A new Oxymoron: Regimented Democracy

From extreme regimentation on one side of the spectrum to extreme chaos on the other side of it, there exists a mid-point we may call human free will.

The closest analogy to regimentation in the natural phenomena would be Newtonian Mechanics. In fact, you can launch a probe into space and pinpoint where it will be a thousand years from now. As to the closest analogy to chaos, it must be the string of unpredictable digits that give pi its value. And it is between those two extremes that lays human behavior. It is rational enough to be predictable, yet capricious enough to confound.

We call freedom the ability of an individual to choose to behave one way or the other. When in a given set of circumstances a group is allowed to choose between possibilities, it becomes difficult to predict how the group will respond because each individual will make an independent decision. This situation is called democracy; a way to organize society … but also a way that renders it unpredictable.

It happens that the brain, which allows us to make free choices, has determined that more good can be had when individuals give up some of their freedoms and accept being regimented to act collectively like a group. It must be said in this regard that as a species, we have accomplished more than any other because organization has allowed us to exceed the sum of our individual efforts.

And then a complication began to manifest itself. It turned out that unlike the other species who know where to stop when they have enough of something, many of us humans do not know where to stop when the going is good, and there is nothing to prevent us from grabbing more of what's there. This is called greed, a human trait that has caused the demise of great achievers.

Wisdom has been defined in many ways; one being that you do not let greed take control of you. Some of the cultures that accomplished a great deal have learned that lesson early enough and heeded it, which is why they persisted. Others did not learn it till it was too late, and so they perished. And then, there is one culture that never learned the lesson despite the fact that it perished many times throughout the centuries, and was resurrected in a different form each and every time, but always retaining greed as its main characteristic.

That culture calls itself Judaism, a constantly shifting concoction whose many demises came about as a result of its inability to stop exploiting the host cultures that allow it to live off them as a parasite. Its current host being America – a country that prides itself on being democratic – Judaism has exploited this democracy to the point that America is about to buckle under the weight of a burden it cannot begin to fathom. The thing is painted the colors of democracy but is in reality a monstrous toxic load that is Jewish through and through.

You can see how that combination works when you look at the editorial which came under the title: “The Iranian side deal” and the subtitle: “Obama's hocus will come back to poke us,” published on July 19, 2016 in the Pittsburgh Tribune. Nothing in this piece is different from what came in the editorial that was published under the title “Aiding and abetting Iran in getting nukes even faster,” on July 20, 2016 in the New York Daily News. That editorial was discussed yesterday by yours truly on this website in an article that came under the title: “Ignorance is not Bliss but a Curse”.

The significance of these two editorials coming at about the same time is that they are but two echoes from among the dozens of others that were repeated over and over again. What is deceptive in all of this is that democracy, which relies on the will of the majority, has been distorted by the Jews who organize artificial events to give the impression that a majority of the people wants what a minority of Jews wants for itself. This trick renders the outcome of such events predictable, and that's a characteristic that runs contrary to what democracy is all about.

Having taken the American system close to the brink of collapse, the editors of the Tribune had the gall to comment on the explanation that was given by the administration, like this: “Consider it cold comfort from an administration that couldn't tell the truth.” Well, someone should tell these editors that no one in the administration risks being gassed or incinerated. The same cannot be said about those who come up with editorials as asinine as theirs.

Ignorance is not Bliss but a Curse

The editors of the New York Daily News have added their voice to those who decided to perpetuate a big lie and a massive deception with regard to the Iran nuclear deal. They made their point in a piece they wrote under the title: “Aiding and abetting Iran in getting nukes even faster,” published on July 20, 2016 in the Daily News.

The lie is that “the pact [nuclear agreement] came with a hidden side deal.” In fact, this is a false assertion because everything about the agreement was made public prior to signing it. As to the deception that's being perpetuated by the editors and their cohorts, it has to do with the significance they attach to the rate at which Iran will produce nuclear fuel.

Without naming who the Associated Press experts might have been that came up with the presumed assessment, the editors of the Daily News quote the news agency as reporting that instead of the promised 15 years, Iran will be able to “enrich [uranium] at more than twice the rate” it is now doing, and will reach that level after only 11 years ... which is 4 years sooner than expected.

