Sunday, October 10, 2021

They see the artificial wane, and they still oppose the natural

Think of an artificial construct, be that a building or a machine or what have you, and ask: How long will it last? The answer is that the construct may last a day or may last ten thousand years, but it will eventually cease operating and will decay.

 

This will happen because an artificial construct does not renew itself. It is made to fulfill a given purpose for a given length of time. When this is done or even before its time, the construct will have ceased to be useful, and will have started the phase of turning into dust.

 

It is only when a human being, who is the creator of the construct, intervenes that the artificial is either repaired or replaced to allow for continuity to be maintained a while longer. Otherwise, an entirely new concept is introduced, a new kind of construct is created to replace the old, and a new era begins.

 

By contrast, what is natural, comes with its own arrangement for the renewal of the self. The incumbent generation has a predetermined lifespan, but would have spawned a replacement in its own image to perpetuate the legacy before ceding the space to its offspring.

 

Much of what occupies human beings, has to do with the relations they forge and maintain with other human beings. As it happens those relations are produced and maintained naturally from the time that we are born—bonding as we do with our parents, the children we play with, and the associates we work with—to the time that we say goodbye to the life we have lived. However, it also happens that in certain circumstances, relationships are forged artificially. This kind of relationships have acquired the proverbial nickname of shotgun marriage in colloquial American English.

 

It is hard to disagree with the notion that a natural relationship which is forged for the purpose of living together or working together or whatever, is healthier than a relationship which is arranged to fulfill someone’s convenience. And yet, what we discover when studying in depth the Jewish approach to forging relationships with others, is that they reek with artificiality.

 

Sadly and oddly, it happens that from identifying the daughters of prominent people, from studying everything about the girl as she grows up, and from using that knowledge to arrange for her “chance encounter” with a matching Jewish boy who will have been coached to impress the girl, she often succumbs to this artificial machination, and ends up marrying the Jew that was chosen for her. And the Jews would have added yet another prominent name into their extended family.

 

Just as sadly and just as oddly, artificial trickery is used by the Jewish establishment to stretch the usefulness of the Abraham Accords. It happens when the establishment that organizes these things, leaves no chance for the natural process to take its course. It is all done artificially.

 

You can see an example of this in the article that came under the title: “New fault lines are emerging in the Middle East,” and the subtitle: “Just because the United States is tired of addressing the many challenges in the region doesn’t mean those problems will simply disappear.” It was written by Sarah N. Stern, and published on October 8, 2021 in the online publication Jewish News Syndicate.

 

What follows is what Sarah Stern said U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken stated on the one-year anniversary of the signing of the Abraham Accords. But anyone that knows the relationship that exists between the White House and Jewish Central, will know that Bliken’s words were stuffed in his mouth by Jewish Central. This is the wish of the Jewish establishment, and these are their words:

 

“The United States will encourage more countries to follow the lead of the [United Arab] Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco. We want to widen the circle of peaceful diplomacy because it’s in the interests of countries across the region and around the world for Israel to be treated like any other country. Normalization leads to greater stability, more cooperation, mutual progress—all things the region and the world need very badly right now”.

 

What is known so far, is that America has encouraged Morocco and Soudan to join the Accords by bribing them. Therefore, what must be expected from further American encouragement, is more bribery to other Arab countries to join the Accords. These were artificial acts based on prevailing conditions that meant something valuable to Morocco and Soudan at the time, but conditions that may no longer be valuable tomorrow.

 

Sooner or later, therefore, the relationship that was forged artificially, will have lost the incentive that brought the two Arab countries into the Accords. And the consequences may well be an exit from the Accords or a neglect of their provisions. The same will apply to every new Arab country (if any) that Antony Blinken will bribe into joining the Accords.

 

But why are the Jews insisting on using an artificial method for getting into a relationship with their neighbors, given that they have been drooling to get into such relationships forever, and they could have used the natural method to achieve what they wanted long ago?

 

The Jews are insisting on the artificial because the natural alternative would have been to forge a relationship that’s based on the mutual exchange of several things. One of those will have been the Arab insistence that Israel end the occupation of Palestine. And this is something that the Jews will not do for, they always take what they want and get a pushover to pay for it.

 

In fact, in the 4,000 years that the Jews have been around, they lived by that method. They never had a bigger pushover to sucker than America … and they are enjoying the free ride enormously.

 

They will not change until they are forced to.