He wants to mobilize, but then do what?

 Clifford D. May wrote an article under the title: “Cold War II and Biden’s new ‘new world order,’” and the subtitle: “Unless we mobilize, expect no good outcome.” It was published on March 29, 2022 in The Washington Times.

 

The subtitle of the article suggests that if “we” mobilize, we can produce a good outcome. But Clifford May does not explain how mobilization will lead to a desired outcome, or what the outcome is supposed to look like. If anything, the images coming from the war in Ukraine, tell that mobilization is the first step in the journey to a horror that only the Jews would wish on the human race, eager as they are to punish it for preventing them from ruling the world.

 

Having quoted several people who said the things that must have sounded like music to his warmongering ears, Clifford May finally spat out what he really felt. Here is what he said:

 

“This is not merely an academic observation. It is — or should be — a call to action. Wars, hot or cold, are not won willy-nilly. If our opponents are mobilizing and fighting, and we are not, a good outcome is unlikely”.

 

Does Clifford May really mean that “our” opponents are mobilizing, and “we” are not? Well, going through the article looking for what he calls our opponents, we find them to be Russia, China and Iran. So we ask: What are these countries doing that’s not telling America: You’re too close for our comfort, pack up your military gear and get out of our neighborhoods? The answer to the question is: Nothing more than that.

 

And that happens to be the most legitimate thing someone can tell another. It shows that the aggressor is not the one that’s at home minding his business, but the one that’s on the prowl looking for those who are getting big enough and smart enough that they may challenge the prowler someday. And so, like a killer of babies, he tries to stab them in their cradles before they come out and flex their muscles.

 

America is the aggressor and has been in a state of mobilization for a long time. If others are now mobilizing, it is not because they want to take something from America, it is that they want to stop America from abusing them. America is the cause of much horror in the world, and they are effect. If you want to neutralize the effect, you must first neutralize the cause.

 

A hundred years of history involving dozens of countries, produce a lot of incidents from which people like Clifford May and those he quotes, can cherry-pick pieces to combine and reach conclusions that fit their preconceived ideas. But that does not make them right. Let me give you an example. There was a time when the Clifford May crowd constructed arguments that said Israel was annexing Arab lands just as Hitler did. This being the case, Jewish logic says, it proves that the Arabs are sending the world back to the 1930s when Hitler started World War II. And so, the May crowd concluded that America should be motivated to bomb the Arabs into the Stone Age. And America tried to pull this stunt several times.

 

Even if these people do not come out as brazenly now as they used to, or make points as stupid as they did, they are still powered by the same old mentality. It is just that they were made to learn how to be more subtle when expressing their primitive ideas. Here is a condensed passage from the current Clifford May article that reveals a great deal:

 

“Iranian diplomats have refused to sit at the same table with Americans, so Mr. Biden — mindbogglingly — entrusted a Russian diplomat to act as an intermediary. The new deal will reportedly allow Moscow to sell Tehran weapons and nuclear facilities meant for peaceful purposes despite US sanctions imposed in response to the Ukraine War”.

 

Clifford May says that his mind is boggled by the fact that a Russian diplomat has served as an intermediary between Iran and America, given that Iran refused to sit at the same table with America. This being the kind of situation that compels us to ask questions, we do just that: Why did Iran refuse to sit at the same table with America?

 

Iran did so because it had a deal with America that the latter reneged on then imposed — by America’s admission — the most savage regime of sanctions on Iran’s family of 84 million people. But why did America do it? America did it for the stated purpose of forcing Iran to knuckle under and accept a new deal that America had always wanted to impose on it.

 

So now, we are compelled to ask this question: Would anyone sane sit and negotiate with a gangster that’s holding a gun to his head while the rest of the gang is raping the victim’s family of millions?

 

The Iranian negotiator being a sane human being, refused to sit with the American. And this, my friend, boggles the mind of Clifford May. Well then, tell me this: If sanity boggles the mind of Clifford May, what does that make of him?

 

In any case, why was a Russian chosen to be the intermediary between the Iranians and the Americans? Well, if not the Russian, it would have had to be the Brit, the French, the German or the Chinese. Since the first three are America’s allies, they did not qualify. This left the Russian and the Chinese to choose from. Since the Russian was most familiar with the subject, he was chosen. It’s as simple as that.

 

All of this is so highly logical, it boggles the mind of Clifford May as noted earlier. No wonder he became a Jewish lawyer who lines himself — in his own words — with “despots in Europe, Asia and the Middle East, in thinking that President Joe Biden is not up to the job”.

 

Look who’s talking!

It was one more meeting for a one more nothing

 Most of the things that go wrong with Israel, and with the Jews in general, have to do with self-deception.

 

That is, even though deep down the Jews have a sense of what goes on, they present it differently to themselves, to each other and to the world because they first process it through the belief that everything which happens to them, happens in accordance with a predetermined divine plan. It is a plan, they believe, which prepares for the coming of the messiah, and his giving the Jews ownership of the Earth.

 

Until something goes wrong, and everything comes to an end for the Jews, the belief in the vision they create inside their heads, keeps growing till they find themselves living in a universe that is parallel to where everyone else lives. Where things could have worked for them, they instead go bad till they crash with a thud the Jews could never have foreseen. Still, unwilling to face the reality that they have been the architects of their defeat this time as they do all the time, the Jews blame the failure on the antisemitism of others, a human disease, they believe, that is stronger than God’s power to protect them, they who are his favorite children.

 

When you research the reasons why this happens to Jews and only to them, you find that at the start of what happens, is something that comes naturally to everyone. That is, it all begins as a perfectly normal human reaction to individuals of all kinds. People tend to congratulate themselves for scoring a success, which can then lead them to fantasize that something special about them made this moment possible. Most people eventually realize that there is a real world to which they must return by abandoning the fantasy or they will get into trouble. And so, they abandon the fantasy and return to normal.

 

And even though the Jews begin like the rest of us, they refuse to abandon the fantasy, preferring to stay with it come hell or high water. Ominously, the fantasy swells in their heads till they lose control of it. Why does this happen? It happens because the Jews are collectively railroaded by “groupthink” into believing in the reality of the fantasy. They talk about it incessantly till it becomes hard in their heads, and they cannot part with it till they hit something even harder. That’s when they wake up to the reality that the universe in which they have been living was the illusion of something that never was.

 

In recent years, this happened to the Jews collectively several times since the day when the late President of Egypt Anwar Sadat visited Israel and spoke to their parliament. It happened again when Jordan signed a peace treaty with Israel. And whereas it failed to happen when the Arab Initiative for an Abraham-like Accord was presented to them in 2002 — because the Initiative mentioned the right of the Palestinian people — it happened when in 2020, mention of the Palestinians was dropped.

 

Whereas dropping the Palestinian issue formally for now, was a strategic decision by the Arabs to call the Judeo-Israeli bluff about the desire to have genuine peace — the Jews say, they want to be convinced that peace will endure — their pundits made a huge mistake, and they continue to make it. That is, these characters are describing the Arab attitude, not for what it is, but describing it by filtering their vision through the fantasy which says that the Arabs are beginning to love the Jews because they are beginning to hate the Palestinians.

 

And while they are at it, why not throw in the idea that the Arabs are also “terrified” of Iran while feeling that only Israel can handle that menacing country. This means that only Israel can offer the Arabs the protection they badly need. And the more that the Jews delve in this kind of thinking, the more they fail to realize they are growing a fantasy that’s pulling them away from the real world in which they live. That’s also the world in which the Arabs live, but cannot relate one iota to the sickly Jewish fantasy. And this is how the Jews are setting themselves up to hit something so hard, they may not recover from it this time.