As a result of this discovery by the Associated Press, and the real or fictitious interpretation of what the numbers mean, the editors of the Daily News have allowed themselves to run wild with speculation regarding what the Iranians will do with the shortened time frame. Here is what they say: “Iran is playing a waiting game to nuke Israel and wipe the Jewish state off the map”.

It is obvious that those who believe these words can only be mental cases. That's because the Iranians have been around for thousands of years and have built a magnificent civilization, therefore cannot be so mental as to be this reckless. If they were, most of them would have been gassed and incinerated by now, and the few that survived would have trouble getting along with anyone on the planet. But looking around, we notice that this is a Jewish reality, not an Iranian one. Thus, it can be explained that the attempt to divert attention by the Jewish editors of the Daily News, is but a trick to project onto the Iranians what they see in themselves.

Since we have deduced that the Iranians are normal as normal can be, we must take it that they are not pursuing a nuclear program to build a bomb and use it to destroy Israel. Therefore, we are obliged to conclude that they are pursuing a nuclear program to generate electricity – which is what they say they are doing.

This being the case, we do the math to see how much nuclear fuel the Iranians might need, and compare that with what they plan to produce. In fact, such detailed calculations were done in an article that was published on this website in May of 2014, and can be accessed in the archives at the right side of this page. The article came under the title: “Pompous Impotence of the Obstreperous”.

What I do here is go over the same concepts without doing the math. Think how much fuel goes into the tank of a car. Now imagine the car getting involved in an accident in which the tank catches fire and explodes. Can you visualize how big an explosion that would be? Now think how much fuel oil goes into a house to heat it during the winter months. Can you visualize how big an explosion it would create if that tank exploded?

Well, it takes a lot more fuel than that to run the kitchen appliances, the living room electronics, the light bulbs in every room, and everything else that runs on electricity in a house. And if a fraction of that fuel was detonated in a single explosion, it would destroy not just the house but the entire neighborhood. The point is that in order to service a city with electric power, a nuclear plant will use enough uranium to raze not only the city but the entire country – if that uranium were turned into weapons.

Thus, to argue about how fast Iran will be able to refine how much uranium, and do it at what rate, is to engage in the kind of Jewish haggling that has paralyzed the American congress, has killed the American democracy and has turned the superpower into a loud mouthed exceptional buffoon. Stop this hair splitting and get serious if you want to save America.

Somebody should tell America's Jews they are strangling the goose that has been laying the golden egg for them. If they don't stop, the goose will die and they will die with it. They may think they are the smartest thing in the universe but they are as ignorant as hell. And that's a curse, not bliss.

It is the Islamo-Christian West vs. the Jews

Dennis Prager wonders why “Few in the West Are Serious about Islamist Terror,” and I have an answer for him. It is that there is no such a thing as Islamist terror. He made his views known in an article that came by that title, a piece that was published on July 19, 2016 in National Review Online.

If the most terrorizing act in life is to stone a woman for committing adultery, the West and the rest of the World have learned that this barbarity is a basic tenet of the Jewish religion, and never has been that of Islam or Christianity. Whereas the Christians and the Muslims have said “let he who has never sinned throw the first stone,” the Jews have been throwing stones left and right as if they were as sinless as a child that's living in a world as sinful as the savage Jewish settlers who terrorize the Palestinians in their country, in their towns and in their homes.

And while the Jews say they adhere to the law that says an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, they practice the rule that says this must be the minimum pain they inflict on those they suspect to have hurt them … whether or not guilt is established. Thus, the Jews regularly engage in sprees to gouge as many eyes as they can, and pull as many teeth as they have the strength to do … as long as the world will let them.

This being Judaism, Dennis Prager provides proof that you cannot cure a Jew of it anymore than you can cure a Nazi of his Nazism. Here is what he complains about now: “The universities teach students the falsehood that there is no moral difference between Islam and Christianity or Judaism.” It is his way to stress the point he has been making over and over again, to the effect that Judaism stands supreme over the other religions. And here he is, placing Islam at the bottom of the ranking system he devised.

