The conspiracy theorist who stuck her neck out

Irina Tsukerman says she is a human rights lawyer and a geopolitical and security analyst. She says she is also the CEO of Scarab Rising, a media and security consultancy. If that’s not enough to impress you, she says she is also the editor-in-chief of The Washington Outsider.

 

The problem with Irina Tsukerman is that she is also dumb. She proved it on February 22, 2022 when she wrote a slanderous article in which she ascribed dark motives to President Joe Biden based of the speech he gave to announce that Russia had invaded Ukraine.

 

What Irina Tsukerman did in her article, was make predictions, all of which turned out to be wrong as proven a few days later. You can verify all of that yourself when you read the article she wrote under the title: “Biden’s cynical ploy to return to Iran deal because of Ukraine,” published on February 22, 2022 in The New York Post.

 

What Tsukerman should have done before sending the article for publication, was leave it for an hour or two and then read it pretending that it was written by someone else. She should have tried to analyze both the article and the person that wrote it. If she has any level of intelligence, she would have realized to her horror that she was morbidly obsessed with the subject of Iran.

 

With a judgment that’s clouded by her obsession, she sat down to listen to President Biden’s speech while fantasizing that by some miraculous turn of the events, the President will say something like this: Anything the Russians can do, we Americans can do more intensely. Let them destroy Ukraine in two or three days, and we’ll destroy Iran in a day or less.

 

But this is not what the woman heard, which is why she got filled with uncontrolled fury as evidenced by the article she wrote. What she revealed at the start of her article, is that she cannot divorce herself from the idea that Jews are a breed apart. Had she been able to think of Jews as ordinary human beings, she would have loved the speech, and would have gone on to do something better than write a dumb article. Here, in condensed form, is how she prefaced that ill-advised article:

 

“Biden’s speech announcing Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and declaring a set of sanctions against Russia’s elites is a typical statement attacking a ruthless hegemonic dictator. But it misses the forest for the trees, enabling the strategies of Russia and Iran. The key point missing is that Russia does not accept Ukraine as a state. Dmitry Medvedev’s rhetoric describing Ukraine as a colony with a puppet regime, shows that Putin’s plans go far beyond annexation of swaths of territory. He has been trying to avoid a major conflagration, getting to the end result by removing the legitimate government. He’s selling his actions as reclamation of Russian territory; therefore, any sanctions will be viewed as illegitimate efforts to prevent Russia from securing its own territory”.

 

Believing that monopoly is the exclusive right of the Jews, Irina Tsukerman could not stomach the idea of what she calls the “missing key point” being borrowed by Russia, which is what Russia apparently did to build a case on it. But what is that key point, anyway? It is that Russia does not accept Ukraine as a state. This is a trick that started as a Jewish invention, and has served Israel well.

 

Here is what it’s all about: The Jews invented the idea that since Palestine was under British occupation, it was not a sovereign country, and this condition gave the armed marauding Jews the right to steal the country from its Palestinian owners. When Russia pulled that same trick on Ukraine, it infringed on the exclusive right of the Jews to monopolize the trick they invented … a reason to inflame them.

 

In addition to infringing on that Jewish right, Tsukerman sees something else that’s equally as upsetting in what Russia did. In the same way that Israel began annexing Palestinian lands with a first step that opened the door to a creeping annexation, she foresees that Putin will go beyond the annexation of swaths of territory. She foresees that Putin’s plans will allow him to endlessly make new demands.

 

Having spewed what makes her the paranoid character that she is, Irina Tsukerman finally came to what she says brings her to Biden’s other foreign policy failure, the Iran deal.

 

Well, my friend, if you ever wondered what happens to a paranoid that gets afflicted with a dose of delusion, read the last four paragraphs of Irina Tsukerman’s article. Together, they make up 136 words. But for the sake of brevity, here is a condensed version of them:

 

“The Ukraine invasion directly benefits the Islamic Republic. That’s why we are hearing that a deal with Iran is close to being signed. Biden has alluded to securing cheap Iranian oil as an answer to high gas prices in the United States. He is cynically using Russia’s destabilization of the global energy market to argue for the return to appeasement for the ayatollahs. Ukraine was sacrificed in exchange for a lucrative energy deal and Iran’s cooperation in Vienna”.

 

So now you know what it takes to be a sheer lunatic in America: You must be a human rights lawyer, a geopolitical and security analyst, the CEO of a media and security consultancy, and the editor-in-chief of a pamphlet. Anyone interested?

Revanchism of three decades or revanchism of two millenniums?

In sports, you never play just one game to determine which is the best team. Because there is recognition that a team can experience bad luck the first time around, you have the teams play a second round.

 

If the team that lost the first round wins the second, you have them play a third round, and the winner of this one is declared the ultimate winner because it would have won 2 out of 3 rounds.

 

In other games, they play up to 7 rounds, and the team that wins 4 is declared the ultimate winner.

 

Whether it is a 3-round or a 7-round game, the second round is usually called the revanchist. When used in sports, that word is considered anodyne, but that’s not how it began. It happened that during the war of the late nineteenth century, France lost territory to Germany. Angered by the loss, a movement started in France whose agenda was to seek “revenge” and fight to regain the lost territory. When this was done, the word revenge became “revanche” in French, and was adopted as is in English.

 

In time, the word has been used by the French in sports. It is almost never used in English, but when it is, it refers to political or war-like situations. As such, it has acquired its original meaning of “revenge” which everyone agrees, is not a sentiment of high morals. Thus, to accuse someone of revanchism is to accuse them of responding to the lowest of instincts.

 

This is what President Vladimir Putin of Russia has been accused of since the time when he declared that he views the dissolution of the Soviet Union as the severest catastrophe to happen in the twentieth century, an event that must be reversed according to him. And now that Putin has attacked Ukraine in an effort to bring it back into the Russian fold, people have intensified their accusations of him, sometimes using the word revanchism and sometimes describing him as a monster.

 

You’ll encounter one such description in the editorial that came under the title: “War threatens European theatre once again,” and the subtitle: “The consequences of weakness.” It was written by the editors of The Washington Times, and published on February 24, 2022. Here, in condensed form, is the editors’ description of Vladimir Putin, President of Russia:

 

“Beyond the reckoning of those who transgress into war, the demons of resentment and retribution, once released, are not easily recaptured and restrained. The world beholds the flash of destruction as Russian President Vladimir Putin has sent his military to rampage through a sovereign nation, fulfilling his long-held vow to undertake the reconstitution of the former Soviet Union”.

 

Perhaps you noticed the word “sovereign” in the above paragraph. What’s it doing there? Well, the editors of the Washington Times stuck it in there to respond to a consequential Russian contention. Actually, it is something that the Russians borrowed from the Judeo-Israelis who invented that contention to suit their own circumstances. This done, the Jews forced it on the Americans who made it a rule of theirs.

 

Here is the full story: To legitimize stealing the country of Palestine that had been under occupation for some time, the Jews did what they always do, which was to invent a rule that said it was kosher to steal a country that’s not sovereign. Palestine being under occupation in early twentieth century, it was not sovereign, therefore proper for the Jews to steal. What a convenient rule! said the Russians. Based on that, they declared Ukraine to be non-sovereign and invaded it. No, no, no, said the editors of the Washington Times, Ukraine is a sovereign nation that cannot be messed up with. And that’s why they stuck that word in the above paragraph.

 

Guess what’s happening to some of us here in Canada as a result. We are terrified that the Russians or Chinese or East Indians or Mexicans will use the fact that our head of state is not a Canadian but the Queen of England, and cite this reality as excuse to declare us non-sovereign. They will then proceed to occupy our dear Canuckstan based on the Jewish-invented new rule.  

