Tuesday, June 1, 2021

Monkeys having a Field Day in the Jungle

 Are monkeys smart enough to rate the IQ of humans? Well, you may not find monkeys on this Planet of the Humans known as Earth, who will want to talk about that. But we found two on the Planet of the Monkeys who were engaged in a conversation that hints at some interesting clues regarding this matter.

 

You may not know it, but in the imagination of fiction writers where anything is possible, there exists a planet that is the twin of the Earth. Something happened not long ago, and the monkeys on that planet began to develop language similar to humans. They did not replace humans, mind you, but learned to live with them as third-class citizens, doing the kind of work that humans cannot do as well, such as climb trees and harvest fruits like coconuts and dates.

 

On that planet, each human family of the Chosen is given a large swath of land called a fiefdom where they live with second-class commoners named Goyim and a number of hard-working monkeys. Other commoners have fiefdoms as well, but not as big as those of the Chosen. And they too have monkeys that help them do the work they cannot do as well.

 

The monarchy that runs the affairs of the Planet, owns half the lands of the planet where the fiefdoms collectively make up the other half. Being a benevolent Goyim elected by the masses to be King of the Planet, the monarch has set aside a large swath of his land, and turned it into a playground for the monkeys. He also decreed that all human commoners and all monkeys shall have a day off each week, for the humans to worship their gods as they wish, and for the monkeys to have a field day in the playground that’s exclusively assigned to them.

 

It was in that playground that we met the two monkeys who were engaged in a conversation about the level of human intelligence. We caught the part of it that went like this:

 

MONKEY 1: So, you’re telling me, you really believe that your human master isn’t smart enough to even be a monkey. Is that it?

 

MONKEY 2: Yes, that’s what I believe, because he had the opportunity to do the right thing, but did the wrong thing instead.

 

MONKEY 1: What exactly should he have done, that he didn’t do in your estimation?

 

MONKEY 2: He should have planted his land with banana and nut trees but he didn’t. Instead, he planted corn to feed the chicken, and vegetables of all kind to feed his human family.

 

MONKEY 1: Does it mean, you believe that planting the foods monkeys love to eat, would have proved him smart?

 

MONKEY 2: Yes, that’s what I believe. It would have made him look smart like a monkey. Instead, he now looks mediocre like do most humans.

 

MONKEY 1: I believe so too. And now I know what a smart monkey you are.

 

As to you my dear human reader, you’ll know what this is about when you read the Washington Times’ editorial that came under the title: “Iran nuclear deal, 2.0” and was published on May 30, 2021. To get you started, here is a condensed version of what came in that editorial:

 

“President Biden appears intent on reliving the Age of Obama. Since the latter’s tenure proved a study in mediocrity, worse things could happen. Like a burglar hectoring police return the tools of his trade, Tehran’s demands that the US indemnify financial losses suffered when Mr. Trump imposed economic sanctions. The US maximum pressure campaign reduced Iranian currency reserves from $120 billion to $4 billion. Ending sanctions could hand the Islamic Republic $90 billion in frozen assets, and restart the regime’s oil sales worth an estimated $50 billion annually. Netanyahu urged US Secretary of State not to rejoin the nuclear deal with Iran. The Islamic regime’s centrifuges are currently enriching uranium to 60 percent. The IAEA chief said: The Iranian program has grown, become more sophisticated so the linear return to 2015 is no longer possible”.

 

You’ll soon get a clear picture as to who the monkeys are and who the humans are in this analogy. Consider for example that the editors pointed to the Iranians demanding that they be indemnified for the losses they incurred when Donald Trump and his gang of madmen mugged Iran. What did the editors call the money that people earn selling their resources and the products they fabricate? The editors called them tools of a thief’s trade.

 

Think about it now. Given that America has more money than anyone, this can only make America the biggest thief in the history of Planet Earth. You must now admit, my friend, that the editors of the Washington Times could not have been very smart coming up with an analogy like this. Could they be representing the banana-eating monkeys in this saga?

 

Moreover, the editors of the Washington Times have accepted the notion that due to the sanctions, Iran was compelled to improve its nuclear posture, and that the progress it made in this field has reached a point from where it cannot be dialed back. Does that not say that the Iranians are the smart ones whereas the “Chosen” and their slaving Goyim are the backward specimen?

 

So then, what about the editors of the Washington Times? Have they not proven they are such mediocre journalists they should be doing jobs like clean floors instead of coming up with one idiocy after another playing journalists?

 

Someone ought to tell them this.