Russia and Iran are two very different things

 The one thing to know about the Jews is that they have such little imagination, when they manage to get something going, usually by a fluke, they try to duplicate it in places where it may not work.

 

This is what happened when they managed to impress upon the Biden administration taking a tough stance against Russia, and their ploy worked. What they did next, was urge the administration to duplicate the same feat on Iran, which exists in a totally different environment, and the ploy failed.

 

When the second attempt failed, Joseph Lieberman and Mark Wallace put their lamentation in the form of an article, and took it public under the title: “Why Biden Is Showing Strength on Russia, And Not Iran,” and the subtitle: “The inconvenient truth is that Iran is only continuing its longtime strategy of deceit, chaos, and violence that it has deployed for decades—against which accommodation and appeasement have never worked.” The article was published on January 29, 2022 in the National Interest.

 

To make their point, Lieberman and Wallace fabricated assertions that are laughable on their face. The two writers said that the Biden administration was threatening Russia with devastating sanctions and contemplating arming a guerilla campaign should Russia invade its neighbor, but did nothing comparable with regard to Iran. What are this Tweddle pair talking about? The fact is that next to North Korea, Iran is already the most sanctioned nation on the planet today.

 

As to the creation of an armed guerilla campaign to do hit and run jobs on Iran, America has equipped Israel, the most savage terror organization ever to plague Planet Earth, and set it against the Iranians in Syria where the latter are doing the good work of cleaning up the country of the dozens of terrorist groups still operating in there on behalf of America, the reputed drone assassin.

 

Lieberman and Wallace went on to draw parallels between what might be called the aspirations of Russia and Iran, without saying a word about the aspirations of Israel and the Jews that have been the instigators of every mayhem to plague the human race during the last 3,500 years.

 

Nevertheless the two writers want the readers to believe that Russia’s Vladimir Putin is acting on his revanchist impulse to reconstruct the Soviet Union that used to be. They say so, instead of telling the truth, which is that Putin was satisfied with the status quo that prevailed right after the dissolution of the Soviet Empire. But what got Putin going was America that responded to the call of the warmongers who started working on creating Cold War 2.0 by expanding NATO up to the borders of Russia.

 

As to what happened with Iran, there too the revolutionaries in that country wanted to be left alone as they worked to rebuild their country after the fall of the Shah’s regime. But the Americans would not leave the Iranians alone. They started plotting against Iran in the 1970s and 1980s the way that they had done in the 1950s, thus prompting the Iranians to respond the only way they could, which was to take hostage the occupants of the American embassy in Tehran. This started the escalation that motivated America to arm Iraq’s Saddam Hussein with poison gas, which he used against Iran. And this is what got the Iranians to say enough was enough. They decided to go all the way, arming themselves to the hilt while relying on their own ingenuity, and making sure that no one will mess with them in any serious way ever again.

 

To complain about what the Biden administration is not doing to cheer their hearts, Lieberman and Wallace chose to argue the next point in a way that can only be described as “true to Jewish form.”  What they did was put out a biblical size fat lie. Look at this sentence: “[Biden’s] relentless quest to revive a political agreement—the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)—which failed to stop Tehran’s nuclear program.” But the fact is that it did.

 

The truth is that Iran respected the agreement to the letter till the previous American administration nullified it, at which time, Iran was free to do what it wanted. Only a Jew would blame his victim—as did Lieberman and Wallace—for responding to his double-cross. The Israelis have been doing it to the Palestinians for ages, and now Lieberman and Wallace are trying to do it to the Iranians. Incredible!

 

Completely disregarding the fact that (1) Israel continually brags about its military exploits going against the Iranian forces in Syria; that (2) Israel is engaged in terrorist activities against Iranian scientists and installations in Iran; and that (3) America persistently warns Iran that all options are on the table — look what Lieberman and Wallace have shamelessly spewed out:

 

“The truth is that Iran is continuing its strategy of deceit, chaos, and violence. Wendy Sherman has made clear that there will be no discussions about Ukraine without Ukraine and no discussions about European security without Europe. This is not the way negotiations with Iran are taking place. A strategy against Iran can only succeed with the help of Iran’s neighbors. Russia’s disregard for international norms finds good company with Iran’s mockery of international good faith. Russia orchestrates disinformation campaigns, meddles in US elections, and engages in cyberwarfare. It is a steady drumbeat of hostilities and Iran matches it. The Iranian regime targets Americans. Its proxies continue to fire drones and rockets at US military personnel in Iraq and Syria. Iran published a hit list comprised of current and former US officials. Tehran repeatedly threatens to launch operations on the US homeland. Quds Force commander boasted of a campaign against the United States from within”.

 

And these are the reasons, say Lieberman and Wallace, why America must do the little that can still be done to tighten the screws on Iran.

 

The poor things are completely out of touch with the reality that the more Iran comes under pressure, the more it stiffens its backbone.

Can anyone seriously believe what he says?

Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch wrote an article under the title: “How many more wakeup calls do we need to understand anti-Jewish hatred?” which implies that most of us do not understand what anti-Jewish hatred is about.

 

So then, what is it that needs to be done to make us understand what Jewish hatred is about? Obviously, what needs to be done is that we be educated on what anti-Jewish hatred is, so that we may fix the problem and do away with this deficiency once and for all.

 

As it happens, the rabbi is standing ready and eager to educate us on what anti-Jewish hatred is all about. And so, this is what he said in that regard:

 

“We know, in ways Jews always know, that there is a human virus, a plague, we now call ‘anti-Semitism,’ that is ingrained, inveterate, indelible, ineffaceable and ineradicable”.

 

Wow! That’s a mouthful of synonyms, isn’t it? To explain all that, the rabbi used the example of the incident that transpired in Texas not long ago. It is the story of a woman of Pakistani origin that’s held in a Texas prison for trying to kill American personnel. Near the prison, there is a synagogue that happens to represent the highest value target in the neighborhood, to a suicidal terrorist who might want to make a big splash before going to where martyrs believe they will be rewarded.

 

This being the setting for what came next, a gunman that had come to demand the release of the woman in prison, found it opportune to enter the high valued synagogue where he held four people hostage. During the 11 hours that followed, security people of all kinds surrounded the synagogue and negotiated with the gunman who turned out had no intention to kill anyone but had a strong desire to force the freedom of the woman in jail or be shot dead by the police, and sent home to Britain in a body bag. And that’s how the drama ended, without anyone else getting hurt.

 

Given that the world is going through a period of time when the Jews made it so that they are once again hated by everyone alive, it is highly probable that the British gunman hated the Jews in his heart of hearts. But this is immaterial to the story … Well, not so immaterial to rabbi Ammiel Hirsh who found it most fitting to play the victimhood card that is so lucrative to Jews, they don’t pass up an opportunity without exploiting it. Here is how the rabbi played the luck that fell into his lap like manna from the sky:

 

“I was struck by the initial statement of the FBI asserting that the hostage-taker was not driven by hatred of Jews. He simply wanted to free the woman convicted of attempted murder of military personnel, who is incarcerated in a [nearby] prison. The initial instinct of professional law enforcement, was to think that the gunman traveled from England to Texas; happened to find himself in this neighborhood; happened to find a building that looked like a synagogue, and he just happened to say to himself, ‘hey, maybe they can help release the woman.’ Just a random, coincidental turn of events”.