 

As if this were not enough for one day’s work, the editors of the Washington Times came up with the following paragraph:

 

“Remaining to be seen following Russia’s attack on Ukraine is where and when it will end. As the world beholds the flash of destruction, the haunting realization reemerges: The consequence of weakness is war. It did not have to be this way”.

 

This is the signature that identifies those editors as being warmongers hiding behind the self-conferred jargon of “hawkish on defense.” What this says basically is that those editors are of the clan which advocates the forever wars by pretending that being armed to the teeth will deter others from causing mischief in the world. Apparently nobody took this message to the Vietnamese and the Afghanis who defied mighty America. And nobody took it to the Ukrainians who defied mighty Russia.

 

While the editors of the Washington Times are trying to resolve the contradictions that exist between what they see and what the reality on the ground is like, they might as well spend some of their mental energies to explain why Russia’s revanchism that has been simmering for only three decades is not kosher according to them whereas the Jewish revanchism that has been simmering for two whopping millenniums is very much kosher and then some.

Technology from thee to me but not me to thee

Are you familiar with the saying: “Cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face?” It is normally uttered to designate those who hurt themselves while trying to hurt others.

 

But things have gone so bad for America lately, you might use the saying to describe it as doing worse than take from others and never give back anything. In fact, you may describe America as cutting off its receiving hands to prevent them from giving away something.

 

As odd as it may sound, when it comes to technological innovation, this is what the Americans are doing. In fact, while acknowledging that they consider their country to be exceptional because it relies on others doing for it what it cannot do for itself, the Americans whose technological innovations are sustained by immigrants, are now lying about others stealing their technology.

 

Thus, to protect themselves from the fiction of being robbed, the Americans have announced taking measures to prevent foreign companies from having access to what they say is their technology. But in reality, these are technologies that were developed in collaboration with foreigners, people who would love to continue developing more technologies in America for Americans.

 

There was a time that we, in Canada, used to lament about the brain drain to the United States. We had good reasons to feel that way, given the ever-present American recruiters on Canadian campuses who were interviewing recent graduates and about-to-graduate students that exhibited exceptional talent in any field of technology – and offering them highly paid jobs in America.

 

Eventually, this show disappeared for two reasons. First, American companies bought most of Canada’s leading edge companies, turning them into branch-plants of companies in America. This gave the Americans access to the brightest of Canadian engineers and scientists, who were quickly transferred to the parent companies in America. Second, the Americans opened the door to students from around the world to come and study in American universities. Those who did well, were offered jobs in America, and they proved to be good at innovating and developing leading edge technologies for America.

 

Thus, for America to come now and say that it will block foreign companies, especially the Chinese, from having easy access to American technology, is to invite the Chinese to do for themselves what they have been doing for America. This will deprive America of what it acknowledges has been the source of its exceptionalism.

 

When you add to this the reality that America’s primary and secondary systems of education are so decrepit, they would be rejected by any self-respecting Third World country, you can imagine what kind of technology will be innovated in a future America; a former superpower that will be free of foreign students, and rapidly losing its exceptional status.

 

More is said about this matter in an article that came under the title: “America Is Fueling Chinese Techno-Nationalism,” and the subtitle: “The US campaign to limit Chinese firms' access to critical technologies has backfired. China has responded by pursuing its goal of bolstering its technological capabilities with an intensity unseen since Mao Zedong committed to developing nuclear weapons six decades ago.” The article was written by Keyu Jin, and published on February 25, 2022 in Project Syndicate.

 

The following is a condensed version of the way that Keyu Jin started her article:

 

“China is applying the juguo (whole nation) approach — deploying massive resources to attain world-class technological prowess. China is pursuing that goal with intensity. The motivation came when under President Trump, the US launched a campaign against Chinese companies, which included restricting their access to US-controlled critical technologies like semiconductors. That campaign has continued under President Biden, and many Chinese firms face a similar fate if they are added to the so-called Entity List. These actions have amounted to a wake-up call for China. Rather than remain vulnerable to the whims of the US, it needs to become technologically self-reliant”.

 

This story played out somewhat differently in the decades of the 1950s and 1960s when the colonial powers decided to punish the former colonies that got liberated and refused to remain under the influence of their former colonial masters. To punish them, the colonial powers blockaded those countries economically and in other ways, thus forced them to rely on themselves in all sorts of ways.

 

To do that, most of the newly liberated colonies began a program of industrialization that served them well through difficult times. Today, those Asian and North African nations — foremost among them China — owe their industrial success to what proved to be the glory days of their punishment.

 

In fact, having successfully completed its program of industrialization, China is now in a position to repeat that same success in the hi-tech fields. And in the same way that China’s industrial success has hurt America’s industries, we should expect that China’s success in advanced technology will hurt America in this field. In that sense, by taking measures to prevent foreign companies from having access to “American” technology, the country is cutting its nose to spite its face.

 

The last word is left to Keyu Jin who stated the following:

 

“China has attracted thousands from around the world to fill research-related positions. The equivalent of billions – maybe trillions – of dollars will go toward subsidizing innovation, from supporting basic research to building science parks. China has the tools, patience, and determination to bring about long-term transformation. One thing is clear: Given the Chinese response to US pressure on its tech giants, it is safe to assume that further restrictions will only strengthen China’s determination to achieve technological self-sufficiency – and, eventually, global primacy”.

The price we pay when we keep to a principle

Despite repeated warnings from the Western powers that Russia will be hit with severe sanctions if it invaded Ukraine, Russia did what it said it will do unless its demands were met. The demands were not met, Russia invaded Ukraine, and the West started implementing the promised sanctions.

 

It is clear to an impartial observer that each of Russia and the West were motivated by a principle they could not violate by backing away from the warnings or promises they made. And so, they moved to implement the “kinetic” clashes and economic measures which are producing the hardship of rising prices for some people, and causing a refugee problem for others.

 

These realities force us to ponder the question: What exactly is that thing called “principle” which can lead to so much misery?

 

A principle is an artificial stance we arbitrarily consider to be inviolable as, for example, the natural postulate (or axiom) in mathematics which goes like this: Because 3+7=10, therefore 7+3=10. You don’t have to prove or explain this; you take it as dogma and use it as a fundamental truth on which to build other mathematical theorems and what have you.

 

Whereas the natural postulate is a universal truth that cannot be violated for any reason, anytime by anyone, the artificial principle is usually created to serve as rails that will guide both the creator of the principle and those who must follow it to a predetermined goal. An example of that would be President Kennedy proclaiming, it is an American principle that no one can install nuclear missiles in Cuba. Violators of this principle will risk an America inflicted nuclear annihilation. So far, this has worked as a deterrence, but it is no guarantee it will never be violated no matter the warnings.

 

Because there is a divergence between the abstract and the working definitions of the word “principle,” human beings confuse between the validity of the two, and treat artificial principles as inviolable as mathematical postulates. In so doing, the humans risk as much as the survival of the planet keeping to a principle that might in the long run prove to have been a worthless proposition.

 

To get a sense of how a case of this kind begins, develops and ends, we may follow the journey of Russia’s doings and the Western responses concerning the Ukraine issue. Three articles that came on the same day February 24, 2022 in the same publication, The Washington Examiner, tell a great deal of what we need to know.

 

The first article came under the title: “Will Biden’s ‘full-scale’ response to Russian invasion succeed where his first round of sanctions failed?” It was written by Christian Datoc. The second article came under the title: “Biden declines to cut Russia from SWIFT payments system despite Ukraine’s pleas,” written by Zachary Halaschak. The third article came under the title: “Our failed policies made the Russia-Ukraine crisis possible,” written by Kaylee McGhee.