 

More is said about this issue and other related issues, and you can access it by reading the article that came under the title: “Israel and the United States Court Arab Partners at Negev Summit,” and the subtitle: “A key topic of discussion at the meeting was the effort to reinstitute the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear agreement with Iran.” It was written by Trevor Filseth and published on March 29, 2022 in the National Interest.

 

The following is a compilation of excerpts from that article:

 

“Diplomats from Israel, the United States, and four Arab nations met for a summit intended to boost relations between the six states. ‘We are here today because we genuinely, sincerely, and deeply believe in peace,’ Moroccan foreign minister said at the meeting. Although Jordan was invited, its government opted not to attend. Instead, King Abdullah visited the West Bank city of Ramallah, where the Palestinian Authority is headquartered. Although they have not dismissed the Palestinian issue, the four Arab nations have sought closer ties with Israel. One topic of discussion at the meeting was the effort to reinstitute the 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran. Blinken defended the agreement, arguing that indefinitely cutting Iran off from the world economy was impractical and that a diplomatic agreement was the only effective way to ensure Iran would not develop a nuclear weapon”.

 

As can be seen, six of them met. Speaking in the name of the Arabs, the Moroccan delegate stated that the Arabs want peace. Jordan said it wants the Palestinian issue resolved. The Americans said they want the Iran nuclear issue to be finalized. As to the Israelis, they said nothing because their contribution has always been to grab something and run when the opportunity opens itself to them. It did not this time, and so they stayed put and mum.

What the people of Egypt strive to achieve

 Amaney A. Jamal and Michael Robbins are both affiliated with the Arab Barometer, an American pollster and research institution dedicated to the study and dissemination in the English language of the economic and cultural trends in the Arab World.

 

Their latest publication is an article they cowrote under the title: “Why Democracy Stalled in the Middle East,” and the subtitle: “Economic Despair and the Triumph of the China Model.” It was published in the Foreign Affairs edition of March/April 2022.

 

By all accounts, this article is one of the most accurate and most comprehensive I have seen on the Arab World, and I would not change a thing in it. But I would like to make a few comments to alert all those who write on this subject, of something they can do to help their readers understand something crucial — if not about the Arab World in its entirety, at least — about Egypt, which alone makes up a third of the Arab World anyway.

 

What I wish to talk about are two subjects: (1) The so-called bread riots of 1977 that took place in Egypt, and (2) the difference between the two Arabic words “satre” and “Karamah,” and what they signal about the socio-economic situations motivating the Egyptian people.

 

It was unfortunate that the first thing the American media did was label “bread riot” the incident that occurred in Egypt in the year 1977. In fact, the discontent expressed on that day was not about the proposed increase in the price of bread, it was that the increase was mandated by the World Bank and the IMF, and that President Sadat implemented that “foreign directive” without telling the Egyptian people about it beforehand.

 

Now, 45 years later, pundits are speculating that bread riots may take place in Egypt once again in response to the Ukraine War that is raising the price of wheat. These pundits are basing their judgment on false information that was disseminated long ago, and on their inability to grasp the evidence to the contrary that was there for all to see when in 2016, the IMF proposed increases in the price of bread and other staples in exchange for the 12 billion dollars in loans that Egypt was seeking.

 

What happened that year, was that President Sisi told the people what he was going to do before doing it, and nobody rioted. Why? Because the so-called riots of an earlier time were not about the rise in the price of bread; it was about the President taking orders from someone outside the country, and imposing those orders on the people without notifying or consulting with them first. When Sisi did what Sadat had failed to do, the people took the price increases in their stride. This explanation should settle that point.

 

Now, to the meaning of the two words “satre” and “karamah” and what they say about the Egyptian character. The literal translation of the word satre is “hide,” but it is used only in a limited and special circumstances. Let me give you an example: A guy bumps into an old friend and says, the last time we met you were desperately looking for a job. How have you been doing since? And the friend says, “mastourah” which translate as “it is hidden” in the sense that it is below something or covered by it.

 

But what is it that’s hidden? What’s hidden is destitution. It means that the guy found a job, and he is doing well enough now to have avoided destitution. The irony here is that the two cultures, Arabic and English, use the same idiom but express it in opposite ways. For example, to say in English that his head is below water (hidden) means that he is in financial trouble. To mean that he is doing well financially, you say that his head is above water. The reversal is due to the fact that one seeks to hide destitution whereas the other seeks to reveal the head.

 

Now to the word ‘karamah.’ Translated literally, it means dignity. So, what’s the difference between saying that someone (a male) is mastour or that he is karim? Incidentally, if the subject is a female, the two adjectives become mastourah and karimah.

 

To answer the question, someone is mastour when he is avoiding destitution. That is, he is poor but not destitute. It is said that he is karim if he’s doing well enough to pay for the prevailing amenities of life, such as living at the middle class level. If he is doing even better than that, he is “mabsout” which translates literally into “he is happy” — the implication being that he has enough money to buy happiness.

 

Getting back to the Jamal and Robbins article, what do we see in it when we look through the lens of those definitions?

 

Well, the thing we notice from reading the article, is that in the realm of economics, the two most important things on the mind of the Egyptians, are having a job and living in an environment of price stability. When guaranteed the minimum living conditions, they make up for the rest by raising a happy family that fills their lives with joy. To achieve this, they want their government to be free of foreign influence, and that they dedicate their utmost effort to the betterment of their people’s lot.

 

This makes it so that voting for politicians who promise much and deliver little, is an absurd proposition. The people think and will say: Let the politicians sort it out among themselves, and choose who will be in charge of what for the coming period.

 

As to the country’s external relations, what works for the Egyptian population, is what the late President Nasser once said: We befriend those who befriend us, and we antagonize those who antagonize us. The people Egypt will add: In our relations with the big powers, we live the principles of non-alignment, which is to maintain god relations with everyone till someone turns abusive, at which time we distance ourselves from them.

 

Thus, to an observer studying the Egyptian character, they would know that the words “autocrat” and “democrat” mean nothing to them. What they think of as important in their lives is: having a job, stable prices, a government that listens to hem, not to foreign powers … all of which allows them to decide for themselves how much effort they will exert to achieve the level of: satre, karim or mabsout.

The new world order need not be scary

 To live in a meritocratic system means that you are allowed to rise to your potential without the state or anyone obstructing your rise. Should this happen, however, the law allows you to go to court and seek relief, even seek damages to compensate for what you may have lost.

 

But why would the state or anyone want to get in the way of you attaining the level for which you have the talent and the drive to reach? Well, at the individual level, every society experiences the competition that can lead to a level of jealousy which may get out of hand, thus prompt someone to trip a rival and damage them intentionally or inadvertently.

 

When it comes to the state’s governing apparatus, we must distinguish between the goings-on that pertain to the so-called autocratic one-party system of governance, and those pertaining to the so-called democratic multiparty system of governance.

 

The philosophy guiding the autocratic system is based on the notion that you have one country, therefore everyone must devote their energies to serve that country rather than waste the energy competing against a rival. The excuse of competing because you have a better idea for the country, is replaced by the notion that you put your ideas to work for the country by moving up the ladder within the system. You do this the way that you move to a higher level inside an enterprise where dedication to your work is rewarded, and open dissent could cause your dismissal.