 

So, we ask: Where in that passage is the wakeup call that the rabbi wants us to hear? And where is the lesson that he wants us to learn? Here are the answers that he gave:

 

“The gunman was convinced that the Jews could get the woman released. Where did he pick this up? That is the question for all who seek to fight against anti-Semitism. The identity of the actual gunman is secondary. The real question is where did he absorb this hateful mindset? One of the oldest of anti-Semitic tropes, is that there is a secret Jewish cabal pulling the strings of the world to benefit the Jews at the expense of everyone else: That Jews control everything. In the last century, it was the ELDERS OF Zion who undermined world unity. Today, it is Zionist elders hypnotizing the world and manipulating the great powers”.

 

Is the rabbi joking or is he deliberately insulting our intelligence, which he did by first stating that the gunman was convinced the Jews could get the woman released, then asking the question: “Where did he pick this up?”

 

The rabbi really doesn’t know the answer to that question?

 

Here you have a Jewish propaganda machine that is constantly poking America’s federal politicians in the rib, causing them to go on the air and tell the world that “there is no daylight between America and Israel,” which is why Israel is given billions of dollars to rob the Palestinians and kill them, at the same time that America gets busy kneecapping those Palestinians who would be on their way to the International Criminal Court with proof that Zionism is a criminal enterprise as designated by the UN in Durban, South Africa.

 

And here you have State governments falling one after the other like dominos as they engage in the business of forcing the citizens of their states by law, to buy products made by slave labor in occupied Palestine, when commanded to do so by the government of Israel.

 

And the rabbis is asking: where did the gunman pick this up?

 

Not only did the gunman pick it up, but so did the intended audiences which are the world at large and the American public. It is that the Jewish propagandists want the world and the Americans to know that they have the power to punish those who do not toe the Jewish line, be that on the international stage or the American theatre.

 

Surely, Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch knows all this. He is just playing stupid.

A lesson on remembrance that’s a waste to time

 Many people, especially in America, lost children, some of them toddlers, because a crazed kid armed with an automatic gun walked into the school and sprayed them with bullets. This has to be the incident most deserving to be remembered, not just by the parents, but by the community and the nation. In fact, such incidents are those most deserving to invoke the dictum: Never again.

 

No one that did not live such an experience can imagine the pain of the parents who lost a child in this manner. Below this level of pain comes that of the parents who lose a child, even an adult child, to a suicide, an accident or a terminal illness, and they have to bury the child, never once believing that they would outlive it and bury it.

 

Various parents react differently to the tragedy that has befallen them. Some show their grief for a short period of time after the tragedy, and then carry on with life as normally as can be. They invoke the memory of the one they lost only on such occasions that make those listening to them, sense the depth of their pain, and appreciate the quiet and dignified manner with which they hold on to the memory and yet function as normally as can be.

 

Other parents, on the other hand, never cease to invoke the memory of the child they lost. Most listeners, while annoyed, say nothing out of respect for the grieving parent and the child they lost. But when the habit goes too far, it can happen that someone close to the grieving parent, would tell it that their obsession has gone too far, and is beginning to annoy the listeners. This is usually enough of a reproach to turn the parent a little more inward and more sensitive to the audience they are addressing.

 

All of that happens at the personal level, but it has its analog that happens at the community level. It is that most nations were involved in wars or were hit by a natural disaster that took the lives of a number of their citizens. The survivors remember that moment on the anniversary of the tragedy, and commemorate it in a dignified ceremony that lasts an hour or longer, after which everyone returns to carrying on with the business of running the country and living their normal lives.

 

This happens with everyone on the planet, except with one group of people calling themselves Jews. These ones have turned the memory of the tragedy they champion into a wailing toy they want everyone to carry around their necks, and be prepared to wire a dollar or two into the account of their favorite Jew whenever the toy wails: Gimme compensation, gimme compensation, which is something it does frequently and does it annoyingly.

 

You can see some of what these people do to turn the memory of what they call the Holocaust into a never ending stream of compensation money for the pain that was suffered by others long ago and far away from here. You can see that incredible phenomenon play out in an article that came under the title: “Holocaust denial and distortion: Which is a greater threat?” It was written by Dani Dayan, and published on January 26, 2022 in the New York Daily News.

 

Dani Dayan who began his article by questioning which is worse, the denial or the distortion of the Holocaust, first gave the impression that he was saying something when, in fact, he was saying nothing. Look at this condensed version of his opening sentence: “Holocaust denial was once a major issue; however, various developments led to its marginalization.” What information is conveyed by a sentence like this? What are the developments that led to the marginalization of Holocaust denial? He is not saying.

 

Having said nothing, Dayan went on to assert that Holocaust distortion was a cousin of Holocaust denial, and that it must be understood well if we are to confront it effectively. To make us understand that relationship without giving an example that might clarify what he is saying, Dayan continued his lecture, saying the following:

 

“Distorters of the Holocaust, unlike deniers fabricate historical narratives that go beyond reasonable historical discourse and are false. These narratives are meant to serve contemporary agendas. Holocaust distortion is dangerous because it distorts facts of history to legitimize past and present misdeeds”.

 

Huh! What the hell does that mean? What historical narratives is he talking about? What reasonable discourse? What contemporary agendas? What past and present misdeeds?

 

Having had it up to here with this abstract and void-of-all-substance lecture, let me tell Dani Dayan about the relationship that has existed between the denial of the Holocaust and what he says is the distortion. It all began when ordinary historians wanted to look into the event that later came to be known as the Holocaust. They approached the subject as pure history, and described it as they saw it.

 

This is when the Jews came unto the scene with fire in their bellies and hollered their disgust at the historians who would not express anger at the Nazis in every sentence they wrote, preferring instead to narrate the historical events as they saw them. Still, blowing their fiery entrails out of their bellies, the self-described instant Jewish historians, hounded the real historians out of the field.

 

When the real historians dropped out of the field, and were asked why they stopped researching the history of the Holocaust, they answered something that went like this: Holocaust? What Holocaust? I ain’t seen no Holocaust. Did you see a little thing run around calling itself Holocaust? Not me. No; I’m not going to waste my time looking for Holocaust or whatever that thing is.

 

And this, my friend, is how the denial of the Holocaust happened.

 

Now read the rest of Dani Dayan’s article, and you’ll reach the conclusion that it was not worth your time, wasting it on a piece of trash that is this inconsequential.

A better solution to a ‘pernicious’ problem

 Andrea Stricker of the primitive Foundation for Defense of Democracies, came up with a solution to what she makes it sound like a serious problem. She says that Iran is producing advanced centrifuges, and this is a threat we should all worry about.

 

She warns that, “Any nuclear agreement that does not permanently remove Iran’s advanced centrifuge threat really is not worth the paper it is written on.” For this reason, she suggests to solve the problem in this manner: “Congress must intervene. Lawmakers should invoke legislative provisions that would force a vote on any decision by the White House to lift sanctions on Iran”.

 

These quotes are snippets from the article that Andrea Stricker wrote to elaborate on her ideas. The article itself came under the title: “A Revived Nuclear Deal Will Not Solve Iran’s Advanced Centrifuge Threat,” published on January 25, 2022 in The National Interest.

 

As far as I know, this is the second time in history that a country has been punished for being “too smart for its own good.” The first time was in 1919 when the colonial powers of Britain and France called on the United States of America to come and gang up against Germany, defeat it and prevent it from ever rising again. When the defeat was completed, the gang forced Germany to sign the Treaty of Versailles.

 

That treaty denied Germany any of the resources that the colonists were looting in the colonies and keeping for themselves. They also barred Germany, that was too smart for its own good, from dabbling in the hi-tech industries of the time. The result was that, in the same way you cannot keep a good man down, Germany rose again. When it was strong enough to challenge the colonial powers, it tore up the insulting treaty, and turned itself into the superpower of the time. While the rest of what happened is bitter history which escapes no one, the Jews are pushing America to repeat the same mistake with Iran.