 

Each of the three articles tells a little of the principle that motivates the players in this global drama. It is one in which the fate of the planet may be at risk if something unexpected happens, followed by an inadvertent response that could escalate to a nuclear exchange between the two camps.

 

The following is a condensed version of the compilation gathered from the Christian Datoc article:

 

“President Joe Biden will announce a response from the United States and its NATO allies after a preliminary round of sanctions failed to stop Russian President Vladimir Putin from launching a military operation against Ukraine. Putin explained to the Russian public how troops would penetrate Ukraine beyond the Donbas region. Biden said in a statement responding to the invasion: Russia alone is responsible for the death and destruction this attack will bring, and the United States and its Allies and partners will respond in a united way. The world will hold Russia accountable".

 

What is obvious in that passage, is that President Biden is responding to the principle which says that America has the duty to stand up to someone like Putin, who violated the order established in the aftermath of World War II. Putin addressed his words to the Russian people who will ultimately hold him accountable for the decisions he makes. Biden, on the other hand, addressed his words to the whole world, to whom he believes he is accountable.

 

The following is a condensed version of the compilation gathered from the Zachary Halaschak article:

 

“The US is bucking Ukraine’s calls to remove Russia from the SWIFT system, opting in favor of sanctions that Biden argues are more aggressive. While there is a divide among Western nations about whether to cut Russia out of SWIFT, Kyiv had lobbied for Biden to do so. Instead, Biden unveiled new round of sanctions against Moscow but declined to excise Russia from the SWIFT network for the time being. In response to a question about why Russia’s removal from SWIFT was not part of the sanctions package, Biden told reporters that SWIFT it is always an option, but right now, that’s not the position that the rest of Europe wishes to take”.

 

It is obvious from this passage that different folks have different principles, therefore different needs they seek to satisfy. Whereas the leaders of Ukraine, some Americans and some Europeans wish to inflict harsh measures on Russia, other Europeans and President Biden wish to take the more cautious approach of gradually tightening the screws on Russia as long as Russia refuses to back off from its decision to invade Ukraine.

 

The following is a condensed version of the compilation gathered from the Kaylee McGhee opinion piece:

 

“Russia’s Vladimir Putin always intended to invade Ukraine and piece together the dissolved Soviet empire. In 2008 he invaded Georgia, in 2014 he invaded and annexed Crimea. The US and its allies made poor decisions that made more likely Putin’s expansion. NATO’s open door to Ukraine and Georgia gave Putin the excuse to treat his neighbors like a national security threat. Does anyone believe the US would have reacted differently if China began arming and forming an alliance with Mexico? Putin is responsible for the choices he made. He is using the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO as an excuse to justify his territorial ambitions. Putin gets to run the show, as he is demonstrating right now”.

 

It is obvious from this passage that the principle guiding Putin is the restoration of the Russian empire, whereas the principle guiding the US and its allies is to maintain the old world order.

 

The two principles have clashed causing the current situation. And the drama continues to an ending that nobody can predict at this time.

The UN Charter and Israel are responsible

 The reason why the permanent five are permanent, and have the veto power, is that they were the “big” ones that won the Second World War.

 

When they came together to forge the Charter of the United Nations, they reasoned that to prevent another World War they, who are the big ones, must not come into conflict with each other. And the way to do this, was to give themselves the power of the veto so as to freeze any situation that might have the potential to escalate and become a reason for two or more big powers to fight each other, thereby start a world war.

 

If that reasoning remains valid today, it leads to the conclusion that whatever Russia is doing now, it is legitimized — if not by the letter of the UN Charter, at least by the spirit of that Charter and — by the conspirative consent of the other permanent four, most notably the United States of America. Why is that? Because the United States has done many times what Russia is doing today, and the other big four criticized it but did not try to stop it.

 

However, it must be said that unlike Russia, America did not itself conquer or annex territory that does not belong to it. What America did, was arm and finance Israel, allowing it to do so, and tell the whole world — not just the other permanent four — that there was no daylight between it and Israel. In essence then, America has assumed responsibility for the doings of Israel. In addition, even though Israel is not a member of NATO, therefore not protected by Article 5 of that organization’s Charter, America made certain that the world understands America’s “ironclad” commitment to Israel no matter what it does.

 

And so, for all practical purposes, Israel annexing Palestinian territory is as good as America annexing that territory, a reason for Russia to annex its neighbor’s territory and tell America to shut up and mind its business. What this says, is that America’s relationship with Israel has completely disfigured America’s image as the liberator of Planet Earth from the twin perils of European Fascism and Asian Imperialism.

 

And if you think this is the only time that America lost so much for Israel to gain so little, it’s because you did not consider what else is happening in the relationship that was forged in hell. Whereas the development and possession of nuclear weapons would have been confined to a handful of nations because America had the power and prestige to work on declaring the rest of the world a Nuclear Free Zone, Israel’s dilly-dallying with the subject, and America’s inability to end that idiotic game, has paralyzed the superpower, thus let the world slide down the slope of nuclear proliferation.

 

You might be asking yourself: How did this happen when America’s power compared to that of Israel, is like the force of a volcano in full eruption compared to that of a kitty’s fart? This is a good question, and you might find the answer in the article that came under the title: “Putin’s winter war,” and the subtitle: “A strategy to contain him should have been implemented years ago.” It was written by Clifford D. May, and published on February 22, 2022 in The Washington Times.

 

Even if you only have the slightest idea as to how Jews operate, you must have detected the cheap Jewish trick that Clifford May has employed in the subtitle of his article. It unfolded in the same way that the Jews never made an offer to the Palestinians and challenged them to take it or leave it or make a counter offer — yet always claimed that they made offers to the Palestinians in the past that cannot be renewed now — you see Clifford May lament about a strategy that should have been implemented years ago to deal with Putin, a strategy that cannot be renewed now. So very cheap; so very Jewish.

 

Clifford May proceeded to write an article that, in essence, gave a quick history of the relationship that Putin had with the world, especially the United States. When you read that history, you get the sense that Clifford May is trying to say that embedded in it, were the signs that Putin was an evil man. The world should have seen this long ago, confronted him and stopped him then. Well, that’s what you feel Clifford May is trying to say. But in reality, you know that history unfolded as normally as it could be, especially when you compare it to that of Israel-Palestine-America during the same period of time.

 

Skipping the infinite amount of nitty-gritty in that long and contorted history, we can deduce what needs to be known by looking at the outcome. Simply stated, Putin is saying that the Ukrainians are a part of “our family,” we love them and want them back into our embrace. While not ideal, that’s a good outcome.

 

By contrast, the Jews of Israel and America are saying that the Palestinians are an inferior race that does not belong in Palestine. The Palestinians should be kicked out of there, say the Jews, to make room for more Jews to be brought into Palestine from around the world. That’s as beastly an outcome as it can ever get.

 

Whatever is happening today in and around Ukraine, has its roots in a UN Charter that no longer reflects the realities of how economic power and demographics are distributed in today’s world.

 

There is also a curious disregard for the reality that the Jews of Israel and those of America have turned America into a weapon that serves the destructive ambitions of the Jews and nothing else.

 

This is the reality of the situation at this moment, and the world is on edge.

They try to control the moral choices of others

 There was a time during an American electoral campaign when a controversy erupted as to who were the makers and who were the takers. The campaigners were trying to identify who were the producers of the nation’s wealth, and who were the receivers of that wealth, perhaps undeservedly.