 

As to the philosophy guiding the democratic system, it is based on the notion that every organization has the tendency to build internal rigidity with the passage of time, thus lose the benefits that may be gained by the adoption of the autocratic principles. In fact, rigidity can even happen in the bureaucracy that makes up the democratic system. And so, in the way that you have the shareholders of an enterprise shake things up by choosing from and voting for rival directors, you have the people of the nation vote for the candidates that run to fill government positions. Composed of three branches, the elected apparatus keeps an eye on the bureaucratic “deep state” to make sure it performs up to the desired standard.

 

Everything about our evolution as a species, says that our legacy since before the start of Civilization, has been the matriarchal or patriarchal autocratic system of surveillance and governance. Democracy as we like to think of it today, happened late in our evolutionary process when several events converged as if by a fluke to make it possible. Those events imposed the new system of governance in places that were so backward and violent, you might think were unlikely to see the rise of a system as benevolent as liberal democracy appears to be … or at least appears to have been.

 

In fact, for thousands of years, humanity from ancient China to ancient Egypt, had been ruled by mostly benevolent rulers who respected the will of the people they governed, and fostered trade and commerce among them to benefit the many. Meanwhile, it happened that during those millenniums Europe was ruled by the sword, wielded by rulers who commanded armies on the prowl, looking for someone vulnerable they can exploit to benefit themselves and benefit the rulers they serve.

 

And then it happened that the Chinese invention of the gun powder, and the Arab invention of the artillery made their way to Europe where iron and coal were also discovered in shallow mines. That convergence led to the invention and production of the field gun at a time when natural resources were becoming necessary commodities to feed the new Industrial Revolution. And these were the earthshaking events that changed Europe socially, technologically and politically; also changed the world diplomatically.

 

Meanwhile, the changeover from the artisanal industries to the factory-based mass production of goods made life so unbearable to the European populations, revolt was manifesting itself everywhere. The old-style rulers that sensed a rising danger, were forced to change the way they governed. In time, this led to the Socialist movement that took roots in Europe. Accordingly, the people demanded better services and more goods, which the rulers could provide only by colonizing and exploiting the foreign nations that did not participate in the Industrial Revolution. The gun in the hand that wielded the sword, proved handy when the time came to implement the colonial schemes.

 

It was that history which led to the system of liberal democracy, standing as ideally as it did until a few decades ago when it began to transform into an act of moral prostitution. Because things have changed for the worse, we see that the sins of the past are catching up to those who are losing the narrative to newcomers on the stage of the rising superstates. Having no better way to make their presence felt, the once mighty are forced to weaponize democracy itself so as to stand up to the newcomers, and exploit those who are too weak to defend themselves, accusing them of anti-democratic practices.

 

This being the cause of clashes between the mighty nations of all stripes, it resulted in the bursting on the scene of a new kind of competition. It is one that pits (a) the old guard who claim they only wish to preserve what is positive about the status quo, against (b) victims of the colonial era who are rising to levels from where they challenge the old guard whose sermons are becoming evermore irritating. Experimenting with new systems of governance, the newcomers will have nothing to do with a democratic system that is now decrepit and a shadow of its old self.

 

You can see how that struggle is playing out when you study the article that came under the title: “The Putin and Xi New World Order,” and the subtitle: “West continues to suffer from post-Cold War self-doubt.” It was written by Jed Babbin, and published on March 25, 2022 in The Washington Times. There are interesting details in the article but the most revealing passages appear at the end of it. When condensed, those passages sound like this:

 

“The West continues to suffer from self-doubt. Neither Russia nor China has that disability. We cannot lead any new world order while Russia makes war in Europe or China threatens Taiwan. We could, with better strategic thinking and significant investment in modern weapon systems, restore the credibility of our deterrent. Biden is neither capable of that sort of thinking nor of making such investments. If he were, he would realize that in order to lead any new world order NATO has to be reunified and our deterrent reinforced, to deny Putin’s and Xi’s abilities to threaten it”.

 

What this shows is that the old guard remains as warmongering as it has always been. This, in turn, demonstrates that war and democracy are once again becoming intertwined … the reason why most of the human race is rejecting it.

This is how the propaganda cookie crumbles

 Melanie Phillips is one of the most accomplished propagandists for the Judeo-Israeli causes. But she is not so perfect as to be impervious to accusations that she spreads lies and fabricates narratives that describe not the reality on the ground, but the fantasies she cooks up in her head.

 

Melanie Phillips wrote an article under a title that reads: “Why Liberals Fail to Equate Israel and Ukraine,” and had it published on March 25, 2022 in the Jewish online publication Algemeiner. Reading it, you’ll discover that Melanie Phillips is moaning that many people—Liberals and others—have repeatedly equated Palestine and Ukraine instead of Israel and Ukraine.

 

And so, Melanie Phillips self-imposed the assignment to disprove the equivalence that everybody sees except for her and her kind. To that end, she went about doing her work the Jewish way. That is, she plucked from thin air and cooked inside her head a ton of lies and distortions relating to terrorism. She attributed all that rubbish to the Palestinians and to other Arabs for a devious purpose. It is that she knew Israel was founded by the two icons of Jewish terrorism: Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin who fittingly went on to become Prime Ministers of Israel. And she wanted to divert attention from this reality.

 

Melanie Phillips must also be aware of the fact that for nearly a century, Jewish terrorism has not been interrupted in the Middle East. When the Jews do not kill Lebanese or Syrians to steal their water, they kill Palestinians and Bedouins to steal their lands. Despite these realities, which are well known to the world, Phillips began her article by attributing terrorism, not to the Jews who tried to steal Bedouin lands just recently, but to the Bedouins who chased the Jews away like you would chase away vultures and hyenas.

 

Done with that point, Melanie Phillips started the effort to disprove the view that a Palestine afflicted by Jewish atrocities resembles a Ukraine that’s afflicted by Russian atrocities. Had this condition prevailed only a few years ago, Melanie Phillips would have simply said there is no equivalence — echoing the rabbis that used to bray: You can’t compaaare, you can’t compaaare — and the English speaking world, especially the American Congress of moral hookers, will have said: Yes, master Jew. We hear you and we’ll pass legislation that will designate the Arabs instead of the Jews, as terrorists. And we’ll all have a bellyful of laughs because we would have deceived the world. And nothing makes you and us feel good like deceiving a world that believes us. Make that, feel “gooooood”.

 

But things have changed since that time because the internet and the various social media broke the back of the Jewish monopoly on the dissemination of the message, whatever the message is. No longer in a position to say: They are the terrorists, and we are the civilized lot, Melanie Phillips worked hard to put together arguments she hoped will carry her lies and distortions without being seen for what they are. Alas, even she could not pull this off without showing her slip.

 

What happened when Melanie Phillips put the pictures of the arch-terrorists Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin in front of her to be inspired by their terrorism, and deviously attribute what she sees to the Bedouins and the Palestinians — her effort crumbled like a cookie. Instead of hurting those she chose to be her enemies for the occasion, she revealed the eternal depravity of the Jewish stance on such matters. The following is a condensed version of what she tried to accomplish but failed miserably:

 

“Hamas and the Palestinian Jihad welcomed these attacks and called for increased resistance. None of these attacks merited more than glancing media coverage in Britain or America. The contrast with public concern over Ukraine is stark. Today, hardly any Western journalists are equating Israel with Ukraine. Instead, more people in Britain are equating Israel with Russia’s warmongering and tyrannical president. This is because they have absorbed the propaganda pumped out for decades by the Palestinians that Israel has taken over their historic lands. In fact, the reverse is the case. In the 1920s, the international community gave the Jewish people alone the right to settle throughout their ancient homeland — the area which is now Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. That right has never been abrogated. Yet many in the West believe that the Jews are the interlopers. It’s a belief that appears to be shared by the US Ambassador to Israel. He said that the idea of Jewish settlement growth in east Jerusalem and the disputed territories infuriates him. ‘We can’t do stupid things that impede us for a two-state solution,’ he said. ‘We can’t have Israelis doing settlement growth in east Jerusalem or the West Bank”.