That's bad enough, but does not in itself designate Dennis Prager as equal to the Nazis. What takes him there is what he says next. Here it is: “to deny there is something Muslim about the theology of those who commit atrocities against 'infidels' is to deny an important truth about Islamic terror. It therefore prevents the only solution to Muslim violence”.

With that, Prager alludes to the fact that Christianity, as an institution, was as brutal as some of today's Muslim kids. The point being that because Christianity was reformed, it is now a more gentle religion. And so, he makes clear that once we stop denying that Islam needs to be reformed, and the Muslims get on with the business of reforming it, Islam will become as gentle as Christianity. Okay. But what about Judaism? It has been around for something like 15 centuries longer than Christianity, and something like 20 centuries longer than Islam? Has it reformed? Can it be reformed? Or is it impossible to reform Judaism as it is to reform Nazism?

Dennis Prager does not come close to answering those questions, but makes arguments that reveal which way he leans. He does so by blaming the bad behavior of the Muslim kids on America's Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, as well as Angela Merkel of the European Union. He complains that Obama refuses to blame Islam for what a few Muslim kids do. He also complains that Clinton wants to take Syrian refugees into America. And he complains that Merkel took many refugees into Germany already, and plans to take even more.

But these are the qualities of mercy that separate the noble people from the Nazis. They also separate the world of Christianity and Islam from the world of Judaism. If this is a harsh assessment of the Jewish character, consider what Dennis Prager says at the end of his article: “Most people in the West do not share its elites' broken moral compass”.

What he is alluding to is what the Nazis were saying. They believed that human compassion was a weakness of the moral compass that kept many a nation from progressing. For this reason, the Nazis exterminated the weak in their midst and distributed the resources that were allocated to them, among the remaining strong. And this, my friend, makes it imperative that Dennis Prager should come out and clearly explain if he wants to exterminate the compassionate Europeans the way that the Nazis exterminated the weak among them.

The way things look now is that he believes the nation can stay strong only if the public will maintain its moral compass intact. And the way to do this is to rid the population of compassion.

Dennis Prager is an archetype of the modern Nazi, and he calls himself a Zionist.

Okay mister; you made your Point. What now?

Imagine you're an entrepreneur who deals with complex matters at home and abroad. You retain a consultant to advise you on how to execute difficult transactions so as to score maximum success while creating the least amount of animosity for you and your enterprise.

But every time that you ask the consultant to give you an assessment of how things are going, and how else you should proceed, he does one of two things. Either he says you need to get tougher when dealing with others – without elaborating as to how you can do this – or he laments that you're doing so badly now, he will say no more. Undaunted, you instruct him to think constructively and come up with workable solutions, but he proves incapable of breaking out the mold in which he was cast.

Well, if you can imagine America being an enterprise, and the opinion makers in it being consultants, you'll have no trouble seeing that the above narrative represents the story of Ralph Peters who came up with yet another article that's as useless as most of those he has written. The latest came under the title: “Bastille Day attack shows how Islamists score their victories for pennies,” published on July 17, 2016 in the New York Post.

The article makes no sense till you reach the end where you see that it is signed by Ralph Peters, Fox News' strategic analyst. This explains the opening sentence of the article, and sheds light on the approach that he adopted for this article and for most of what he has written. Here is the current opening sentence: “The most important quality an intelligence officer can possess is the ability to escape his preconceptions to see the world from the enemy's perspective”.

Seeing this, you instantly understand what is happening because you know that Fox News is not an American network presenting the world from an American perspective; it is a Jewish network pretending to be American, and presenting the world to those who watch it from the perspective of World Jewry.

All of that helps to clarify what Ralph Peters says next. Speaking of the tragedy in Nice, he offers this point of view: “Our analysis failed miserably. Instead of measuring the terrorist success, we diminished it … terror triumphed in Nice.” Indeed, this message of abject failure in everything that America does is the message that Fox News has been throwing at the American people from the moment that the Jews became aware that Barack Obama will not be the puppet who will say or do what they command him to say and do.

In fact, the Jews view the President of the United States as being the enemy they must defeat in the same way that the American people view terror as being the enemy they must defeat. And so, you constantly see the likes of Fox News and Ralph Peters inflate the exploits of everyone in the world while deflating the work of the American administration.