 

This part of the debate ended unofficially, having established that the makers were (1) the people who extract the resources from nature (such as the farmers and the miners); (2) The people who manufacture these resources, turning them into useful products that the citizens want to consume and; (3) The people who work in the vast array of service industries, ranging from the street sweepers to the brain surgeons.

 

What the debaters did not discuss was the part of the service industries known as Financial Services. Simply put, this is the part that is connected to the Central Bank (The Fed) which is singularly responsible for printing the money that makes the economy work. For this to happen, the Central Bank channels the money throughout the economy via a network of banks, near-banks, insurance companies, brokerage firms and other money-processing institutions known as the Financial Institutions, which are supposed to operate as utilities. But this is where the debate can go on to eternity, and still not fully cover the subject.

 

However, the problem troubling this industry can be put simply as follows: the Service Industries are supposed to service the public, which they do. But the industry is made of people who are imperfect by their human nature. So, what happens is that the part of the industry that’s handled by human beings, unfolds more like a self-servicing contraption rather than a business servicing the public.

 

There is an infinite number of ways by which the money that’s supposed to be distributed fairly among the producers of the nation’s wealth, ends up not in the pocket of the producers but the pocket of those who work in the “self-service” industries and their cohorts. The latter being the people who generally work in the communication industries, ranging from journalism to lobbyism.

 

In fact we have a recent example that shows how those who produce not even an apple a year, get paid handsomely to do nothing but attack those who create the products that make up the wealth of the nation; products that the consumers need, buy and enjoy. The example came in the form of an article under the title: “Ben & Jerry’s Ukraine Tweet Is Not Just About Russia,” and the subtitle: “Ben & Jerry’s is now a cautionary tale on the dangers of the Environmental, Social, Governance [ESG[ movement run amok.” It was written by Jonathan Schanzer and Richard Goldberg, and published on February 22, 2022 in the National Interest.

 

Shanzer and Goldberg, the two attackers who live the highlife yet produce nothing that is useful, are not shy about spewing the hatred they hold in their hearts for Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, the two men who, at a young age risked everything they had to start an ice cream business that turned out to be so successful, it proved them driven by the talent of accomplished entrepreneurs.

 

The problem that Shanzer and Goldberg have, is that they are affiliated with a comical outfit which thinks of itself as a think tank named Foundation for Defense of Democracies, where the only thinking that’s done, aims at perpetuating the self so as to protect that which could not stand on its own, like for example, Israel’s system of apartheid. Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, producers of the nation’s wealth, would have nothing to do with that. Jonathan Shanzer and Richard Goldberg who live on donations from those they deceive, are furious that Ben & Jerry who could no longer be deceived, pulled out from the Palestinian West Bank that’s under Israeli occupation, a place where apartheid is practiced.

 

To give an excuse as to why they are attacking Ben & Jerry who produce wealth for the nation, Shanzer and Goldberg who live freely on that wealth, came up with a reason that is not much different from attacking motherhood because mothers raise moralistic children who don’t get into trouble often. Thus, having attacked the ice cream company because of its stance with regard to Israel’s apartheid, the slippery slope on which Shanzer and Goldberg found themselves, compelled them to attack the entire “Environmental, Social and Governance” movement. See for yourself:

 

The following two paragraphs represent a condensed version of what Jonathan Shanzer and Richard Goldberg are saying about the subject:

 

“Ben & Jerry’s is a cautionary tale on the dangers of ESG. Last year the company, which is owned by Unilever, announced it would terminate its license to distribute in Israel. In doing so, the company [switched] sides in an old clash. The decision was odd, given that the company failed to take such position” in every little dispute around the globe whether Ben & Jerry’s operates there or it doesn’t.

 

Shanzer and Goldberg went on to say this:

 

“To be fair, Unilever isn’t alone. Many corporations that advertise their commitment to ESG are selective in their application. Take, for example, the major sponsors of the Beijing Olympics. Coca-Cola, Procter & Gamble, Visa, Toyota, and Panasonic all purport to adhere to ESG principles, with dedicated pages on their websites to all the good they do for the world. Yet, they have all chosen to ignore the lives of millions of Uighur Muslims in China”.

 

This is the defense that was invented by the demonic minds of the professional evil doers. They will say to anyone trying to do good: If you cannot solve all the problems of humanity in one fell swoop, don’t try to solve anything separately.

 

This is how they hope to maintain their evil at perpetuity.

Time to showcase the phony king’s nakedness

 Do you remember the saying: “Never fear, Smith is here”? That’s what Zachary Smith used to say every time there was a hint of trouble ahead. But when the trouble actually materialized, the cowardly Smith ran and hid behind anything or anyone, including a child.

 

Those of us old enough to have been entertained and delighted by the TV series of the 1960s called “Lost in Space,” remember how funny but also how annoying the character Zachary Smith had been. Suppose now that something like this is playing out in real life with the stakes being so high, they could cost America its status as superpower if not its existence as a Republic. What then?

 

But is this really happening now? Yes, it is happening right now around the globe, especially in America, where the character of Zachary Smith is played in real life by many Jewish leaders, and especially by Israel that is perpetually said to “lead the world” in one thing or another … from knowing how to scoop up a dog’s poop better than anyone, to how America may produce semiconductor microchips just by haggling about them without the need to have multi-billion dollar manufacturing facilities. Call this the miraculous power of the wrangle.

 

Producing those microchips in abundance to fill America’s needs, is what the Israeli and the Jewish-American syndicate of blabbermouths convinced the dodo birds of the American political elites, will happen if and when a microchip crunch manifests itself in the world, and America will want to swim in a sea of microchips. Never fear a microchip crunch, said the Jews of Israel, and promised that they who are the “Start-up Nation” will jaw-jaw their mandibles and produce microchips. In the same way that when Jews of an earlier era stuck their fingers into the desert sand, and out came the groves of fruits and vegetables, they promised that when their mandibles will get going, out will come the microchips.

 

And then it happened that bottlenecks of the supply chain interrupted the flow of microchips from where they are produced to where they are consumed. America being a consumer of massive amounts of microchips, told the miserable and phony “start-up nation” to supply it with some so as to maintain a viable economy. Microchips? the Israelis asked. What microchips? We don’t even produce potato chips in Israel. How do you expect us to produce semiconductor microchips? What makes you think we can murmur the word microchips, and make them materialize? If that’s what you believe, someone must have lied to you, and you sucked the lies like the dodo bird you proved to be.

 

Needless to say that believing in the tsunami of lies which came out the mouths of Jewish liars, was the reason why America held back on developing its own microchip industry. Just imagine that while America was snoozing, believing that the “never fear, Israel’s here” chant of the lying mouths will rescue it at the right time, a handful of Asian countries were busy working to monopolize the production of microchips, thus put America in a situation of danger like it never had been since its establishment.

 

You can get exposed to more insight about this industry when you read the article that came under the title: “Taking Stock of Semiconductors,” and the subtitle: “It does America little good to win the innovation battle for the state-of-the-art if our military, ground transportation, and infrastructure grind to a halt for lack of the common essentials, including a reliable supply of semiconductors.” It was written by Jeb Nadaner and Alexander B. Gray, and was published on February 20, 2022 in National Interest.