 

So here it is in black and white. Instead of following the logical path, which would have been to highlight the similarities and differences between the situations in the Middle East and Europe, and go from there to make her point, Melanie Phillips chose to do the two things which are standard gismos in the Judeo-Israeli propaganda tool box.

 

First, Phillips attacked the Palestinians for resisting the occupation, thus attempted to establish the principle that what’s good for the Ukrainians is not good for the Palestinians. Is this a manifestation of her racism? Only she knows.

 

Second, Phillips tried to pull off the kind of trick that used to work for the Jews in the old days. That is, she simply stated that the world gave all of Palestine to the Jews in the 1920s, expecting that, at least the American Congress, will believe her. Time will tell if that will be the case.

 

An adaptation of the old adage that says all roads lead to Rome being that Jewish pundits are obligated at this time to pirouette to the subject of the Iran Nuclear Deal no matter what subject they are discussing, Melanie Phillips finally left the Palestinian issue, and took the road that leads to Tehran. And so, she came up with the following passage to end her discussion:

 

“There are worries that the upcoming surrender to Iran over the nuclear deal will galvanize Gaza and the disputed territories in the giddy belief that the Islamic world is on the verge of annihilating Israel”.

 

It is the never-ending expression of paranoia that is also lucrative for the Jewish leaders because it leads to the prayer that goes: Gimme compensation. In the name of the heavens, gimme compensation.

The New World Order Can Be Made Perfect

 Thinking of the fog of war as applying not just to kinetic wars but to socio-cultural ones as well, will be necessary to understand what Victor Davis Hanson is saying in his latest article.

 

In fact, Victor Hanson seems to think that America (interchangeable with the world) is currently in the middle of a socio-cultural war he hopes will end with the midterms election later this year. This is when the rightwing Republicans are expected to defeat the leftwing Democrats according to him, thus bring normalcy back to America, which is an independent country, but as pointed out a moment ago, is also interchangeable with the world according to some. If you don’t understand this, blame it on the fog.

 

You’ll get a better sense of all this anyway when you read the article that Hanson wrote under the title: “Biden’s ‘new world order’ and the radical left’s reset,” and the subtitle: “But it won’t be the one president and the Davos set are expecting.” It was published on March 24, 2022 in The Washington Times.

 

If you are so sensitive as to detect the trends promulgated by the current schools of thought, you’ll be surprised by the first two paragraphs of the article. It is that the first speaks of Klaus Schwab and global elites, which is a reference to the Capitalist one-percenters. The second paragraph, on the other hand, speaks of surrendering to international experts who will enlighten us on woke issues, which is a reference to the Socialist bunch. To explain how these two crowds get talked about in the same breath, Victor Hanson proceeded with the discussion in the following manner.

 

He used much of the article’s space to mock the extremely wealthy who live the opulent life while preaching frugality to the rest of us. He makes the point that in the process of transiting society from its current state to the one advocated by the elites, the middle class will be destroyed. He even seems to suggest that if the Davos set has it its way, it will be goodbye to the Republican slogan of a century ago: “a chicken in every pot,” and goodbye to owning a home, to live in rented apartments instead. Lucky are those who will have learned early on to cook tasty cabbage meals for breakfast, lunch and dinner because by then, the quarter pounder will be the thing that legends are made of. It will be something that future generations will see only in the old movies.

 

But it will not always be fun and games for the elites either, says Victor Hanson, especially if they buy into the modern monetary theory that would have the printing presses of the central banks worldwide print money like there is no tomorrow. He warns that this habit will take us from the current 10% yearly inflation to a runaway hyperinflation that will trigger a recession or stagflation, maybe even a global depression.

 

What we are supposed to infer from this, is that based on the legends of the past — those that describe what happened during similar moments — it will be the caviar eaters, not the cabbage eaters, who will jump from the windows of their high rises to their ultimate demise known as death by suicide.

 

To avoid this heartbreak from materializing, says Victor Hanson, we need to return to the good old days when things used to work the way they were supposed to. The following is a condensed version of the measures he believes will be taken when the Republicans will win the next midterms election, and start fixing what has gone wrong in America … and by implication what has gone wrong throughout the world. Here are the measures that Hanson has suggested:

 

“Closed borders with only legal immigration. Tough police enforcement and deterrent sentencing. Integration and the primacy of individual character rather than fixations on the color of our skin. Tuning out of the mediocre media. A greater increased production of oil and natural gas to transition slowly to a wider variety of energy. Strong national defense, and deterrent foreign policies”.

 

Victor Hanson ends his article with the above paragraph without explaining how these measures alone will cause the cabbage in every pot to be replaced with chicken quarters, and with beef quarter-pounders on every backyard hibachi. And so, we are left to presume that this will happen because the middle class will ditch the apartments and replace them with privately owned houses, outfitted with a hibachi barbecue set in every backyard.

 

Moreover, because Hanson neglected to mention how all of this will come about, we get the opportunity to make the suggestions ourselves on how to fix the problems plaguing the world today:

 

So, how about doing more than mock the super rich. We could, for example, team up with those that have already recognized that the financial system is so badly structured, it allows some individuals to accumulate fabulous wealth at the expense of the many. We explain to the other super rich that the system must be restructured but that, for the project to succeed, they must cooperate with the commission that will gather the information and do the restructuring.

 

To convince these people of the validity of our idea, we explain to them that beside the current situation being unfair, it creates inefficiencies in the economy by the fact that it reduces the number of heads who could participate in making the economy grow.

 

We’ll tell them this happens because many good men and women have great ideas they would love to take the chance to realize but cannot do so because they lack the seed money to start the venture, and sustain the family while they go slogging against tremendous odds during the first two or three years of the undertaking.

 

That’s what starters must do to show they have the potential for success, before they can approach the deep-pocket investors who might come onboard for the voyage ahead.

 

Better than doing this, will be to have a more equitable distribution of the nation’s wealth so that everyone that has a dream can afford to work on realizing it.

The flag of ‘surrender’ is seen as colorless

 It is not everyday that something happens which delivers three lessons in one package. Believe it or not, we are on the verge of witnessing an event that will prove to be a gift for America, for the Middle East and if the Jews don’t blow it, for Israel too.

 

It is a gift that will replace the one which former President of the United States Donald Trump nullified under the pressure of the Judeo-Israeli lobby whose purpose in America has always been to push the superpower into forever wars.

 

And then it happened in America that a new administration was voted into power. It decided to prevent the Jewish lobby from commandeering the Congress of disgrace into pushing the country down the path of a new war intended to fulfill what the Jews believe is an ancient prophecy that foresaw the world consumed by fire. This is when the messiah is supposed to come down from heaven, and hand the planet to the Jews so that they can rebuild it from scratch.

 

Throwing that prophecy into the garbage bin where it belongs, the new American administration said NO to the Jewish lobby that kept pushing for a YES that never came. And so, unless something that is truly catastrophic happens at the last minute, it will soon be announced that a deal has been reached between Iran and the Permanent Five of the UN Security Council plus Germany; a deal that will be signed into a binding legal document.