 

Well, if this will not work with Iran anymore than it did with Germany, what else can be done?

 

Since Andrea Striker’s idea is to maintain the maximum pressure that has been in force for a while, and tighten it even further till Iran drops to its knees and asks for mercy, we should explore all the tricks that used to come with the affliction of maximum pressure, and see what else we can do to get Iran to stop being too smart for its own good, and accept to end its dabbling in the hi-tech of modern industries.

 

The idea of applying maximum pressure on a settlement or a village began long ago in primitive times when hordes of savages would circle a village, preventing anything from going in or coming out. When the villagers ran out of food and water, they surrendered to the army of savages that’s blocking the village. They bought back their freedom by giving the valuables they had to the savages. At other times, when the village had within it wells from which the villagers drew water, or a patch of land in which they grew food, the savages poisoned the wells and burned the vegetation in the fields.

 

Having used the savage trick of applying maximum pressure on Iran, which is the analog of circling the village, we might as well go savage all the way, and apply the modern equivalent of poisoning the proverbial wells of Iran and burning its proverbial fields of vegetation. How to do that? We probe Andrea Stricker’s article to see if she is providing clues as to how this can be done.

 

Searching the article, we have our eureka moment when, towards the end of the piece, we hit this passage: “It appears that the Biden administration will allow the Islamic Republic to extort the United States out of billions of dollars for little in return.” What Stricker is talking about is Iranian money that is in the possession or that is under the control of the United States. From what she is saying, it looks like America has already gone all the way applying the modern equivalent of poisoning the wells and burning Iran’s fields of vegetation.

 

And so, having deprived the Iranians of what is vital and what is theirs, you can see in this trick the analog of the savages depriving the villagers of water from their own wells, and food from their own patch of land.

 

Knowing that America got into practicing the method of the savages at the urging of the primitive Foundation for Defense of Democracies, you realize that you have no advice to give America on the matter of punishing Iran for being too smart for its own good. What you do instead is give America advice on how to extricate itself from the morass into which the Jews, including the said primitive Foundation, maneuvered her into.

 

What you tell America is that in the same way you cannot keep a good man down forever, you cannot keep a nation down forever. You urge America to make peace with Iran lest it repeat the story of the treaty of Versailles, see Iran come out the ordeal much stronger and seeking revenge.

 

This is when we’ll all pay the price of Jewish bad advice and American flunky malleability.

How they infiltrate institutions and weaponize them to serve the self

Cabal is derived from the Jewish word Kabala, which refers to a group of conspirators coming together, and using tricks unsuspected by the public, to subvert the will of that public by getting things done in a way that serves the Jewish interests at the expense of everyone else.

 

Ever since the Elders of Zion were identified as one such group, who are working to turn the entire planet into an organization that’s here to serve their interests, the Jews have been doing two contradictory things simultaneously. By way of a helpful analogy, you may think of an idiot that’s given a car to drive. He uses one foot to push on the accelerator to maximum throttle, and uses the other foot to push on the brakes trying to stop the car.

 

In that same manner, the Jews find it necessary to speak in one voice and so, they form groups for every occasion, and when the time comes — such as urging the President of the United States to intervene in the natural progression of policy making, and send to Israel money that’s embezzled from the American taxpayers by a Congress of braindead zombies — many of the groups would come together and sign a letter to impress the President with a show of their cabalistic strength. Do these people want to be seen as a cabal, or don’t they? They must know by now that trying to have it both ways always ends with a ton of bricks falling on heir heads.

 

In fact, while bragging about their cabalistic strength, the Jews have been fighting the idea that they are a worldwide cabal conspiring to advance Jewish interests at the expense of everyone else, with all its members seen as going in the same direction — not necessarily by getting together and breathing the same air in one room — but by exchanging views, as they consult with each other by telephone, through the media and through the internet.

 

Whereas the cabal known as the Elders of Zion did not achieve much that would have served World Jury, as they were called at the start of the twentieth century, the gradual transformation has turned the cabal into a more potent force by the middle of the century. It had its heyday during the second half of the twentieth century, but then started to weaken by the start of the twenty first century.

 

This brings us to the article that came under the title: “Texas synagogue attack reveals Biden’s neglect of homeland security,” and the subtitle: “It’s open border everywhere.” It was written by Ira Mehlman who is media director at the Federation for American Immigration Reform in Washington. His article was published on January 26, 2022 in The Washington Times.

 

What follows is a condensed version of what Ira Mehlman said about the subject. He may not officially be an insider, but he is close enough to the workings of the government that the knowledge he is using to accuse the Biden administration of sabotaging the security of Americans, can only be construed as the Jewish way of sabotaging the security of America by attributing to others what he knows his kinfolks are doing to force America to help an Israel that never ceases to ask for new and better equipment. The excuse is to fight what the Jews call terrorists when the universally acknowledged truth is that Israel is the only terrorist entity in the world today and that America is the enabler. Here is that paragraph of infamy:

 

“Reckless disregard for homeland security is only one facet of the administration’s deliberate sabotage of systems designed to keep Americans safe from attacks in their own country. The attack on Congregation Beth Israel in Texas ended [because of] the security training and quick thinking of the Rabbi than the actions of the law enforcement agencies called to the scene. Many questions remain. More disturbingly, the circumstances that led to Akram being in Texas appear to be the result of Biden administration policies. Akram had a lengthy criminal record in England. He was a frequent traveler to Pakistan. He had been listed as a ‘subject of interest’ by Britain’s MI5. Any of these black marks on his record should have been sufficient for him to be denied a tourist visa or turned away when he arrived at John Kennedy International Airport. None of those things happened. A likely scenario is that government employees were (perhaps reluctantly) following departmental policies that directed them to overlook warning signs and grant admission. In the coming weeks and months, we will likely learn how Akram breached protocols and gained entry to the United States”.

 

Look at this sequence of Jewish logic: Many questions remain. Akram in Texas APPEARS to be the result of Biden policy. A LIKELY scenario is that government employees were following departmental policies that directed them to overlook warning signs and grant admission. In the coming weeks and months, we will LIKELY learn how Akram breached protocols and gained entry into the United States.

 

What you have here is someone, construed to be an insider, asserting that Joe Biden is hurting the country based on evidence that is “likely” but not definite, and that “appears” with little or no certainty to be the result of Biden’s policy.

 

And so, Ira Mehlman wants the Biden administration to take that comparatively trivial incident as a warning sign that things can get worse. Well, let me tell you, sometimes people say that the truth comes out the mouth of a baby. But nobody ever said that useful advice ever comes out the mouth of a baby.

 

Now you know why half a century of Jewish control of America has transformed the country from the beloved superpower that it was to the reviled has-been that is now losing its ranking on the totem pole of nations others would want to look up to.

They create noise to divert attention from their evil

 Let’s say you just moved into a neighborhood you didn’t know much about previously. Shortly after you moved in, you got visited by three of the neighbors. They came one after the other over several days to welcome you and offer house warming gifts.

 

As time passes you get to know these people better and you form an opinion about each of them. What your assessment comes down to is that none of them is perfect anymore than you think of yourself as being perfect. It is that everyone is good in some thing and bad in other things. But if you must rank them as to who is the best and who is the worst, you identify one as being the worst.

 

You see him as the worst because he never ceases to criticize the others for neglecting to do what is necessary to be a good neighbor. For example, he criticizes them for not shoveling the snow in front of their houses for days after a snow fall. And he criticizes them for not getting rid of the weeds in their lawns until it is too late in the season.