 

To explain what the problem is, and how to solve it, Nadaner and Gray gave a comprehensive lesson on how useful the microchips are to all sorts of industries, how and why they came to be in short supply, and how to avoid getting caught in a similar situation in the future. The following is a condensed version of their article:

 

“US manufacturers had only five days’ worth of semiconductors compared to forty days-supply three years ago. The administration tapped the Petroleum Reserve. The government maintains stockpiles for protective equipment, critical minerals, and helium. It is time to consider expanding the scope of products and materials kept under strategic reserve—starting with semiconductors. Until recently, technique called ‘just in time’ delivery, left the country vulnerable to interruptions. But times are changing. Recognizing those vulnerabilities, the US Congress has invested billions of dollars to support US semiconductor research, development, and production. These steps will take multiple years to establish new production and supply systems. A high percentage of microelectronics products consumed in the US are produced in China or Taiwan and South Korea. There is a disconnect that cannot be addressed through market forces. The problem cannot wait to be solved. To ensure an adequate supply of semiconductors, requires a strategic stockpile. The government would acquire and set aside up to a month’s worth of microelectronics items. The Defense Department is a natural home for such a stockpile”.

 

Think of where America would be today were it not deceived by the incessant propaganda effort of the Jewish lying machine whose deceptive representations caused America to neglect building a robust microelectronics industry for itself, relying instead on the prowess of a “start up nation” that is as phony as the fictitious Iron Dome.

 

If something good came out of the microchip crunch, it is that the phony king of “leading the world in everything” has been stripped down to his birthday suit, and shown to look like an ordinary mortal with no special endowment to brag about.

They apply dictatorship under another name

 You don’t have to imagine what would happen if a mouthpiece aligned with the American government were to write an article in an Israeli newspaper describing America’s preference as to how the government and opposition parties in Israel should treat an issue that Israel considers important.

 

In fact, something like this happened a number of times in the past, and the reaction in Israel has been nothing short of the Israeli Prime Minister and others publicly (that’s publicly) telling the American government to shut up and mind its own f***ing business. This was followed by the customary: hurry up and send money and weapons free of charges. And the American government promptly obeyed.

 

Thus, stretching your imagination to the breaking point, you think that Israel — being the little fart which, in real life, is nothing more than a pauper-level supplicant — is allowed to treat America in this manner because America chooses to treat it like an equal.

 

But when you discover that the reciprocation that’s supposed to establish equality, is non existent, the stretching causes your imagination to snap with the fury of the steel wire in a crane that’s trying to lift a hundred-ton load. The snap happens when you discover that mouthpieces aligned with the Israeli government routinely write articles in American newspapers describing the Judeo-Israeli preference as to how America must behave when handling matters that concern Israel. What galls you the most, is that whereas the Israelis do not hesitate to put America in its place when they think it went out of line, not a word comes out the mouth of dithering Americans to tell the Jews to shut up or mind their own business.

 

This situation is so completely reversed from what it ought to be, you refuse to believe it unless you are shown a real example. Well, it so happens that a real example was produced recently in the form of an article that came under the title: “Do We Pay Too Much or Too Little Attention to ‘The Squad?’” It was written by Jonathan S. Tobin, and published on February 20, 2022 in the Jewish News Syndicate. The following is a condensed version of how Tobin introduced the subject he is discussing:

 

“It was a great day for the US-Israel alliance. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led a delegation on a visit to Israel where she sounded the right notes. She knew what her hosts and her party’s Jewish donors wanted to hear, and she laid it on thick. It was in contrast to the broadside about Israel from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), the leader of the congressional ‘Squad’”.

 

With this, Tobin is saying that there is a visible rift in the Democratic Party between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on one side, and AOC, the leader of the ‘Squad,’ on the other side. Tobin goes on to explain that aging Nancy Pelosi and the other old timers continue to support Israel no matter what it does, whereas AOC and her young colleagues want to hold Israel to account for what it does that’s contrary to American values.

 

Whereas the rift between the two women and their respective companions, is a matter that concerns only the Democratic Party, it means a great deal more to Jonathan Tobin and his Judeo-Israeli comrades. That’s because even though the Democrats and the Republicans are at war against each other in America, the two parties continue to work together, in a bipartisan way, to benefit Israel at the expense of America and everyone else. This situation looks so absurd and so insulting to America’s sense of self-respect, AOC and her Squad companions seek to change it. According to Tobin, time is on their side because it won’t be long before the aging defenders of anachronism will be out of the way, leaving the reins of power and decision making in the hands of AOC and her team.

 

But even before the transfer of power from the old guard to the rising young leaders of the Democratic Party, is complete, Jonathan Tobin sees that things have changed somewhat from the way they used to be when bipartisanship made the interests of Israel, priority number one … well ahead of America’s interests. To prove it, Tobin cites the example of the Iran nuclear deal which is unanimously rejected by the Republicans but rejected by only a handful of Democrats.

 

In the quest to prevent the further erosion of America’s usefulness to the needs of Israel, Jonathan Tobin is suggesting two things. First, he wants Nancy Pelosi to push back against what the members of the Squad say that sheds light on Israeli crimes. He even wants Pelosi to punish the Squad members for harming Israel by spreading the truth about it. Second, Tobin sees that contrary to popular belief, what needs to be done, is for the media to throw more light on the doings of the Squad members, but do so to emphasize the negative side of their pronouncements and their activities. Here, in condensed form, is how Tobin explained his point of view:

 

“Pelosi remains willing to tolerate AOC and other Squad members despite their support of the antisemitic BDS movement. That’s because she’s shown at times that she’s afraid of them and for good reason: They have the support of the party’s activist base. The critique of the press that holds that we’re paying too much attention to backbench House members while not appreciating the importance of what the leadership is doing has it backwards. We’re not over-covering AOC and The Squad. What we’re doing is not focusing enough on the threat they pose to take over one of America’s two major parties. And when they do, even the theoretical hope for reviving a bipartisan consensus on Israel will go out the window”.

 

It's not going to work this time for Jonathan Tobin or the Judeo-Israeli global crime syndicate. But bear in mind that it did work previously — when dictatorship was pronounced bipartisanship — which is why America ended up being ruled for half a century by the dictatorial commands of the little fart that still goes by the name Israel.

Named honorary Whites, they got White privilege

 It was apartheid South Africa that came up with the idea of granting the status of “Honorary White” to non-white but wealthy people willing to do business with it. This was a way for South Africa to get around the boycott that was declared by virtually the whole world against the governing regime. Of course, the intent of the boycott was to force that country to end its repulsive practice, which is what happened eventually. And so, like Shakespeare said: All’s well that ends well.

 

But all is not well in America these days because, having done the usual thing and messed up an easy to understand situation, the Jews now find themselves sucked down a quicksand that’s not letting up. In fact, what the Jews did that hurts them today, began decades ago when — to imitate the Soviets that got bogged down in Afghanistan and asked the Americans to be merciful in their criticism given that both are of the White race — those Jews instructed the North American media to promote the idea that Jews are White, and fighting against the hated “the Middle Eastern types,” which was euphemism that referred to Arabs or Muslims.

 

Granted what they asked for, the Jews had a field day wallowing in the avalanche of goodwill expressed toward them by the White supremacists, especially those of the Evangelical whorish kind. Then, the Woke movement came to America, and white was no longer the favorite color of a skin. Having chosen to be identified as White, the Jews felt like they had brought a ton of bricks on their heads trying to con the North American population and political elites that they are of one race called “European Jews,” and not the multi-colored wannabees who say they are Jews but don’t even know what that means.

 

So now, the Jews are trying to push back against a Woke movement that’s holding them to the choice they made decades ago, and deceptively earned privileges they were not entitled to. And this is why you see people like Steve Wenick weep at the possibility they may lose privileges they cannot fathom how they’ll live without when the privileges will be taken away. Steve Wenick expressed his sorrow in an article that came under the title: “The Myth of ‘Jewish-White Privilege,’” published in the Jewish online publication Algemeiner on February 16, 2022.