 

When this happens, the Middle East will have gotten the stability it needs. America will have gotten the respect of the world it had lost into the Jewish sewer for half a century. Even Israel will have gotten the message that the gun with which it keeps shooting itself in the foot, may no longer be there for it to hurt itself or cry out for compensation it does not deserve to have.

 

But does this mean that the warmongering captains of incitement who sit at the helm of the Judeo-Israeli propaganda machine are retiring, or at least looking for something else to do? No, these characters are not retiring but their pitch has changed. Like a Gestapo officer guarding a handful of POWs he knows that the proverbial cavalry is on its way to liberate, Jonathan S. Tobin that used to scare the weaklings, has been so humbled, he no longer cracks the whip as ferociously as he used to.

 

You can see that change of attitude, and what else has happened in the realm when you study the article that Jonathan Tobin wrote under the title: “Must Bennett Wave the White Flag on an New Iran Deal?” It was published on March 23, 2022 in the Jewish online publication Algemeiner.

 

To hide the fact that his newly discovered humility is due to his realization that the world has changed decisively — if the rug has not been pulled entirely from under him — Tobin has tried to make it look like someone else is the source of humility that has descended on the Jewish clan. He deflected the blame from himself unto someone else at the start of his article with the following couple of sentences:

 

“As far as Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett is concerned, there’s no point in getting into a fight you can’t win. Given the Biden administration’s unshakable commitment to cutting a deal with Iran that will revive the 2015 nuclear agreement, he’s right that the chances of stopping this disaster from happening are slim and none”.

 

But now that Tobin has admitted he doesn’t see how the new situation can be reversed back to what it used to be in the good old days, why bother to continue with this discussion? Well, Tobin is now arguing to ascertain that the new situation must remain a characteristic of the Iran Nuclear Deal only, and must never be allowed to become the norm in other matters relating to the America-Israel relationship.

 

Tobin seems to believe—and so he advises—that despite giving in to President Joe Biden and his Team on the subject of the Nuclear Deal with Iran, the Judeo-Israeli lobby can and must remain resolute when it comes to telling America how to conduct its affairs in a manner that will serve the interests of Israel. To make this case, Tobin chose to blame everyone, including the Republican Party, for the defeat that the clan has suffered on the Iran Nuclear Deal. This is how he formulated the narrative concerning this subject:

                                                               

“The Obama administration bamboozled the Republican leadership in Congress into accepting a process by which the pact would be given congressional oversight. They failed to demand, as they should have, that Obama submit the deal as a treaty, for which the Constitution requires a two-thirds majority in the Senate for confirmation. The GOP leaders should have thrown down the gauntlet to Obama and told him that they would defund the State Department and refuse to confirm any diplomatic appointments until he respected the Constitution and submitted the deal for a treaty confirmation”.

 

The flag that Jonathan Tobin fears Naftali Bennett may be forced to raise, is not colored white to signal surrender or anything like that. The flag happens to be colorless, which indicates that after half a century of Jewish running America’s foreign policy, Team Biden finally brought back to America the right to choose for itself how to deal with foreign countries.

Here is why America misunderstands the others

 Can the difference between reality and the misinterpretation of reality be worth a quarter of a trillion dollars and counting? Can that difference be the main factor to trigger a nuclear war?

 

Let’s look at the premise behind the first question. What we have nowadays is a Jewish propaganda machine that’s pursuing two parallel discourses.

 

The first is the decades old discourse that would have you believe Israel’s Arab neighbors are bloodthirsty monsters whose sole purpose in life is to kill all Jews. Consequently, if America were to leave Israel unprotected, the result will be millions of dead Israeli Jews. Using this discourse, Israel has been able to siphon off about a quarter of a trillion dollars so far from a dumb-dumb American Congress of moral prostitution, and there is no end in sight.

 

The other discourse is a more recent formulation describing the Arabs as being the sweetest, most suave beings whose grace is rivaled only by that of the angels. Indeed, say the Jews, Israel could not have better friends than the Egyptians who will help it sell its natural gas, the Emirates who will take it with them to Mars, and the Saudis who were the first to come up with the idea of an Abraham Accord.

 

As to the second question, all you need to do is listen to the Russians and the Ukrainians talk about the ongoing war between them, and you’ll realize how easy it would be for one of them to misinterpret what the other is saying and in a panic, decide to be the first to use the nuclear and/or chemical weapons they have in their possession.

 

When it comes to relaying a message that may have repercussion on them and their interests, the Jews are masters at relaying — not the message the way it was formulated originally — but the interpretation they put on the message. For example, boycotting someone’s business is a common occurrence, and has been for a long time. Those who are boycotted get the message, change their behavior or absorb the inconvenience of the boycott and try to live with it.

 

The exception is Israel and its mouthpieces who interpret the BDS movement as an attempt to destroy Israel and inflict a holocaust on its people. This is how everything that the Jews dislike is misinterpreted and wrapped for delivery to the public and the American Congress. The Jews refuse to see things for what they are; they see them as a deliberate attempt to do away with Israel and annihilate all Jews.

 

At times, it can happen that a Jew becomes interested not only in the affairs of Israel, but America’s relationships with the rest of the world. A Jew in this category yearns for a war that will engulf the whole world. He would see an America that’s led by Jewish commanders embark on conquering the planet. The latter would become the property of the Jews as if it were handed to them by the long awaited messiah who may still come to attend the celebration or maybe not.

 

A well known Jew in that category is Clifford D. May. His writings have always reflected that kind of mentality. His latest contribution came in the form of an article that was written under the title: “The death of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction)” and the subtitle: “And the urgent need to reestablish deterrence.” It was published on March 22, 2022 in The Washington Times.

 

Clifford May’s aim being to argue in the most subtle of ways that World War III will be good for America, he first had to dismiss the MAD principle as being no longer useful. He then had to interpret the utterances of Vladimir Putin and present them as being pure evil, thus make the man look like a demon incarnate. How does Clifford May accomplish all that? The answer is the deliberate misinterpretation of the key elements in the narrative.

 

Here is how Clifford May dismissed the MAD principle:

 

“The idea behind the MAD principle was to make nuclear warfare a lose-lose proposition. Now, however, President Vladimir Putin rules the roost. He’s more of a L’etat c’est moi kind of guy. Three days after invading Ukraine he put his nuclear forces on alert”.

 

Translation: MAD no longer frightens people. Because Putin dismissed it, America will have to assume that he will use weapons of mass destruction if cornered too tightly. This will cause America to put its own arsenal of such weapons on high alert. And anything can happen after that.

 

Now look at the following passage. It is Clifford May introducing Vladimir Putin. He described him as a primitive savage who would go on a rampage and loot his neighbors mercilessly. Even then, Clifford May did not stop here. Immediately after that misrepresentation, he quoted Vladimir Putin saying something frightening. It is meant to convey the following message to the audience: Don’t blame me; look at his words. My view of him was inspired by what he said.

 

Here is that passage:

 

“He [Putin] warned the US and other NATO countries that any attempt to prevent him from pillaging and conquering his neighbor would result in consequences ‘such as you have never seen in your entire history’”.

 

Clifford May is only one of the many Jews who are highly skilled and capable of making the readers believe that what they write (from their imagination) is not their fantasy but the considered opinion of someone else. In fact, America was flooded with such fabrications during the last half century.

 

That work so confused America’s governing elites, they became like children taken by the hand for a walk in the park. And like children, the supposed big shots of American diplomacy never understood the game that the foreign and Jewish adults were playing on the world stage.

 

They did not understand it then; they don’t understand it now. Pity.