 

This being the case, you take note of what he does and what he neglects to do that would classify him as a bad neighbor according to his own criteria. The first thing that strikes you about this guy is that he never takes care of his lawn. And when it comes to shoveling the snow, he almost never does it, which forces the other neighbors to do it so as to create a clear path for pedestrians to walk through.

 

You decide to go further than what’s visible from the outside, and catalogue what this man neglects to do inside the house. You find that his toilet overflows and does not get cleared for days. His kitchen looks like a garbage dump filled with dishes and utensils that have not been washed for days. And his floors have not been swept for ages.

 

You decide to talk to him to find out what he thinks he is doing, criticizing others when he is so much worse than them in every respect. His first reaction to your inquiry is that of hostility. So, here is a guy that made it a career criticizing others but does not want to be questioned in a way that suggests criticism of what he does and what he neglects to do. But he answers your questions anyway, asserting that he is a perfect human being, and blaming his apparently untidy lifestyle on others.

 

Well, dear reader, this is a near perfect analogy for what Jewish America has become in relation to the rest of the world. You have a country that is the murder capital of the world. It has a drug problem that ends the life of its youngsters more than the rest of the world combined. It has a relationship between police and citizens that deteriorated to such an extent, the two are almost at war with each other. And the list goes on forever.

 

But despite all of this, America that tried to be the policeman of the world and got kicked in the ass everywhere it went, has now settle down and took on the role of critic. Make that critic extraordinaire because the voices that put down everyone else in the world are Jewish voices who pretend to represent an America that is not theirs, and that is beginning to be irritated by their theatrics.

 

Two recent articles show how this theater of the absurd is unfolding in America. One article came under the title: “To the fashionably woke, Uyghur lives don’t matter,” and the subtitle: “How ‘never again!’  became ‘never mind.’” It was written by Clifford D. May, and published on January 25, 2022 in The Washington Times. The other article came under the title: “Team Biden blames Iran’s bad behavior on Trump,” written by David S. Jonas and Erielle Davidson, and was also published on January 25, 2022 in the Washington Times.

 

As can be seen, both articles are written by Jews pretending to be Americans. They are criticizing two nations of such high caliber, they overcame enormous obstacles and broke through the colonial barriers that were meant to keep them underdeveloped and ready to be exploited. Now, the Jews are steering America to get it in a position where it will have no choice but to use the option of “last resort,” which is the war that is so dear to the Jewish heart.

 

To make his point, Clifford May cited the example of an ultra rich immigrant from Asia who made it big in America, and yet expressed in no uncertain terms, what he thinks of what they are telling him is happening in China with regard to the Uyghur people.

 

The thing is that to divert attention from the reality of the physical and cultural genocide that Israel is conducting in the stolen country of Palestine, the Jews are creating noise wherever they can to be in a position of using the Alan Dershowitz dictum that says Israel has the right to do to the Palestinians what anyone has done to someone anywhere and anytime in the world.

 

The reality is that the Muslim nations investigated the allegations raised by the Jews and their cohorts about China’s treatment of its Muslim minority known as the Uyghur. They found that the measures taken by China’s government to bring these people to the level of modernization achieved by the rest of the country, were more humane than the treatment of the Chinese people during the Cultural Revolution of the 1950s and 1960s.

 

As to the article of David Jonas and Erielle Davidson, it is nothing more than a rehashing of the old Jewish arguments, meant to incite America to bomb an Iran that dared to put itself on a path that will make it a superpower.

 

The Jews want to see Iran destroyed before it gets there because if it does, Israel’s dream of conquering the region as a prelude to conquering the world will evaporate.

They try to have it both ways but lose again

 The Jews know that what they want has never been accepted by humanity, and never will. There lies the problem because what the Jews want is not just fundamental to their core belief, it makes up the very essence of their continued existence as Jews.

 

If the Jews give up trying to realize what they always wanted, they’ll cease being Jews. Because what they want cannot be separated from who or what they are, they’ll become something else or become nothing if they stop trying to achieve the impossible, knowing that they’ll never get there.

 

What the Jews want was formulated long ago as a cruel hoax. They were told that God chose them to inherit the Earth and all its content, including the humans who will worship them for being the biological children of God. Having waited thousands of years for this day to come without any sign that it will, the Jews finally accepted the idea that the promise was a big lie.

 

Compelled to abandon the belief that they were chosen by God to be his children, the Jews searched for a substitute who will play the role of a sugar daddy, and be so sweet to them, his actions will taste like honey from heaven. It took the Jews a while and a number of misses before they discovered an America that’s willing to play the role of big sucker, sweet sugar daddy to the forever demanding Jews.

 

Now enjoying a solid as well as a persistent support from America, the Jews did something that is so unique to them, it hit humanity like a slap in the face. They turned against the United Nations (UN) that created Israel, for constantly reminding that entity of its obligations. And this wasn’t even the worst part of what happened. What else the Jews of America did in concert with Israel’s propaganda machine, was to mount a cosmic size campaign of demonization against the Palestinians whose country they stole. Because never before did a thief insult his victims, the UN, realized that it had taken into its lap, not a poodle that needs nurturing, but a cannibalistic snake that needs to be defanged.

 

Needless to say that the Jewish propaganda machine responded by attacking the UN that created it with the same vehemence it had been attacking the Palestinians whose country the Jews stole. A recent example of such attack, came in the form of an article under the title: “What the Rabbi Can Teach the United Nations,” written by Michael Curtis, and published on January 23, 2022 in the American Thinker.

 

A piece of work that is about 1,200-words long, you’ll see that a little more than half of it is devoted to attacking the UN, while the rest is devoted to angrily telling it, and through it telling the human race, that a single Jew that happens to be a rabbi, towers high above the entire human race.

 

You might say that the root cause of Michael Curtis’s anger is that the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) has established a commission of inquiry to investigate the underlying root causes of the various problems plaguing the occupied Palestinian territory, and report to the General Assembly every year. What draws the ire of Michael Curtis and those of his ilk, are two things. First, the commission will recommend measures to be taken by member states, designed to force Israel to change its ways. Second, no sunset clause will bring the commission to end its inquiry.

 

Michael Curtis guessed that the commission will discover that the root causes of the ongoing problems in the occupied territory, go back to the actions of the Israeli military, which is the institution in charge of maintaining and administering what is after all, the military occupation of Palestine. And so, Curtis reminds the international community that Israel is censured by the UN for defending itself. To prove his point, he gives the example of the mini-war that erupted between Hamas and Israel in May of 2021.

 

Totally oblivious of the fact that the most horrific act of terror someone can commit is the occupation of a country, Curtis says that Hamas was the one that terrorized Israel. Without calling it root cause, Curtis says that the conflict started when Israel decided to add insult to injury by evicting a Palestinian family from its home, and taking the property. Hamas launched a few rockets to warn Israel and deter it, which caused Israel to respond so disproportionally that the minor flare-up escalated to become a mini-war.

 

Having identified the root cause of that mini-war as being the eviction of the Palestinian family from its home, Michael Curtis went on to complain as follows: “Hamas launched rockets and missiles, but the UN is not investigating those actions or their root cause.” The fact that he did the identification but refuses to see it for what it is, means that the Jews do not consider the Palestinians or any non-Jew to be human enough to deserve being protected against a Jew who would come to terrorize him, take his possessions, demonize him, and complain about him for refusing to be pliant or pliable.