 

With a customary hypocrisy the size of a biblical plague, Steve Wenick began his article by lashing out at humanity, accusing it of what he knows is not human but more Jewish than even Matzoh bread ever was. Look at the shameless passage with which Steve Wenick started his article, and judge for yourself:

 

“‘Jewish-White-Privilege’ refers to the fact that if you are Jewish in America, the assumption is that you are both white, and privileged. That is a false premise. Ignorance abounds about Jews and Jewish history — a history replete with false accusations and misinformation. The cudgel of ‘ignorance’ is the weapon of choice, a convenient excuse for bigotry against the Jews”.

 

You couldn’t find a better way to describe those who call themselves Jews but have zero knowledge of what they believe is a religion they cannot delineate or maybe is an ethnic group they cannot demarcate or maybe is a race of beings they cannot define. In fact, it happened that when the internet came along, and the voices that were muzzled by the dictatorial instructions of the Jews to their prostituting politico-journalists, all those dilemmas exploded like mushroom clouds, causing the likes of Steve Wenik to hurriedly pull an old Jewish trick, and use it to save the situation. Here is what he shamelessly did:

 

“My Jewish origins date back to the same place and time as that of all Jews. My Jewish soul stood at Sinai along with my black, brown, and white brothers”.

 

Do you realize what this is about, my friend? It is about the Jews being so squeezed that Steve Wenik and those like him are desperately trying to put together a new fictitious narrative that will respond to the realities which came to light about the Jews being — not one people with a common origin in Palestine but — an assorted bunch of losers from around the world, making up a crime syndicate specialized in theft and deception.

 

In order to do that and be credible, what the Steve Weniks of this world want the readers to conclude on their own without the writers saying it in print, is that the story of Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael as told in the Old Testament, is just about as worthy as a used toilet paper ready to be flushed down the tube.

 

What these characters want you to believe, is that starting now and till new instructions are issued, you must believe that Abraham begot, not Isaac or Ishmael, but a multitude of black, brown and white skinned brothers — but no yellow skins or sisters. It is the kind of thing you might see in a Hollywood production that sticks to historical truths like the time when they had the Jews build the pyramids of Egypt a good 1,300 years before they ever set foot in Egypt. Well, don’t you believe in miracles or time travel?

 

Having placed you where he wants you, Steve Wenick proceeded to spew the new narrative. What he did was neglect mentioning what happened to the black and brown brothers, and narrating only the journey through White Europe of the invented for-the-occasion White brothers. He told of their ordeal as they tried to settle in Italy, England, Hungary, Switzerland, Austria, Bavaria, Portugal, Spain, Germany, the Papal States, Russia, Poland, and other European countries as well as America, home of the Statue of Liberty. Instead of honoring and favoring the witness of the Jewish brothers, said Wenick, those Europeans and America mistreated the White Jews as they would any undesirables.

 

With this, Steve Wenik has concluded that “Jewish-white-privilege is not a term of advantage, but a painful trope that leads to denying us the comfort and acceptance as a member of the community of inclusiveness”.

 

What Steve Wenick and those like him refuse to acknowledge, is that being of every color of skin and every race, the one thing that the so-called Jews have in common, is that they all adhere to one ideology they elevated to the level of religion. And what’s remarkable about this religion is that it has only one prayer that the devout are obligated to recite perhaps a thousand times a day.

 

So, how do the Jews pray a thousand times a day? Well, if an alien being from a distant planet came to Earth and saw what was happening without being prejudiced by history, he would send a message to his superiors that says the following:

 

The Jews pray by telling a big fat lie a thousand times a day. This is why they have been despised by everyone on Planet Earth through time and space. This is unlikely to change because the Jews don’t want it changed.

To normalize by artificial means is to live a contradiction in terms

Since the beginning of time when the early hunters and gatherers settled down and farmed the land near the rivers, human life has done well by following the dictates of the natural order of things.

 

Since the beginning of time when the nomads that call themselves Jews realized they missed the opportunity to settle down and build a nation for themselves — they turned to the one thing they knew how to do well: they stole Palestine which belongs to the Palestinian people who settled in that piece the land at the beginning of time and never left it.

 

Since the beginning of time the Jews have tried to keep or retake the stolen property but were kicked out of it each time one way or another; and ownership of the land was returned to the Palestinians who remained on it despite being occupied on and off by several colonial powers, ranging from ancient Rome to the modern British empire.

 

Since the beginning of time, the Jews have represented the personification of the perpetual losers. Like the scum who keeps getting into deliberate accidents to claim charity and compensation — which pay for his upkeep and his mischiefs — the Jews have managed to make Germany, America and others, set up streams of money that continually go to replenish the Jewish bank accounts.

 

The latest of their gambit in this vein has been the Holocaust that turned out to be a very lucrative enterprise for the Jews. In addition, the pity that was generated by the intensity of their plight, gave them a small enclave to make their home in Palestine, which they called Israel. But as it turned out, this was the mistake that has allowed the Jews to sucker the Americans, not only for cash, but also for the most lethal military equipment and above all, for the moral support that consists of pimping for Israel, and protecting it at the Security Council with the American veto of infamy.

 

In addition to vetoing all that tells the truth about the crimes committed by Israel, the moral support that America extends to that entity, translates into blocking the natural unfolding of the events that pertain to Israel and those who deal with it, replacing those events with artificial alternatives. For example, the natural method of doing commerce is that you gain the goodwill of your customers by addressing the concerns they tell you about when they reduce purchase of or boycott your products. The artificial way invented by the Jews, has been to force the braindead zombies governing the American States, to make laws that force their own people to buy and consume Israeli products they don’t want.

 

Another more poignant example is what came to be known as the Abraham Accords. It was a few months after 9/11 that the Arab nations, meeting in Beirut at the request of Saudi Arabia, agreed that Israel being the one factor poisoning the relations between the Arabs and the United States, if not the entire Western World, it will be wise to offer Israel the security and recognition it wants. To that end, the Arabs agreed unanimously to recognize Israel, establish full diplomatic and commercial relations with it, and open the door for cultural and touristic exchanges to be established. What the Arabs wanted in return was that Israel abide by the various United Nations resolutions calling on it to end the occupation of Palestine, and return to the 1967 borders.

 

It turned out this was not what Israel wanted. What the Jews of America and Israel wanted was the status quo as far as Israel’s relation with America was concerned. As to the status of the occupation, they wanted the continued creeping annexation of Palestinian lands. And so, neither the Jews of America nor Israel responded to the Arab proposal. Not a yes or a no or a counter offer came from them.

 

What happened more than a decade later, was that the former American President Donald Trump, saw the pole numbers and knew he would lose reelection unless he created an artificial situation that would raise his polling numbers. The only thing that came to mind was that Netanyahu of Israel owed him one. Trump called Netanyahu and told him to announce his acceptance of the Arab proposal or else. The reluctant Netanyahu knuckled under and did as he was told. And this is how, in the most artificial of manners, the so-called Abraham Accords came to be.

 

When this happened, the Jews that neglected the Arab proposal for more than a decade, suddenly went into a state of prolonged orgasmic jubilation. They are still celebrating and calling on America to do the very thing that always turned a sumptuous meal into breakfast for dogs. The Jews wanted America to artificially “build” on the Accords instead of letting things develop naturally from here on.

 

And that’s what you see in the Abraham Cooper article. He is chiding Representative Jamaal Bowman who was swarmed by the Jews when first elected, and made to believe that the Accords will improve if placed in the hands of the Jewish leaders to build on, but then changed his mind when he realized that fabricated normalization was a bad idea to begin with. Worse, when normalization is based on bribing the reluctant Arab leaders to go against their conscience and the will of their people — well, this is to invite the kind of disaster that has been the hallmark of Jewish existence for thousands of years. These people never learn, and so they keep repeating the same insane mistakes over and over again.