Raised to become obnoxious controlling freaks

 Surveys are conducted all the time in many places around the world, especially in the United States of America. They are conducted by pollsters to determine how the governing party and the President of the nation are doing.

 

Surveys are also conducted by the opposition parties to determine if they are putting out the right message or if they need to change something. And in some cases, surveys are conducted by individual politicians to determine how they can improve their image, thus remain ahead of a potential challenger.

 

In all these cases, the changing numbers from one survey to another, say that the popularity of the candidates fluctuate constantly, and so we take it that fluctuation is a normal condition. This makes sense because over time, the president, the party and the individual politicians say and do things that please some people and displease others. What the polls do is reflect these changes.

 

What we must consider in addition to all that, is the fact that the methods of communication and information dissemination have proliferated with the advent of the internet and the all-news TV channels. The consequence is that most people know what’s happening in the world, thus form opinions about current events elsewhere. When surveys are conducted to probe where the public stands, the popularity of the countries that make the news, as well as their publics, is reflected in the survey results.

 

Whether the polls are favorable or unfavorable, no serious repercussion is felt by the ethnic groups that belong to those countries in North America or elsewhere. People accept whatever little backlash takes place if any, knowing that the trend is temporary, and that life will soon go back to normal for them.

 

All of that applies to all ethnic groups except one: The Jews. These people identify closely with Israel, and make it so that what happens there reflects on them everywhere they happen to be. It is as if the Jews were fanatic wanderers deeply loyal to the “old country,” even if they had never seen that place.

 

Moreover, whereas nothing would happen if the Jews treated the matter as do the other ethnic groups when they come under similar circumstances, much happens to the Jews because they make a mountain out of every molehill, and treat it as if it were a matter of life and death for the entire Jewish clan.

 

You can see an example of that in the article that came under the title: “On Dems and Israel, a tale of two Bronxes,” and the subtitle: “Compare and contrast Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ritchie Torres.” It was written by Noa Tishby, and published on March 22, 2022 in The New York Daily News.

 

Reading the article, you’ll get the sense that Noa Tishby—like all the Jews who take up the subject—will not become satisfied unless she secures the whole enchilada for the Jews and for Israel. That is, whereas democracy accepts that your poll numbers will be up one day and down another, the Jews want to see 110 percent support for their causes 110 percent of the time. Knowing that this is authoritarianism such as Hitler never dreamed of, the Jews incessantly repeat the refrain that they are liberal democrats, which is their surefire method to con the Americans, and perhaps a few more around the world. As to those who don’t believe them, it’s because they are antisemites that must be canceled.

 

Being Hitlerian to the core disguised as liberal democrats, however, the Jews go bonkers at the thought that they are losing bipartisan support in the American Congress. Would Hitler tolerate getting less than 110 percent support from the governing body of the world’s only superpower? And so, if it isn’t good enough for Hitler to have only one party support him, it isn’t good enough for the Jews to have only the Republican Party support them. Because this is the reality of the situation in America at this time, it is time for the Jews to holler: Existential threat! Existential threat! till they blow their entrails out of their bellies, and get the attention they crave. This is what Noa Tishby is doing in her article.

 

The following is a condensed version of the points she is making in the article:

 

“America’s Democratic party is evolving. Two camps have emerged on how the party views America’s relationship with Israel. The party will follow Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) or Congressman Ritchie Torres. AOC locks arms with anti-Israel voices inside and outside the halls of Congress. A new generation of leadership sweeps across the country, among them is congressman Ritchie Torres. His district is adjacent to AOC’s and he is as progressive as she is on most issues, yet remains a supporter of Israel. Citing the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement, Torres has fought for Israel within the ranks of his party. Without a robust, bipartisan support in the United States, Israel’s enemies will steadily weaken or destroy the world’s only Jewish state. Let me make it simple: Democrats must support and enact an agenda that protects Israel. If Democrats abandon Israel, the consequences will be dire”.

 

Looking at this performance, there can be no doubt that Noa Tishby was raised by her clan to feel like she owns America, and no doubt that she was allowed to grow up and become an obnoxious controlling freak by America’s spineless politicians.

A case of different strokes for different folks

 Because—as far as I know—there is nothing in international law that says you can do harm to a non-sovereign state that you cannot do to a sovereign state, I became suspicious when I read the following sentence:

 

“The Russian invasion of Ukraine is the most brazen illegal war waged by one sovereign state against another since World War II”.

 

The sentence spoke of a sovereign state without mentioning the non-sovereign states, which by implication, excludes the latter.

 

In all probability—as far as I’m concerned—that is a false statement, but it was used to open an article that came under the title: “International Law Goes to War in Ukraine,” and the subtitle: “The Legal Pushback to Russia’s Invasion.” The article was written by Oona A. Hathaway, and published on March 15, 2022 in Foreign Affairs.

 

I read the article, and every paragraph in it reinforced my suspicion. I concluded that Oona A. Hathaway is not an impartial observer that happens to be a lawyer writing about a subject of general interest. Instead, Oona A. Hathaway is working pro bono for the Tel-Aviv/New-York crime syndicate. The aim of her exercise is clear. It is to use words like these: “The invasion of Ukraine is an illegal war waged since World War II,” to both deny the continuing criminal behavior of Israel, and perpetrate the continued denial of the legitimate rights of Palestinians.

 

Having done this, Oona Hathaway, went on to celebrate the “unprecedented” cascade of sanctions that was imposed on Russia by most of the world, to punish that country and send a message to future would-be violators that such behavior is unacceptable, outlawed and will be responded to decisively.

 

But given that humanity chose not to respond to violations of the law by launching a war against the lawbreakers, a non-lethal method was formulated to punish the guilty by sanctioning them. This being the method that the world has used against Israel—calling it Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS)—Oona Hathaway consorted with Scott Shapiro to invent another term, “outcasting” which does not remind the public that before the punishment of Russia, there was the punishment of Israel.

 

So, you want to know what exactly does outcasting entail in the opinion of Oona Hathaway and Scott Shapiro. Well, the following is a compilation of the passages that describe what she says goes into outcasting. It is presented here in condensed form:

 

“Outcasting involves economic sanctions and also barring Russian athletes from participating in international sporting events, banning Russian airplanes from European and US airspace, and curtailing Russian media outlets’ access to European audiences. In addition, normally moribund international legal institutions have sprung to life in response to the invasion. Days into the war, the chief prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC) announced that he was launching an investigation into possible Russian war crimes and crimes against humanity. Ukraine has also turned to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to intervene in the conflict. And, there are growing calls to create a special tribunal to consider whether there has been a crime of aggression. Although it’s too soon to know whether any of these efforts will succeed, the unprecedented response may have the effect of reviving and reinforcing the international legal order. Ukraine’s decision to rely on law even as Russia has relied on brute force has raised the stakes of the confrontation. The conflict is not simply about the future of Ukraine; it is about the future of the global legal order as we know it”.

 

If all of this sounds so familiar to you that you can remove the word “Russia” and replace it with “Israel,” also remove the word “Ukraine” and replace it with “Palestine,” you will not be shocked to learn that the parallel between the two situations does not end here. In fact, the similarities extend all the way to the halls of the United Nations.

 

In fact, the following is the condensed compilation of the passages that describe what has been going on inside that international organization:

 

“The UN Security Council tried to pass a resolution deploring the Russian invasion and demanding the withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukraine, but Russia vetoed it. Although Russia is able to exercise its veto power on the Security Council to prevent it from mandating any punitive action, the country’s almost complete isolation within the organization has been thorough. Soon the matter was referred to the General Assembly, which voted overwhelmingly to demand that Russia immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw its forces to within its internationally recognized borders. Only a small handful of states voted with Russia against the resolution. The other countries chose to abstain. It is clear that Russia is more isolated than ever”.