 

But there is in that argument the seeds of what the Jews fear the most. In their usual quest to have it both ways, they said that the property in question belonged to Jews since before 1948. In the war of that time, the Jordanian army evicted its occupants and gave the property to an Arab family, that has lived in it ever since. Now, the Israeli courts have decreed that according to Israeli law, the property should be given back to Jews. Do you know what this means, my friend? It means that according to Israeli law, the Palestinians have the right to return to the properties taken from them during that same war. It is the obligation of the Israeli government to return those properties to Palestinians. Failing this, the international community must apply maximum pressure on Israel till it cries uncle and complies with the wishes of the human race.

 

Still, despite all of that, Michael Curtis is convinced that the UN, and through it the entire human race, need to be taught a lesson. He says that the UN and all its institutions should honor the rabbi who found himself in the company of a mentally incapacitated individual that was holding a gun he did not use because he did not want to kill anyone. Instead, he wanted to be shot by the police, die a martyr’s death and be sent home to Britain in a body bag.

 

So then, honor the rabbi for what? Well, honor him for something. You can think up something, can’t you? But if you can’t, ask him, and he’ll have an answer. Rabbis are good at thinking up the big lies and get away with them.

He wants to cast a Shadow from the Dark Age

 For half a century, Jews have deflected criticism leveled against Israel by saying this is the kind of criticism that will lead to the destruction of Israel and the final solution of the Jewish question.

 

Every time the Jews pulled one of these devious tricks, people thought it was the last of them, and that henceforth the Jews will live like normal human beings, which would have been a welcome relief to all of us. Unfortunately, however, this was not to be, in that after every trick came another trick, and yet another without respite, and without taking an interlude if only to let us catch our breath.

 

Now that some things have changed in the world, what you expected will happen has happened. It is that Jonathan S. Tobin saw yet another excuse to pull the same old trick, fashioned this time in such a way as to respond to the new circumstances.

 

What Tobin took pain to elaborated on led him to end his current article with the paragraph that follows the one you’re reading. His article came under the title: “What Those Who Accept the ‘Stolen Land’ Myth Don’t Understand,” published on January 23, 2022 in Algemeiner. Here is that ending:

 

“Far from being a harmless woke myth, the fallacy about Jews stealing land doesn’t merely enable slander; it is the foundation on which most forms of antisemitic hate, delegitimization and terrorism rest”.

 

This is forceful stuff. It took Jewish pundits — Jonathan Tobin among them — a number of decades to get to this level of rage. Here, in brief, is how that approach has developed over time:

 

First, the Jewish leaders claimed that the Jewish Jewelers and tailors from Eastern Europe, who stole Palestine, had the right to do so because they farmed the land better than the Palestinian farmers who only managed to turn the place into the Land of Milk and Honey, and make it a part of the Fertile Crescent. Big deal! But when this argument was shown to be the same as that of the racist colonial powers; one that modern societies abhor, the Jews stopped using it, and switched to something else.

 

This time, the Jewish leaders adopted the argument that Palestine belonged to no one when the Jews grabbed it because, as shown by the Tweddle dumb-dumb Dershowitz and Kantorovich, Palestine was occupied by the Ottomans and then by the Brits. This is when the Jews “liberated” the land using the method of illegal infiltration into the country, and the method of terrorizing everyone who stood in their way, be that Brits or Palestinians. Thus the Jews earned the right to make Palestine their own.

 

In response to that absurd logic, it was argued that the Jews had the right to take possession of Palestine because they “liberated” it from British colonialism, no more than the Brits had the right to take possession of Palestine because they “liberated” it from Ottoman colonialism. Upon seeing their excuse shot down in flames, the Jews abandoned it, and argued instead that contrary to what they were saying previously, Israel is composed of Jewish Arabs more than it is of European Jews.

 

This being the case, said the counter argument, more than half the Israeli government should be made of Jewish Arabs, but the fact is that not a single Arab occupies a high position in the Israeli bureaucracy or its political organization. And when you see a system of apartheid as stark as this — keeping apart even third generation Jewish Israelis of Arab descent — you become convinced that Israel’s relation with the Palestinians under occupation in the West Bank, is one of savage apartheid that surpasses by far the evil that was practiced in South Africa and Rhodesia at the height of their most loathsome application.

 

It was this piece-by-piece dismantling of the fake arguments to the effect that Jews have the right to steal Palestine, which forced Jonathan Tobin to draw the parallel between the plight of the Palestinians and that of the “New World’s” indigenous people. But here too, all that Tobin has managed to do, is build an edifice that is so fragile, it can be sent flying into the air by blowing on it as you would blow away a fly on your sleeve. Here in condensed form, is what Tobin has written regarding the parallel which compares the Palestinian case to that of the North American natives:

 

“One of the tragicomic customs is the way that groups open meetings with acknowledgment that they are on ‘stolen land.’ It involves beginning any proceedings by first stating that those speaking are ‘on the lands’ of the Native tribe that once lived here. Part of the problem with this toxic idea is that whatever you think the answer to the question about the identity of the owners of the North American continent might be, the notion that Jews are ‘European’ or non-indigenous to Israel [Palestine] is a lie. With respect to North America, it’s true that the Native tribes were dispossessed by the Europeans. What traditional American histories called the ‘winning’ of the continent involved tragedy for the Native American losers. But few of those paying homage to indigenous tribes who once lived on such ‘stolen land’ are planning on giving their property and homes to the descendants of the natives”.

 

It took us, who came to settle in the Americas, 500 years to finally recognize that what we accomplished was immoral. Had our ancestors been more humane when they first arrived instead of fighting to exterminate the indigenous people and rob them of their possessions, we would be carrying on a different kind of relationship with them. It would have been superior to the system we have now, which forces the natives to live in reservations where life is abominable, and tearing at our collective conscience as we see no possibility to correct what we have created.

 

Whereas the roots of our problem go back half a millennium, Jews of the Jonatan Tobin mentality, wish to duplicate in Palestine of the 21st century AD what was done to the new world during the Dark Age, under the pretext that “the process of dispossession was the way that groups of human beings always interacted with each other since time immemorial — with the strong subjugating the weak,” as he put it.

 

Welcome to the 21st century BC, all of you Jewish pundits who yearn to relive the savage life of the Stone Age.

Does this guy know what he is talking about?

 Originally, the word “conspiracy” meant breathing together. That is, when in the past, there were no means of communication that allowed people to hatch a scheme while far apart from each other, they came together and literally breathed the same air in the same room while planning their secret schemes.

 

The discovery and use of the electromagnetic wave changed all that because this gift to humanity, is capable of carrying codified, written and audio-visual messages from one place to another via several technological innovations — get this now — at a speed that can go around the Earth more than 7 times in one second. It is called the speed of light. For this reason, people who wish to conspire, no longer need to come together and breathe the same air in the same room. They only need to have access to a modern means of communication.

 

Whereas to ordinary folks, conspiracy could only take place when two or more people spoke to each other directly by telephone or via missives sent through the mail, wartime snoops knew differently when for example, they spoke of the “fat boy” being on his way, which meant that the atom bomb was on its way to blow up a Japanese city, like it happened to Hiroshima. The American attackers knew what the message meant, the Japanese defenders, who might have picked up the signal, did not.

 

Several decades of one-way communication from people that became sophisticated at manipulating both the message that’s transmitted, and the medium that’s carrying it, has had the effect of turning every listener into a potential unidirectional conspirator. That is, when a pundit sets out to spread an opinion among other pundits and among the general public, what he does is express an opinion that will be disseminated by going from one messenger to at least two others, to twice or more as many, to double that, and so on till it becomes the dominant opinion. It will reign supreme till replaced by a new opinion.

 

Meanwhile, if that opinion reaches those in the American Federal and State legislatures that have the power to make things happen, yet are susceptible to being influenced by the ideas of pundits however trivial they may be, those legislators will take actions that might inflate an overseas terrorist entity such as Israel while at the same time trivializing America’s democracy.