 

Like the rest of his clan, Abraham Cooper is smitten by the juvenile idea of worshiping the numbers regardless of what the numbers signify. And so, he and they love to count the number of American States that have adopted the Jewish definition of antisemitism. As well, the Jews point with pride and with fake sorrow to the number of anti-Jewish incidents in America as reported by the FBI. They believe that the bigger the numbers, the better their arguments to get more taxpayer money.

 

The Jews say they need the money to improve their security, but what they do is fund their various other causes, such as importing losers from around the world to kill Palestinians and steal their properties. And there is one more thing that’s as dear to the Jewish heart as anything: They argue to get more legislations passed that tell the public their own government prefers the Jews over them, which is why the Jews are classified as a privileged lot.

 

Now, Abraham Cooper wants to take this mentality to the international stage, and count the number of Arab countries America will bribe to make them enter the Abraham Accords with or without the approval of their populations — and damn the consequences.

The venomous stinging swarm ran out of venom

 There was a garden in the City on the Hill that wasn’t the Garden of Eden, but a garden where fruits and flowers grew in lush abundance, said John Winthrop.

 

People from everywhere came to savor the good life in the City on the Hill. Then one day, weed grew in the garden of the City on the Hill. In time, the garden began to look like a messy patch of neglected boondock, and the City began to slide to the bottom of the hill where it garnered the look of a slum like those in the less developed Third World.

 

The calamity first happened when a swarm descended on the city, causing it to deteriorate. The swarm pretended to be better than the bees at pollinating the flowers and make them bloom into bigger fruits. But this was a deception because the swarm was like grasshoppers that came to devour the fruits already there and the flowers that were ready to develop.

 

If you think this is an analogy representing a real situation, you are correct. But it is not an all out fictitious story because John Winthrop did really exist, and he did utter the phrase, “City on the Hill.” He was referring to America, the place of great potential that fulfilled the promise it made to all newcomers. It did so till overwhelmed by the malign swarm that came to devour the garden and all that’s in it under the false pretense of helping it to grow bigger and better fruits.

 

Two reflections on the malign swarm came in the form of articles with different titles. What they have in common is that both intend to cause the political leaders to steal from their own people and give to the swarm that bribes and blackmails them simultaneously.

 

One article came under the title: “Congress overdue to help fund Israel’s Iron Dome,” and the subtitle: “Terrorist rocket attacks may not be front-page news, but they haven’t stopped.” It was written by Blaise Misztal, and published on February 15, 2022 in The Washington Times.

 

The other article came under the title: “US needs to deliver on its promise to fund Israel’s Iron Dome,” and the subtitle: “Failure to do so will undermine ‘ironclad’ partnership with Jewish state.” It was written by the triple swarm of Richard Natonski, Jonathan Ruhe and Andrew Ghalili, and was published on February 16, 2022 also in the Washington Times.

Those of a certain age who read the Blaise Misztal article will remember the tricky theatrics that were deployed during the decades of the 1960s and 1970s by the Jews of Israel and America. Their task was to impress upon the unethical hordes of political animals from America, that Israel was doing more good than evil in occupying Palestine and exploiting its indigenous population.

 

The corniest of the tricks was to invite to Israel brainless politicos from America where they assisted in shoveling dirt to simulate the planting of a tree in what the Jews made the Americans believe that the Land of Milk and Honey was really a desert that contained neither milk nor honey. This was the truth, said the lying Jews, till the Jewish tailors, musicians and jewelers from Eastern Europe, stuck their golden fingers into the sand, and made the miracle happen, causing the desert to bloom with lush vegetation.

 

During the decades that have elapsed between then and now, the Jews of America and Israel developed a whole new arsenal of tricky theatrics by which to impress upon the brainless politicos of modern times, that shoveling taxpayer money from America to Israel will do more good than evil in that the money will be used to import losers from around the world, and have them take up residence in properties that were ethnically cleansed of their indigenous Palestinians. These were properties that were razed with the use of American-made tanks and F-35s, and were rebuilt to hide the crime. One of the tricky theatrics now used by the Jews sounds like this:

 

“The Iron Dome has played a role in protecting Israel from the rocket attacks launched by Hamas, a Palestinian terrorist organization”.

 

As can be seen, in the same way that the old theatrics aimed to convince the American politicos that the Land of Milk and Honey was a desert, the new theatrics aim to convince the American politicos that Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin ran — not two Jewish terrorist organizations — but one terrorist organization headquartered in Gaza, operating under the assumed name of Hamas. After all, it was Israel that organized, equipped and financed Hamas with instruction to terrorize Fatah, the Palestinian group of freedom fighters headed by Yasser Arafat … till Hamas decided to turncoat, change allegiance and oppose Israel instead.

 

As to the troika of Natonski, Ruhe and Ghalili article, it relies on a different kind of tricks to deceive the American politicos, and make them believe that sending money to Israel under the false pretense of replenishing a life-saving non-existent system named Iron Dome, will do more good than evil. Here is what the troika did:

 

To hide the reality that it was the Jews who brought terrorism to the Middle East, and hide the reality that they continue to be masters of the gruesome art, the troika that’s an important part of the Jewish propaganda machine, has used the guilt-by-association trick as well as the blackmail to attribute to the Palestinians the evil that belongs to Jews, and attribute to Jews the good that belongs to the Palestinians. Look at the following passage, and judge for yourself:

 

“Restocking Iron Dome is a priority for the US and should be funded promptly. The system shields Palestinians and Israelis from rockets fired by Iran-backed terrorist groups. As detailed in a report by the Jewish Institute for National Security of America [home of the troika] the protection afforded by Iron Dome saves Palestinian and Israeli lives by precluding Israel’s need to conduct ground operations”.

 

As can be seen, the troika is associating the Palestinian freedom fighters with the exemplary nation of Iran, which the Jews accuse of the terrorism they see in themselves. In addition, the troika is blackmailing America with the threat that in the absence of money to replenish a system that does not exist, Israel will mount ground operations that have always resulted in the Israeli army being crushed like bugs under Palestinian boots.

 

The poor things; they are beginning to look like a swarm emptied of the venom that used to make it the feared buzzword on the Hill.

He laments words of wisdom that did not pan out

 To start his discussion, Clifford D. May first observed that in 1982, President Ronald Reagan said that democracy was winning around the world.

 

Clifford May went on to say that after this observation, came words of wisdom to the effect that, in line with authoritarianism being in decline, more nations will choose freedom and thus prosper.

 

But despite the fall of the Soviet Regime less than ten years later, the prediction of freedom and prosperity did not pan out according to Clifford May. This prompted him to lament what has been happening ever since instead of motivating him to try figuring out what exactly happened or what can be done to remedy the situation.

 

You’ll see all that in the Clifford May discussion that came in the form of an article under the title: “Coalition of the unwilling: Western elites prefer not to fight authoritarianism,” published on February 15, 2022 in The Washington Times. The writer began the discussion by expressing his shock that the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) contends the following:

 

“The real challenge for the West may not be to prevent China from one day becoming the dominant global power, which seems to be, if not inevitable, at least highly likely — but to manage that process in such a way as to avoid war and preserve democracy and the best of the Western enlightenment legacy”.

 

Is that expression of shock for real, or is it a disguise hiding something else? After all, these are the people of Karl Marx; of the Bolsheviks and of Uncle Joe Stalin, the inventors and first practitioners of authoritarianism. Clifford May himself started life as a Philo-Communist who studied in the Soviet Union, being a classmate of Vladimir Putin. And so, for him to come now and pretend that he hates Communism is like the nymphomaniac who denies she enjoys sex. Surely, Clifford May must have at least a residual love in his heart for the old glory days. So, what’s his problem now?

