You go on a vacation and return to your house after four years only to see that it has been wrecked. You find evidence that your neighbor must have been visiting it in your absence and so, you go see him to inquire as to what he knows about what happened.
You question him but realize
he is evading answering you directly, and you conclude that he had something to
do with the wrecking of your house. After all, he never liked the idea of you modernizing
it, replacing old fixtures with new ones and always being first to bring to the
house what new innovations come to market.
You tell him of your suspicion
about his role in wrecking your house, and he confesses. To defend himself, he
repeats the old arguments he used to make about your front door looking too
futuristic, your windows reflecting too much light instead of absorbing it,
your kitchen containing unnecessary appliances, and your bathroom looking like
you spent a Pentagon budget on it.
You tell him that's none of
his business. You had good reasons to want a modern home, you gave yourself
one, and he had no right wrecking it. You are determined to rebuild it and make
it look the way it did before you went on vacation, if not look even more
modern than before. He criticizes your thinking on the grounds that things have
changed so much in the last four years, you cannot go back to the status quo
ante because things will no longer fit together the way they did years ago.
To buttress his arguments, he
points to the front door and says what was futuristic years ago is now
obsolete. He points to the windows and says that today's Plexiglas absorbs
light instead of reflecting it. He points to the kitchen and says that instead
of one appliance for every task, new appliances perform many tasks. He points
to the bathroom and says that new gadgets allow for the saving of water and
energy like never before. You tell him to get lost and never go near your house
again.
As crazy as that metaphor may
sound, it closely reflects what two inmates of the Jewish Institute for
National Security of America (JINSA) came up with lately. To elaborate on what
they have in mind, they wrote an article under the title: “The US must not
rejoin the Iran nuclear deal,” written by Eric Edelman and Jonathan Ruhe. It
was published on March 21, 2021 in The Washington Examiner.
To add substance to your
perspective, it is worth recalling that the JINSA is the madhouse where, not
long ago, the inmates were calling on America to give Israel more than 20
billion dollars in cash, give the little fart enough military hardware to sink
it into the Mediterranean Sea, and give it the most advanced technological
innovations it could give to China in return for the latter letting the Jewish little
nothing, participate in the mega projects that China is implementing in the
developing world.
What Edelman and Ruhe want now
is that the Joe Biden administration abandon the idea of returning to the Iran
nuclear deal. They say that if there were good reasons to enter into such a
deal in the past, those reasons have now vanished because of the wrecking that
people like the JINSA did to the deal, giving destructive advice as they did to
the Trump administration during the four years that it was in power.
Knowing that their desires
will never be fulfilled, Eric Edelman and Jonathan Ruhe end their article by
advising the Joe Biden administration to toughen its stance, thus force Iran
into a new deal that's more favorable to Israel. But if this will never happen,
and instead of cracking, Iran will get even stronger as it has done during the
reign of Donald Trump, what do the JINSA inmates expect to accomplish?
To answer that question, it
must be said that the Jews do not expect to accomplish a goal with every scheme
they cook up. They have a vision of a preordained ultimate goal that was chosen
for them by God thousands of years ago. It is to own the entire planet and all
its content. What the Jews are required to do is examine every act that might
carry weight, and ask themselves: Is it good for the Jews in the sense that it
will serve the ultimate goal toward which they all work? If the answer is yes,
they go ahead and do the act no matter what the consequences will be in the
short term … be that a pogrom, a holocaust or whatever.
Note that the question: Is it
good for the Jews? is what they used to ask before the creation of Israel.
Whereas they may, once in a while still ask that question now, they are more
likely to ask: Is it good for Israel? If the answer is yes, they'll do it even
in the face of mounting resentment to their behavior in America, and most
everywhere else in the world.
In fact, the existence of
Israel encourages the Jews to do the things they were inhibited from doing
previously because they believe they now have a place to which they can run and
be protected if their behavior causes another pogrom or holocaust.
What the self-appointed Jewish
leaders do not realize in all of this, is that thanks to the nonsense of the
Trump era, a good part of the Jewish rank-and-file no longer believes in the
promise of an ultimate reward.
In fact, more and more ordinary Jews are choosing to live the ordinary life than bask in the false promise of a mythical tomorrow that will turn them into kings, queens, princes and princesses meant to reign over an obedient humanity of domestic servants who will work solely to please the Jewish masters.