 

But how does it happen that in the land of free speech, the American legislators are not able to take advantage of what the law of the land allows them to do, which is to contrast the Jewish message against those carrying opposite opinions, and balance between the two? Well, this does not happen in America because the Jews regularly pull an end run on the American law.

 

What the Jews have been doing is block free speech by raising the specter of ideas which are contrary to theirs, reaching the conclusion that discourse allowed in America about the Jews or Israel can only be to praise them or love them lest the chain reaction of one bad opinion engendering another, lead to the conclusion that a good solution to the Jewish question, is a final solution. To wrap all these ideas into one package that’s shorter than a bumper sticker thus easy to remember, the Jews came up with the single term: “antisemitism” by which they accuse those who refuse to love them of horrible things. They so accuse innocent people even if the Jews are no more related to the Semitic race than Ivanka Trump can claim to be related to Rashida Tlaib.

 

Five decades of this sort of solo performance, strictly enforced by the Jews, were enough to alert the new social media generation of Americans that something rotten has been decomposing at the core of the Jewish control of America. That generation has decided it must do something to change all that lest America become too toxic to even serve as fertilizer.

 

So then, who is it that’s too backward to understand any of this, or lacks the ability to know what he’s talking about? His name is Scott A. Shay who wrote: “Why conspiracy theorists so often aim their ire at Jews,” an article that was published on January 20, 2022 in The New York Daily News.

 

Scott Shay’s message is that observing what goes on in the world leads to the conclusion that humanity is rife with false conspiracy theories about the Jews, thus rejects the notion that it is the Jews who are rife with false conspiracy theories about humanity. And this lead to an interesting question of logic: Since the two accusations are mutually exclusive, only one is correct, and the other is false. Which is it?

 

To answer that question we look for clues in Scott Shay’s own piece of writing. What we discover is the following:

 

“The latest attack on Jews in the US was motivated by the perpetrator’s belief in conspiracy theories. The attacker believed in the conspiracy theory that Jews control the US, and he was far from alone. Conspiracy theories don’t require facts or evidence, just bias. Most other recent high-profile attacks on Jews were committed by conspiracy theorists. In all these cases, though perpetrated by attackers with very different ideologies and backgrounds, Jews are a central focus. This common hatred has structural similarities. Jews are fascists for the communists, communists for the fascists, whites for the Black Israelites, fake whites for white supremacists and on and on. This is true of educated leaders as well as illiterate followers. The proliferation of conspiracy theories is a bad sign for society… as is anti-Semitism, which is typically an early indication of societal disintegration”.

 

If we accept the mutually exclusive Scott Shay thesis that the whole world believes in conspiracy theories about the Jews, we must also believe that because there are 500 non-Jews for every Jew in the world, the Jews represent the Copernicus who was proven right whereas the throngs of religious leaders and sages were wrong. That is, the Jews must be correct, and humanity wrong.

 

Yes, something like this can happen except for one thing. For every Copernicus that came along, there has been countless charlatans who were proven wrong. In the end, however, humanity accepted the truth and altered its opinion about the way that the universe unfolds.

 

It has been thousands of years now, and humanity still considers Jews such as Scott Shay to be charlatans, and there is no sign that this is going to change.

 

And so it shall remain till proven otherwise, perhaps in a thousand years or longer.

False Accusation of criminal Wrongdoing

 A world class psychodrama has played out in Texas not long ago. A bumbling wannabe suicidal terrorist with a weakened mental capacity tried to accomplish what he believed was a glorious act but failed, thus gave the world a case to study that may rank in importance at par with the Stockholm Syndrome.

 

Given that the incident involved Jews, a flood of articles were written about it: some were news items and some opinion pieces. Two articles were picked for discussion in this blog, because of what they can yield in terms of information and opinion.

 

One article came under the title: “Texas Synagogue Attack Smells Like more evidence of FBI Corruption,” and the subtitle: “This caught-off-guard response from FBI agents is sadly what Americans have come to expect from our top law enforcement agency.” It was written by Madeline Osburn, and published on January 18, 2022 in The Federalist. The other article came under the title: “Texas synagogue terrorist Malik Akram’s last call: Of course he hated the Jews,” written by Jake Wallis Simons, and published on January 20, 2022 in the New York Post.

 

What we have here is a psychodrama that is told in a plot and a subplot. So, let’s begin with the subplot, which is the accusation that the FBI is corrupt, exhaustively discussed by Madeline Osburn in her article. Here in condensed form, is an abbreviated montage of what Osburn has written:

 

“The FBI’s statement that they ‘are continuing to work to find the motive’ is another example of the agency’s ineptitude on multiple levels. The first is their refusal to hint at the crime’s motivation as antisemitism. Said Kenneth Marcus: ‘This was not a slip-up. It is symptomatic of a widespread failure to understand the problems of antisemitism and anti-Zionism.’ Frustrating is the FBI’s corrupt obsession and use of resources on cases like the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. The FBI’s failures as an entire institution in recent years are too long to list here, but looking at the mass shootings and explosions alone that happened is frightening. The FBI also has a bad track record at categorizing motives and crime. Whether it’s their inability to move on threats before they occur, or their corrupt labels after the fact, the FBI is notorious for botching both”.

 

As can be seen, Madeline Osburn is saying that the Jews are unhappy with the work done by the FBI because the agency is more interested in protecting America against the violent overthrow of the government by armed revolutionaries, than it is at highlighting the antisemitism and anti-Zionism displayed by a bumbling wannabe suicidal terrorist with an weakened mental capacity, ranting his heart out on a long distance telephone call to his younger brother.

 

Ironically, Madeline Osburn who is managing editor of the Federalist, seems mystified as to why the FBI mistakenly believe that protecting the American Federation rather than propagandizing Israel, is what they get paid to do. What happened to the idea that America’s treasury and its security apparatus, were created by Congress to serve Israel and only Israel? Has someone forgotten something?

 

This brings us to the article of Jake Wallis Simons. The following excerpt is what introduces us to the plot of the psychodrama which unfolded on that day in Texas:

 

“Toward the end of the 11-hour standoff Saturday at Congregation Beth Israel, Malik Faisal Akram, the 44-year-old homegrown terrorist from northern England, ranted to his younger brother about issues close to any jihadist’s heart”.

 

This is a conversation that took place between Malik Akram and his brother, and was recorded, says Jake Simons, by a security source. Supposedly, the conversation took place, “toward the end of the standoff” during the synagogue’s hostage-taking incident, he explains.

 

The transcript of the conversation shows that Akram wanted to die like a martyr. He did not threaten to kill the hostages because all he wished for was that his people do to the American women what the Americans do the women of his people: fornicate with them, presumably by mutual consent or by rape. Here is an excerpt from Akram’s rant:

 

“I’m opening the doors for every youngster in England to enter America and f–k with them! Live your f–king life, bro, you f–king coward! We’re coming to f–k America! F–k them if they want to f–k with us! We’ll give them f–king war! I’d rather live one day as a lion than 100 years as a jackal. I’ve asked Allah for this death. Allah is with me, I’m not worried in the slightest. I’m going to go toe-to-toe with [police] and they can shoot me dead, I’m coming home in a body bag. Why do these f–king mother–kers come to our countries, rape our women and f–k our kids? I’m setting a precedent”.