 

His problem is Israel. As usual, Israel bit more than it could chew, but this time even America will not come to the recue. What happened was that in the quest to obtain more advanced weapons than its neighbors, Israel started an arms race that put it at a clear disadvantage with those neighbors. The consequence has been that there is nothing America can do now to help it weaken or break the deterrence it faces on all its borders. In fact, Israel is now forced to sit quietly in its corner, unable to stir trouble like a self-respecting Jewish entity is supposed to do.

 

Coupled with a Western alliance that is itself paralyzed, this situation is alarming Clifford May who realizes that Israel’s days of capricious behavior are numbered, which also means that Jewish leaders such as himself will have their powers curtailed. He fears that he and his likes will be rendered a relic of the past in the same way that the Falun Gong leaders and the Dalai Lama were turned into invisible nonentities roaming the Earth in search of someone willing to listen to their words of “wisdom”.

 

The following paragraph is a compilation of the lamentations expressed by Clifford May concerning what he sees as the lethargy that’s gripping the Western World regarding the rise of what he calls the authoritarian regimes:

 

“The EIU is untroubled by the prospect of the Chinese replacing the United States as the dominant global power. It reflects the views of a broad swath of British, European and American elite opinion. Members of this coalition of the unwilling do not intend to defend the institutions that guarantee freedom of speech, the press, property rights, an independent judiciary and the rule of law. Within this coalition are both left-wingers and right-wingers. The leftists believe America is fundamentally flawed, socially unjust and systemically racist. It has no business passing judgment on Chinese, Russian, Iranian, Cuban, Venezuelan and others. The rightists believe that America can and should become a fortress, ignoring conflicts in far-off lands”.

 

As if stirred by a sharp instinct to the effect that the Jews will not come out of this experience without being blamed for something—like history says they always do—Clifford May felt the urge to visit the website of Amnesty International pretending to look and see what it says about the China Olympic games. He found that thing, but he also discovered something else. It was the thing he fully expected to see, that which to his dismay, ran as follows:

 

“I see on the website of Amnesty International a note that the Olympic games promise to be a memorable sporting spectacle. Much more prominently featured on the website: Amnesty’s allegation that Israel is guilty of apartheid, carrying the implication that [Israel] has no right to exist”.

 

Things being this bad, are there solutions to them, according to the EIU? Yes there are, says Clifford May, and he printed them despite the fact that he found them inadequate. Here is what he printed:

 

“So, what policy does the EIU propose the Free World adopt? It recommends that the US and its Western allies should focus on rejuvenating their political systems so that they can provide a desirable alternative to that of China. Far better that the US and the world’s democracies demonstrate the advantages of their system of government by re-democratizing their politics, rather than by trying to isolate or contain China”.

 

Clifford May would have preferred to follow what he says is the advice given by Ronald Reagan who said that freedom must constantly be fought for.

 

Needless to say, however, that Ronald Reagan the pacifist would not have appreciated being quoted speciously by someone who meant to use his words to promote forever wars, which is what Clifford May has done so cunningly.

When a haggling case blew up like a stink bomb

 First, I must reveal that I find haggling to be distasteful. And so, every time I become aware that a subject which may interest me, is heavy on haggling, I avoid it unless the content is too important to neglect.

 

Well, neglecting the subject is what I did when a controversy erupted about what Whoopi Goldberg had said. I did not follow the subject, but the subject was so ubiquitous, I could not avoid being exposed to bits and pieces of it. So, take this as an admission that I do not know all of what relates to this subject.

 

What I know about the matter is that during a discussion, someone said that the Holocaust was about race, and Whoopi Goldberg said, no it was not. I was tempted at the time to enter the fray despite the haggling that surrounded the subject, but considering that other matters were more pressing, I kept my distance from the Goldberg controversy, and used my time and energy to do other things.

 

And then, it happened that a few days later, while surfing the headlines of the newspapers, my eyes caught one that promised the article below it will interest me enough to want to write about. This was the news item that came under the title: “AOC says anti-Israel pundit Marc Lamont Hill victim of cancel culture,” written by Kate Scanlon, and published on February 15, 2022 in The Washington Examiner.

 

As I was reading the article, my mind connected elements of it with the bits and pieces that I had gathered from the Whoopi Goldberg haggling. By the time I had finished reading the Kate Scanlon article, I knew what I was going to write about. Here is the part that intrigued me the most in the Scanlon article:

 

“Marc Lamont Hill was fired from CNN in 2018 following comments he made about Israel and the Palestinian territories during a speech at the United Nations, calling for a ‘free Palestine from the river to the sea.’ That phrase is used by terrorist groups, including Hamas, that have called for the elimination of Israel. The comments were called antisemitic by the Anti-Defamation League”.

 

Apparently, the Jewish organization that goes by the name ‘Anti-Defamation League’ (ADL) did not just blow its entrails out of the belly upon hearing an innocuous phrase uttered by a likeable professor, the ADL accused the good professor of being antisemitic because he uttered a phrase that, according to ADL, sounds similar to what the so-called terrorists utter at times. But who was it that decreed this rule? It was none other than the mother of all terrorist syndicates; the one that calls itself Israel.

 

And that is the point where the connection was made in my mind between the Marc Hill incident and the Whoopi Goldberg incident. It is that the professor was vilified for believing that the Palestinian people should live in freedom, whereas Whoopi Goldberg was vilified for believing that Hitler was wrong, and that his “Angel of Death” Josef Mengele was a very ignorant medical doctor.

 

Here, my friend — to the Jews and to the Palestinians — is what goes into the saying that Palestine should be free from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea:

 

The Jews believe that the piece of real estate known as the West Bank belongs to them and will be annexed piece by piece so as to make Israel a continuous piece that extends from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, and no Palestinian state of any size will ever exist. But for now, they will tolerate the Palestinians speaking of freeing the West Bank, even if Israel has no intention of relinquishing it.

 

And so, whenever someone, like Professor Hill, speaks of a free Palestine from the River to the Sea — which means from end to end — the fanatic Jews get goosebumps because to them, it means there will not be a Zionist state; not even within the 1948 or 1967 boundaries.

 

As to the Palestinians, they say that if the Jews will not let them have their own country in the West Bank and Gaza, then they should allow for both “peoples” to share a single country. It will be one that extends from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. It will be a country in which everyone will have equal rights and equal obligations. And this is what the slogan: “Palestine shall be free from the River to the Sea,” means to them and to those who sympathize with their cause, such as Professor Hill.

 

Now, for the Jews to transport their diseased mentality to America and use it to cancel good people like Marc Lamont Hill, is to commit the same kind of horror that they made when they accused Whoopi Goldberg of whatever it was that they accused her of.

 

But why is it that the Jews reacted violently when Goldberg said something they should have embraced? It is that she repudiated what Hitler said and what Mengele approved of, namely that all Jews are of one and the same inferior race. No, Whoopi Goldberg meant to say, the Jews are as diversified as any religion, and if they are inferior, all of humanity is inferior. But because this is false, it follows that the Jews are the same as everyone else.

 

What’s wrong with that, you ask? The answer is that there is nothing wrong with it if you’re a normal human being hearing it. But everything is wrong with it if you’re a convert to Judaism, the religious ideology that lives on charity spurred by the victimhood status in which it exists like fish in the ocean of perpetual begging for charity and compensation.

 

Hitler and Mengele provide that ocean, and the Jews who cannot live without charity, will fight to the death maintaining that they are inferior and forever in need of a handout.