 

Here too, you can remove the word “Russia” and replace it with “Israel,” also remove the word “Ukraine” and replace it with “Palestine,” only to see that the parallel between the two situations is almost perfect.

 

That prompts us to ask this question: Why is it that in the presence of two identical situations, we see a complete reversal in the way they are treated by America, and reluctantly so by some of its allies who are pressured by the latter to go against their conscience and stand with Israel instead of condemning it?

 

The answer is that America itself has been robbed of the freedom to think and act for itself. Just think about it, if the Palestinians had a lobby in America that was powerful enough to neutralize the demonic effect of the Jewish lobby, America would today be earmarking billions of dollars in cash, and would be setting aside billions more in weaponry to give to the Palestinians while encouraging them to do what they can to crush the Jewish invaders.

 

That would have been both the natural and moral things to do for America.

They dream of a warmongering Pax Americana

 When you see that sausage has ceased to be made in the kitchen of a hundred senators, all of them products of the same culture and same language, you wonder what happened that paralyzed the kitchen of the English speaking senators, children of a twisted culture.

 

When you see that sausage continues to be made in the United Nations’ kitchen of almost two hundred representatives, each of them the product of a different culture and a different language, you are amazed at the superiority of the governance approach used by the human race over the one used by America.

 

Struck by the wonderment that’s generated by the reality of a paralyzed American governance, and struck by the amazement that’s generated by the reality of a smoothly operating UN governance, you think that the American senators would acknowledge the superiority of the management system adopted at the UN, and would try to learn from it. But this is not what’s happening.

 

In trying to understand what has gone wrong in America, you discover that very little is chatted in the public square or the opinion columns about the subject. You probe into the reason for the silence on the matter, and discover to your horror that the factors paralyzing the governance machinery in America, are the same factors that block the debate about America’s disfunction.

 

That situation imposed itself as if a plague had infested America’s political, journalistic and religious institutions, prohibiting their workers and adherents from uttering the name of Zion in vain lest they spread anti-Jewish hatred. And while this is prohibited, the dudes are allowed to curse the name of god, a habit they say preserves and defends what they still call freedom of expression. Go figure.

 

And just as you begin to believe that the lamentable situation you see in America, is the result of neglect caused by an aging culture that’s getting tired, you are hit in the eyes with a reminder that the cultural police that’s paralyzing both the governance and the free flow of ideas in America, are working actively to destroy the United Nations. Their goal is to replace the world organization with a Zion-commanded warmongering Pax Americana.

 

An example of what these people are doing is spelled out in the article that came under the title: “Backing Zelenskyy’s new United Nations,” and the subtitle: “It’s time to create alliances that meet today’s global construct.” It was written by Tom Basile, and published on March 18, 2022 in The Washington Times.

 

Perhaps Tom Basile was thinking about the US government when he mistakenly wrote about the UN, accusing it of the following: Deficiencies. Decline into near irrelevance. Ineffective and interminable operations. Failures to prevent genocide. Sex abuse scandals. Billions in waste and fraud. Damaged credibility. Most of which apply more readily to the US government than they do to the United Nations.

 

Basile attributes what he calls deficiencies of the United Nations to the fact that Russia has the power of the veto, and using it as it did lately for the exact purpose that the veto was given to the 5 permanent members of the Security council: To prevent a world war that can happen when a big power is backed too tightly into a corner.

 

And whereas Russia used the veto as intended, America has been abusing it, not to prevent a world war, but to protect an Israel that maintains a system of apartheid, and commits by sheer habit more crimes against humanity than all the existing villains and all those that came and went, put together.

 

Tom Basile proceeded to lament that all efforts to reform the UN have failed, presumably because no one came up with a good idea to do the job. But then, halleluiah my friends, Volodymyr Zelenskyy opened his mouth to give a speech, and the miracle happened. From the blessed Zelenskyy mouth came a golden proposition for the creation of what the neocons of America have been advocating for years. That would be a new and improved United Nations, perhaps formed under a different name. It will be an organization that will, in due course, replace the existing United Nations and be amenable, not to the wishes of the human race, but the wishes of America and its Zionist masters.

 

What Zelenskyy wants and what his neocon predecessors have wanted was not to create a new international organization that will better unite the nations of the world, but an organization that will split the world into a couple of pieces. There will be one piece containing Israeli thinkers and American combatants, as well as anyone that’s prepared to be commanded by the Jews the way that the Americans are commanded by them. And there will be another piece containing everyone else in the world. These will be the people whom the Jews will take pleasure whipping into perfect political shape.

 

According to Tom Basil, the following represents the blessed thinking of Volodymyr Zelenskyy, expressed here in condensed form:

 

“As the world realigns, the time has come to create new international alliances. The US can establish new cooperatives that marginalize the power of China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela and others. A successor to the UN would be a new global economic, energy and military alliance to counter the New Axis. China’s influence in all the major arms of the UN has grown significantly, including in the areas of food, agriculture, aviation, telecommunications, industrial development and the World Health Organization. World peace cannot be achieved when communists and authoritarian regimes exist. Continued US engagement at the UN is critical to counter these corrosive influences but the end game should be realigning nations toward a more potent, efficient and effective new multi-lateral organization”.

 

In other words, the Tom Basile types of dodo bird, are dreaming of the Pax Americana that failed to materialize in the past. They see it now disguised as a United Nations even if in reality it is nothing more than a shape-shifting snake morphed into the image of a dovish UN.

Their one more prodding to repeat the insanity

 A saying that was falsely attributed to Albert Einstein went something like this: Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

 

You don’t need to go too far to see proof that this saying is based on a sane and solid premise. In fact, everywhere you look these days, you’ll see a Jewish attack on the ongoing negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 regarding the subject of Iran’s nuclear research and uses. And those attacks proved to be as insane as insanity can ever get.

 

If you want to know what’s insane about these attacks, it is that as any attack they are meant to break something. In this case, the intent of the Jews has always been to break the Iran Nuclear Deal. But instead of breaking it, the attacks have strengthened the deal, which happened to the consternation of the Jews and their adoring lackeys. How do we know that? We know it because every Jew and his lackey are moaning loudly and shamelessly that this is happening.

 

And so, instead of quitting the insanely useless game, and looking for something better to do, the Jews and their lackeys repeat the futile attacks on the Iran Nuclear deal, always expecting to get a better result, but never seeing their expectation fulfilled.

 

The irony of it all is that the Jews and their lackeys attack the deal by moaning about their failure to break it, and worse, by admitting that their attacks are strengthening the deal. A recent example of this insane endeavor came under the title: “Biden’s Nuclear Deal With Iran Is Set To Be Even More Disastrous Than Obama’s,” and the subtitle: “Russia’s demand for a sanctions exemption is the only thing stopping the new, deeply flawed nuclear deal from going forward.” It was written by Fred Fleitz and published on March 17, 2022 in the online publication, The Federalist.

 

When they say that the new deal is more disastrous than the old deal, as seen in the title, the Jews admit that their doings are having the opposite effect of what they expected. But instead of ending their pointless quest here and now, they repeat the failed attempt, hoping to achieve the unachievable while relying on their moaning to assist in taking them where they never went before.