 

Jake Simons went on to make the following points:

 

“He [Akram] raged against the Jews. Anyone could hear him rave, ‘But Americans don’t give a f–k about life unless it’s a f–king Jew!’ CBS refused to call him what he was: an Islamist terrorist. Michigan Attorney General said: ‘we don’t know that for certain, but we have seen an exponential rise in the formation of extremist organizations, many of which are white supremacy organizations.’ The BBC showed the efforts made by Akram’s family to get him to surrender, as well as his deteriorating mental state. The jihadist ideology? The Jew-hatred? Not so much. The FBI Dallas office’s special agent described the terrorist to the press as singularly focused on one issue, and it was not related to the Jewish community”.

 

Which is why Madeline Osburn and Jake Wallis Simons believe that the FBI are corrupt. This aside, what remains to do now is for the four hostages to write what they remember has happened during the 11 hours that they were with the gunman. Did they discern a change in attitude on his part as time moved on? How so? Did they express the need for food or water or the urge to go to the bathroom? What were his reactions? Did their own attitude change with the passage of time? How so?

 

All that information, written honestly without embellishment or propagandizing, can serve many fields in the sciences, the humanities and the arts.

A bleak Scenario for the Future of America

 Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way wrote an article under the title: “America’s Coming Age of Instability,” and the subtitle: “Why Constitutional Crises and Political Violence Could Soon Be the Norm.” It was published on January 20, 2022 in Foreign Affairs.

 

While this is a well thought out piece, you can think of it as describing only the beginning of something much bigger than the two writers dared to imagine. What they did was study what happened to the countries of Eastern Europe that tried democracy but then rejected it either fully or partially. They saw differences between the methods that were adopted by each country, pinpointed those that might be duplicated in America, and came up with a construct they called, “Competitive Authoritarianism.” And the two writers predicted that this kind of regime will become the norm in America.

 

To describe blow by blow how events will probably unfold in America before reaching that dreaded end, Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way, said this:

 

“America will likely be marked by heightened political violence. Extreme polarization and intense partisan competition generate violence, and indeed, the United States experienced a spike in far-right violence during Trump’s presidency. The United States could experience a rise in assassinations, bombings, and other terrorist attacks; armed uprisings; mob attacks; and violent street confrontations—tolerated and incited by politicians. Such violence might resemble that which afflicted Spain in the early 1930s, Northern Ireland during the Troubles, or the American South during and after Reconstruction”.

 

Yes, it is not too difficult to imagine that America may drift far enough into chaos to find itself in a situation such as that. But unlike those countries or even America of the Reconstruction era, the peculiarities of today’s America — seen as the spark that will cause an explosion — will have worldwide reverberations to rival those of the French and Russian Revolutions.

 

For one thing, the nations of Eastern Europe, Spain, Northern Ireland and the American Deep South of the nineteenth century are different from the America of the twenty first century in many respects. First and foremost, those countries have populations that enjoy a high degree of homogeneity in terms of ethnicity, language, color of the skin and religion, whereas America’s population is extremely diverse in all these categories. If today, all these people see each other as Americans, tomorrow each of them will see the other as the enemy that must be vanquished.

 

Whereas the firearms in the hands of past revolutionaries, were few and not as efficient as those of today, the number of guns in the hands of present-day Americans exceeds the size of the population. And the new weapons are of such variety and killing efficiency, a single machine-gunner today could take on a platoon of old-time musketeers and vanquish them hands down. Now imagine millions of contemporary revolutionaries equipped with this kind of weaponry, going at each other from sea to bloody sea.

 

Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way think that America’s transformation from democratic to autocratic will more or less follow the pattern of the Eastern European countries, but that the people’s dissatisfaction that will follow the happening, will make America resemble Northern Ireland or Spain of the early 1930s. Well, if this happens—whether or not the abundance of firearms in America will make it look more like the Lebanese or Yemeni civil wars—America will not experience the happy ending that the Spaniards and the Irish were lucky enough to see and celebrate at the end of their ordeal.

 

The reason for that is simple to understand. Today, the American people live a life of plenty and one of luxury when compared to most others. Americans live this life thanks to the amenities which are made available by the industries, the organizations and the people that run these places. Let a prolonged disturbance take the comfortable life away from them, and you’ll see the businessmen — that had no compunction relocating their businesses abroad during good times — flee America as fast as the draft dodgers fled the country during the Vietnam War, and go live elsewhere. They will no longer sing: Home sweet home, America. Their new love will be England or Switzerland or even China or Vietnam.  

 

On their way out, these people will have dumped the dollars they used to keep in their American bank accounts, and will have converted them into gold and other currencies. The dollar will go down to zero, and the people staying in America will not have the purchasing power to import from abroad even the bare necessities of life.

 

So, while savage revenge will have filled the hearts of these people, guess who they will blame for the misery that was heaped on them and their country. You guessed it; they will blame the Jews. And with all the guns they have in their hands, and all the bullets they have stashed away in their basements, you can guess what will happen next.

 

But relax, my friend, because nothing says the scenario for America must unfold as described. Still, it behooves us not to restrict ourselves to historical events, or believe that these are the only possible outcomes awaiting America. The reason is that America is a different place from those described in the history books, and our time is different from the past. It offers opportunities for salvation beside the opportunities for destruction that will make the past look like child’s play.

 

We must think of all that when we imagine how the American scenario may unfold. And then, as important as all of that, we must think of a superpower equipped with thousands of nuclear weapons going down while having a finger on the nuclear button. Will America push that button? Or will it die a noble death as did the Soviet Union that died and resurrected to become the Russian Federation?

The Guardian Angel and the Thousand Demons

Growing up Catholic, we learn that each of us has a Guardian Angel who accompanies us everywhere we go, and watches everything we do.

 

The assignment of the Guardian Angels is to prevent us from being harmed physically, such as getting into an accident, also prevent us, when possible, from committing a moral imprudence.

 

As children, we are also told that Satan is in competition with God for our souls. And so, while Guardian Angels prod us to do the right thing, Satan’s demons are always present, prodding us to commit sins.

 

While this is the religious drama we learn about as children, a similar drama plays out in real life, not just with each of us as individuals, but also with all of us whether we are a small group or a large one. And there are plenty of examples that can be cited, such as the following:

 

A small band of petty thieves decides to go big time, and starts invading homes armed with deadly weapons, which they use against anyone that tries to stop them. Or, conversely, a number of like-minded people organizes to help the homeless find shelter.

 

Or it can happen that a large army decides to go flatten a country it considers a dangerous enemy. Or conversely, a country mobilizes an army of volunteers to go to places around the globe where they need help because they were struck by a natural disasters or because they never had the opportunity to develop and reach a self-sustaining level.

 

Of all the countries in the world, the United States of America is one of the very few that can boast it has lived through dramas that cover most of these categories. The unfortunate part, however, is that America went from being the country of President Kennedy’s Peace Corps to the country of destruction by arial bombardment and land invasions.

 

Today, the tug-of-war is ongoing between (1) the warmongers on one side who play the role of Satan’s Devils by constantly pushing America to go bomb someone or invade another, and (2) the peacemakers on the other side who play the role of Guardian Angels by advocating that America spend its resources looking after its own people, especially those in dire need of assistance.

 

We can see examples of all this in two articles that were published recently. One article came under the title: “Biden’s choice with Iran,” and the subtitle: “Nuclear negotiations a distraction from its internal vulnerabilities.” It was written by Robert G. Joseph, and published on January 17, 2022 in The Washington Times.

 

The other article came under the title: “It’s time for the United States to reduce Sanctions Against North Korea,” and the subtitle: “The United States’ maximum pressure strategy against North Korea has only emboldened Kim Jong-Un. It’s time for the Biden administration to consider other options.” The article was written by Doug Bandow, and was published on January 18, 2022 in The National Interest.

