan. That democracy is supported by majority of citizens, most of them in major urban areas. The Taliban hate this and will continue to try to gain control of the country”.

 

Now you can appreciate why the argument that's in circulation fell flat. It is that, according to its content, the Taliban have the final say on the withdrawal of the American troops. For now, the Taliban choose not to break relations with al Qaeda or even pretend to, so as to keep the Americans where they are because the status quo suits their purpose.

 

But when the Taliban will feel that the Americans have served their purpose, like do all useful idiots at some point, those same Taliban will pretend to break relations with al Qaeda, will see the Americans out of their country once and for all, and will rekindle the relationship with their al Qaeda brethren. It is as simple as that, and yet it escapes mentalities of the Gary Anderson caliber.

 

As if this were not enough, Anderson ends his article on a truly bizarre note. Here is what he wrote:

 

“When we left South Vietnam in1973, we did so with assurances from the North Vietnamese that they never intended to keep. Today, there is no South Vietnam. We still have leverage to curb the worst angels of the Taliban's nature. We owe that much to the thousands who have died in the war”.

 

This is a massive triple blunder with which to end an article, like I've never seen before:

 

First, the truth is that the North Vietnamese never gave any kind of assurance to the Americans who were kicked out of South Vietnam, not in an orderly fashion as suggested by Anderson, but in the most humiliating manner you can imagine.

 

Second, Anderson laments that today, there is no South Vietnam. This is correct, there isn't, and that's a good thing. But look how much has been accomplished by a unified Vietnam. The country has even become one of America's best friends, and in some ways ally. To dislike an outcome such as that, is to reveal a disease of the spirit that is absolutely sickening. And Gary Anderson has made a virtue displaying his.

 

Third, Anderson is repeating the horrendous absurdity, brought into the American discourse by the neocons, that the way to honor the soldiers who died in a war, is to send more soldiers to die in the same war. And this too can only be the product of a diseased mind.

 

The man needs help, and someone close to him should bring it to his attention.

Will the Future see Trump's America or Biden's America?

 History has so evolved that America is currently undergoing a major transformation; one that will take time to disentangle and paint as a clear picture.

 

It will take time because the future that we cannot yet predict, will nevertheless identify the ongoing battle as unfolding between two competing images. There will be the Donald Trump image of an America that's engaged in fierce combat with the Joe Biden image of America. In the end, one of the two will come to symbolize the America of our time.

 

Because it would take an encyclopedia to draw up the complete picture of a nation as complex and varied as America, we must choose to work only on one aspect at a time. And so, I choose to discuss America's foreign relation as it applies to the Middle East, while concentrating on the subject of the Golan Heights.

 

I use as point of reference an article that came under the title: “Blinken's Worrisome Golan Heights Hedge,” and the subtitle: “Supporters of President Trump's decision to recognize Israel's claims to the territory are warning Biden not to reverse it.” The article was written by Jimmy Quinn, and published on February 12, 2021 in National Review Online.

 

What Israel is occupying at this time, is only a fraction of the Golan Heights it had conquered in 1967. A major part was retaken by Syria in the counteroffensive of 1973, leaving a thin sliver in the hands of the Israelis. Since that time, there has been attempts to negotiate a resolution to the dispute by the two parties on the basis of a quid pro quo.

 

However, this being the typical Jewish method of operation, it did not go well with the Syrians any more than it did with the Palestinians or any other group. In the end, the project failed to bear fruit because the Israelis entered the negotiations powered by a mentality that sees nothing wrong in robbing your property, holding it for ransom, and attempting to negotiate its return for something that's even more valuable. The Arabs just could not stomach the image of the Jew as being a gleeful thief, and having to negotiate with him.

 

In any case, this demonstrates that the claim of the Golan Heights remaining in the hands of the Israelis is a security issue for Israel –– is a bogus claim. In fact, Israel's continued expansion by robbing land from the neighbors under the pretext of enhancing its security, is what will decide if America will in the future be seen in the image of Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler or the image of Joe Biden and Dwight Eisenhower.

 

However, it must be said that nothing of what was discussed so far, is unusual when compared to what exists in the annals of history. If that's all there is to the story, future historians will not be shocked to know that the Jews have behaved as others before them. But that's not all there is to this story. Soon you'll see, what it is that makes the Jews unique and deserving to be singled out. You'll know that the culprit is the mentality that's powering their behavior. To see how that works, we look at the following passage in the Jimmy Quinn article:

 

“The question concerns the likelihood that Biden reverses Trump's decision. Kontorovich calls Blinken's comments a trial balloon, an effort to see what the reaction might be if Biden were to use unrecognition as a bargaining chip in negotiations with Iran. 'Here they're playing with something, which was not a card that was theirs to play,' Kantorovich said. It would be a radical policy”.

 

Bear in mind that Eugene Kantorovich is considered by the Jews to be the Cadillac of Jewish legal thinking. So, here you have a situation that encapsulates both sides of the same argument, and the Jewish top lawyer fails the logic of it miserably, making a twelve-year-old sound like a genius. Look closely and you'll see Kontorovich advance the idea that Biden could not unrecognize what Trump had recognized because it is not a card for Biden to play with? Okay Kontorovich, we hear you. But please explain how it is that the card came to be in Trump's hand in the first place? And why is it okay for Trump to do what Biden cannot undo?

 

This is the kind of pattern you'll see repeated in Kontorovich's legal writings. After viewing a few of his works, it'll dawn on you that Kontorovich does not live in a world populated by human being, including Jews. No, that's not how he thinks. Rather, Kontorovich lives in a world populated by Jewish humans and something else. It is something like White killers, diseased mice, Arab terrorists, playful monkeys, lazy Blacks, killer birds, useless Asians and what have you.

 

Kontrovich believes that when justice is administered, you must only consider the needs of the human Jews and nothing else. That's because in his view, anything else is not human enough to deserve justice … and there is no human that’s not a Jew.

 

This is why we dismiss Eugene Kontorovich as a lowlife rat. So should the Biden administration if it wants the future to see a Biden-Eisenhower America rather than a Trump-Hitler America.