 

Whereas all of that is apparent from the title and subtitle of the Fleitz article, you can see an even greater elaboration of what’s insane when you go through the text. The following is a condensed version of the passages that show how Fleitz is moaning about America reneging on the old bad deal only to get trapped in a new worse deal, which is how he sees things. Here are those passages:

 

“The worst deal ever is getting even worse. Russia is trying to exploit its role in the new agreement by demanding that Russian trade with Iran be exempted from sanctions imposed on Russia in response to its invasion of Ukraine. During negotiations over the last year, Tehran’s representatives refused to meet directly with US diplomats. Iran also engaged in [nefarious] behavior, including a huge surge in its nuclear program and ballistic missile tests. Unable to meet directly with Iranian officials, the administration outsourced negotiations to the Russian Ambassador who bragged how he managed to negotiate a better deal for Iran”.

 

We are to understand from those passages that not only did the provisions of the new deal become more favorable to Iran, which automatically means less favorable to Israel, they have also become less favorable to the United States by the fact that they have gone under the influence of the Russians.

 

So you want to know what exactly are the provisions of the new deal that so annoy the Jews and Israel and the self-appointed American “experts” who want you to believe they know better than the administration which has been working on both deals from the start.

 

First, the following is a compilation of the provisions that concern the money which Iran will receive, and the technological improvements it will be allowed to introduce to its uranium and missile productions:

 

“Iran will receive an estimated $90 billion in sanctions relief and an additional $50 billion in extra revenue each year from higher oil exports. Iran will get a cash payment when $7 billion in frozen Iranian assets held in South Korea will be released. Iran will be permitted to enrich uranium to 20 percent uranium-235. Iran will not destroy most of its advanced uranium enrichment centrifuges. Sanctions on Iran’s missile program will expire in 2023. Limitations on advanced centrifuges will all go away in 2028. Most other restrictions end in 2030”.

 

Second, the following is a compilation of the provisions that spell out the role which Russia will play when it comes to the business of rewarding Iran and punishing America:

 

“The most troubling US concession is a provision under which Iran will continue to enrich uranium, send it to Russia and be provided an equivalent amount of uranium ore. This arrangement contains an understanding that will return Iran’s enriched uranium if a future US president withdraws from the nuclear deal. It is intended to punish any future US president who withdraws from the new nuclear agreement”.

 

If there is a lesson to be learned from this experience, it is that no American President, must ever again, go down the path of Jewish induced insanity by repeating what they tell him to do and expect to achieve a better result from all the previous failed attempts.

The opportunism that led to a civil war

 There is no bigger tragedy than war. This is what’s going on between Ukraine and Russia at this time. The first thing that came to mind upon learning of that war, was the question concerning the way that the opportunists of the world will take advantage of it to suck as much blood as they can of the tragic event.

 

And then, the answer to that question revealed itself. It turned out that the officials in charge of the Ukraine war, and those in charge of the American diplomacy were shocked to hear the Jewish Prime Minister of Israel announce his willingness to mediate between the combatants in that war. This happened at about the same time that the Jewish President of Ukraine had announced his desire to meet with Russia’s President Putin in Israel — in occupied Jerusalem of all places.

 

Why is that suggestion shocking? It is because Israel is doing to the Palestinians what Putin is doing to Ukraine. For the leader of Ukraine to suggest bestowing the blessing of a suffering Ukrainian people on the murderous rampage that’s inflicted on the Palestinian people by the cannibalistic settlers of Zion, indicates that either Volodymyr Zelenskyy was elected in a rigged election, or he is such an accomplished comedian, he conned the Ukrainian people into electing him on a made-up platform of lies.

 

This is why the lower-ranking leaders in Ukraine and the higher-ranking leaders in America have opposed the Volodymyr Zelenskyy idea whereas fanatic Jews of the Abraham Wagner variety have expressed enthusiasm for it. In fact very few Jews support the idea. As it happens, some believe that the suggestion will not get off the ground, but will damage the Jewish effort to present themselves as idealists. Worse, the idea will inevitably cause the comparison between the Russian attack on Ukrainians and the continued Jewish attacks on Palestinians. The result will be that the blood which the opportunists hope to suck out of the tragedy, will turn out to be deadly toxic for the already tattered reputation of the Jews and their illegitimate pet project, Israel.

 

In addition to the Palestinian factor that looms large on this subject, ordinary political considerations also play a role in the ill-advised proposition of holding a summit in Jerusalem. In fact, this is what you’ll read about in the article that Abraham Wagner wrote under the title: “Israel’s off-ramp for stopping Putin and his Ukraine war,” and the subtitle: “Jerusalem Peace Conference is the best idea yet.” The article was published on March 17, 2022 in The Washington Times.

 

Refraining from mentioning the Palestinian issue or the ongoing Jewish theft of Palestine or the wholesale criminality that’s inherent to the Jewish project, Abraham Wagner went about telling of the difficulties in trying to arrange a meeting between Vladimir Putin, a leader who believes he owns what he is fighting to grab, and Volodymyr Zelenskyy, a made-for-the-moment leader who is totally bereft of the sense of leadership. In fact, what Zelenskyy misses is that, as a supposed leader, his priority number one is to save the lives of the Ukrainian people, not squander them to fulfill the American warmongers’ agenda of fighting the Russians to the last Ukrainian.

 

Zelenskyy cannot grasp the principle that the lives of people should come before any other consideration, and certainly before any temporary political gains he may score by continuing to fight a fruitless war. In fact, it looks now that the outcome of the Ukraine War will not be that of one side winning and the other side losing. Rather, it will be that of death and destruction on a scale comparable only to the cannibalistic Jewish crimes which are continually committed against the people of Palestine.

 

Here, in condensed form, is how Abraham Wagner has described Israel’s difficulties, trying to have it both ways — such as benefiting from Russia’s presence in the Eastern Mediterranean, and at the same time benefiting from America’s support for the people of Ukraine:

 

“Since the outset of the conflict, Israel has been in a difficult place, failing to join the US and Europe in condemnation of Russia, while still not siding with Mr. Putin. For his efforts, Mr. Bennett has been criticized by some in the Israeli media, as well as in Ukraine and has gotten lukewarm support from the US regarding Israeli mediation between Ukraine and Russia. [Despite all this] Mr. Zelenskyy stated that ‘among the founding fathers of Israel, there were Ukrainian Jews who brought with them their history and a fierce desire to build a wonderful country. So, it’s not so bad to have such mediation’”.

 

The inevitable outcome of all this has been that a haggling civil war has erupted among the Jews who are also fighting against non-Jews. Here, in condensed form, is how Abraham Wagner has described that unseemly brawl:

 

“Zelenskyy noted that it would not be right to meet in Russia, Ukraine or Belarus. Bennett’s mediation efforts are irritating a number of senior Ukrainian officials. Zelenskyy has a relationship with Bennett, other Ukrainian officials have signaled Israel that the meeting between Bennett and Putin in the midst of war was not to their liking. Israel did not appreciate the criticism. Some in the US have also joined in criticizing Bennett. US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland has recently said that Bennett should emerge from his comfort zone and provide Ukraine with aid while joining the sanctions against Putin. This is the same Victoria Nuland that in a prior post tried to sell Zelenskyy down the drain and should probably not be in the US government at all. Unfortunately, she seems to be calling some of the shots here”.

 

There is no off-ramp for Volodymyr Zelenskyy that will save Ukraine. The clown should just get off the stage and let an authentic Ukrainian take control of the situation. Vladimir Putin will most certainly agree to a ceasefire and negotiate a compromise.