 

When you read his article, you’ll realize that Robert Joseph is obviously a rabid warmonger, and that he does not hide his cannibalistic instinct to rip apart those he dislikes by misrepresenting the truth about them and by dehumanizing them. And so, for you to consider, here in condensed form, is what Robert Joseph has blathered, talking about Iran, his favorite bogeyman of the day:

 

“The windfall of cash paid to the dictatorship was used to bring the Assad regime in Syria close to victory, to provide resources to proxies and to suppress the people of Iran. The second windfall that the regime would receive from lifting current sanctions would be employed for the same purposes. If an agreement is reached, the value of any short-term constraints will be far outweighed by making clear that the call to promote democracy and human rights is nothing more than empty rhetoric. Mr. Biden remains committed to restoring an agreement that has failed to achieve closing the pathways for Iran to build a nuclear weapon. This became apparent when Iran has shown that it was preparing for a breakout while still under the agreement. The Biden administration appears enthusiastic, to pay a high price for the restoration of the agreement. It has taken no concrete steps to increase pressure on Iran. Mr. Biden will still hand over the resources that Tehran needs to accelerate its nuclear and missile programs, as well as to pursue its aggression against US Gulf allies”.

 

You do realize what Robert Joseph means by “windfall,” don’t you? He means that if you work all your life, accumulate a small fortune, and a thief robs you of it, but then the system of justice gets that fortune back to you, some jerk out there, perhaps named Robert the disciple of Satan or something, will complain that you just received a windfall you will use to commit anti-satanic evil acts.

 

It is for this reason that people want to hear from thinkers such as Doug Bandow whose humanity makes his dissertations ring true to human beings who are yearning for a return to a more civilized discourse. And so, for you to consider, here in condensed form, is what Doug Bandow has written, talking about North Korea, today’s favorite bogeyman of every warmonger in America:

 

“Sanctions don’t work. The Kim regime continues to produce missiles, nuclear weapons, and a host of other war materiel. Pyongyang justified its activities by pointing to the hypocrisy of Americans producing weapons for themselves while criticizing the North’s activities. Washington penalized several North Korean officials and proposed new UN measures on the DPRK. Pyongyang responded sharply, launching two short-range missiles from rail cars. North Korea also warned that if the US adopts a confrontational stance, the DPRK will take stronger reaction. That could be a nuclear test. Sanctions have not deterred North Korea from devoting a disproportionate share of its resources to the military or developing missiles and nuclear weapons. If anything, Kim has used sanctions to justify new advances. These sanctions keep the DPRK poorer economically but only somewhat weaker militarily. They don’t prevent it from being able to kill millions in a full-scale war. Diplomacy might be doomed to fail. However, reducing sanctions might create new areas for agreement”.

 

Doug Bandow’s message, perhaps whispered into his ear by his Guardian Angel, is clear and simple. It goes something like this: Stop running around poking people in the rib, America, because some day someone bigger than you will want to poke you in the rib. And that’s when you’ll know how stinky you’ve been during all these years.

Rebuilding America better than ever before

 You cannot stand in front of an empty parcel of land, blink your eyes like a genie and see the house of your dream rise on the land. If you really want that house, you’ll have to build it brick by brick, wall by wall and fixture by fixture.

 

If you develop the imagination and you summon the courage to do all that, you’ll have built the house that will give you decades of comfortable living. But because everything decays, the house will eventually require repairs once in a while. And there will come a time when you’ll need to implement a major refurbishing of the house.

 

This analogy is so universal, it applies almost everywhere in life. It is true for when you learn to read and write, and grow up to be a writer. It is true for when you build a business from scratch. It is true of any institution that wants to expand and serve a larger community. And it is true of any country that sees the need to undergo a renaissance.

 

We live at a time when every country on Planet Earth, is undergoing some kind of transformation. This includes the United States of America whose case is complicated by the fact that it is subjected to a bevy of forces that prove to be incoherent and contradictory. They prove incoherent when it comes to moving America in a clear direction. And they prove contradictory because they often work at cross-purposes to each other while trying to achieve the same goals.

 

You get a glimpse of that when you study the article that came under the title: “All the president’s enemies,” and the subtitle: “Mitch McConnell is no Vladimir Putin, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei or Xi Jinping.” It was written by Clifford D. May, and published on January 18, 2022 in The Washington Times.

 

Clifford May’s interest has always been foreign policy, and this has not changed one bit. But current circumstances compelled him to start the discussion by mixing foreign and domestic policies. It was a speech by President Biden that compelled him to bring up the domestic part, which he immediately dismissed. Clifford May then concentrated his attention to discussing foreign policy. Here is the pertinent quote from his article that shows what happened as he spoke of Joe Biden:

 

“He went on to pledge that he would fight ‘all enemies — foreign and, yes, domestic’ — equating elected American lawmakers with ultranationalist Mr. Putin, Mr. Khamenei and Chinese Communist Party Chair Xi”.

 

Clifford May’s aim is to prevent the President from being distracted by domestic issues, when in his view and that of his colleagues at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), the only thing that should preoccupy America today and in the future, can only be how to serve Israel’s interests and nothing else. So, here is what Clifford May and his colleagues say must be done:

 

“As for Iran’s rulers, Mr. Biden should understand by now that attempts to appease, bribe or seduce them will be unavailing. My FDD colleague, Mark Dubowitz, and former Pentagon senior adviser Matthew Kroenig made the case in a Wall Street Journal op-ed last week for a realistic alternative: ‘coercive diplomacy.’ That means ‘putting the military option back on the table, along with a renewed sanctions offensive.’ Without those tools, American diplomats have no leverage”.

 

The military option, and a sanctions offensive, they say. You must have noticed that this is the proverbial “same old, same old.” Whereas the house of Uncle Sam is crumbling, and badly needs serious repairs or a complete revamping, the Jews want to revive and continue the policies that failed America throughout the decades. Yes those policies failed America, but they proved financially lucrative for Israel, even if they did not add to its security.

 

Could it be that Clifford May and his Jewish cohorts are not aware of what’s happening, or what needs to be done? Could it be that explaining to them America needs to reverse some of the old policies and why so — will make them come around and embrace the change?

 

No. To do so will be to make a needless effort, and will prove to be a waste of time. The reason is simple. It is that the Jews know some of what’s going on. What they don’t know and don’t want to know is that neglecting to revamp Uncle Sam’s house will hurt them more than anyone. Here is what Clifford May has shown he knows:

 

“An election year has begun, and Mr. Biden would doubtless prefer not to talk about the fiasco of the Afghanistan surrender and withdrawal, the absence of security on the Mexican border, the highest inflation rate in 40 years, unionized teachers refusing to return to the classroom and confused pandemic policies”.

 

America has problems, both domestic and foreign. They are interconnected, Biden has identified them, and he set out to fix them. These problems developed during the last half century, which happened to be the time when Jews were in control of America. And they defied getting fixed during all that time.

 

In fact, fixing America’s problems can only happen when the country is divorced from the Jewish influence that ruined it. Unfortunately, as you’ll see in the closing argument of Clifford May, he is touting the old failed policies as being America’s salvation. Here is that closing argument:

 

“The president’s highest priority should be to ensure that the US remains more powerful militarily and economically than its adversaries. Many people also expected he’d attempt to reunite a polarized nation. As he begins his second year in office, he’d be wise to consider what he must do — and what he must not do — if he is to have any chance of accomplishing that worthy mission”.

 

Clearly then, America’s problems can be identified as the Jewish advisers on whom it relies. Get rid of them, and Uncle Sam’s house will instantly get fixed with the blink of a genie’s eyes.