These people go that far and do this much because it is the easiest way to exploit America's democracy and tolerant habits, to erode the public's confidence in their administration. In addition, the more that Fox News, Ralph Peters and World Jewry fail to persuade the electorate to reject this administration, the more they paint the President as being America's number one enemy. It is not al-Qaeda anymore, it is not ISIS either … rather; it is the President of the United States that's the enemy of America.

Look how the author describes what is happening, how he says America is responding to it and yet, he fails to offer an alternative. Here is a montage of his sayings: “We're trapped in American thinking … We'll spend a million on bombs to kill a single jihadi … Islamists score their victories for pennies … They slaughter us for pennies and bathe in our blood. And we belittle them”.

In fact, it is with the last two sentences that he ends the article. This prompts you to cry out the obvious question: Okay mister, you made your point. Now what?

But don't expect him to tell you what now because it was never a part of his mission. He is paid by Fox News and the New York Post not to tell it like it is, but to try and maneuver the electorate into handing America to the Jewish lobby, and in the process, turn themselves into Palestinians in their own country.

America fought to liberate itself from British colonialism only to see the Jews try to colonize it anew.

Reject the Quack of the wild Goose

In an article that came under the title: “Getting smart about crowdsourced terror” and the subtitle: “What the U.S. should learn from Nice,” Michael Chertoff wrote a few things that make sense, but they are by no means exhaustive. His article appeared on July 17, 2016 in the New York Daily News.

The article is made of three parts. First, there is a description of the current situation. Second, there is an analysis of it. Third, there are recommendations as to what society should do to counter terrorism. Well, it must be said that the description of the situation is thorough and adequate. What is lacking is a good analysis of what's happening, which leads to an incomplete set of recommendations.

Chertoff began the analysis correctly in saying that no two terrorist attacks – of the current variety – are alike, but instead of explaining this part adequately, he went on to say: “which is why they pose such a challenge.” He made a distinction between the way that al Qaeda used to operate 15 years ago, and what terrorist activity has morphed into now.

He says in this regard that the new form of terrorist expression “includes widely distributed, small-scale and often homegrown attacks against soft targets and public spaces.” This is different from the way that hierarchical and centrally managed Al Qaeda used to operate, which is why it was possible to frustrate its activities then, and nearly impossible to confront those of ISIS now, he says.

And this is the point at which Chertoff misses the opportunity to make the most important point of all. It is that the new form of terrorist expression was not invented by ISIS. Rather it is a tendency that is as much an American phenomenon as the fusion of jingoism and the Second Amendment. In fact, such activities are not new to America; being around since the days of the Wild West. The truth is that people have been killing each other on this piece of real estate in that manner since the European invasion of the continent.

What is a serious addition to the mix is not that ISIS “has moved toward encouraging individuals to carry out acts of violence on their own;” it is that the cable channels give more massive coverage to the most massive of murders, and to the most mysterious of motives. This is what gives big ideas to those who gave up on life, and seek to depart it with a splash.

Many of these people have learned that when they shout “Allahu akbar,” they get the Cadillac coverage that even a dead president does not get. They learned that Allahu akbar is the quack of the wild goose that gets the analysts to probe for weeks on end the possible motives that made them act the way they did.

This is just fine with characters that love to go with a smile on their face, thus communicate to the next set of geese how to get chased a wild chase by idiots, and be granted not just fifteen minutes of ordinary fame, but fifteen days of sensationalized fame in the world of cable television. And there will be a spot for them in the annals of history … even if it will only be a footnote.

Thus, beside the three steps that were suggested by Chertoff to combat homegrown terrorism, we must add the need to curtail the coverage of such occurrences by the cable companies. We must also clarify and expand on some of the points that he made.

For example, we must be mindful of the possibility that to say something when you see something is to embark on a slippery slope that can easily lead to the kind of snitching which used to plague the Communist world. It was one of the reasons why the governments of these places lost the confidence of their people.

Otherwise, Chertoff is correct in suggesting that family and community members will speak up “only if we can demonstrate that we will respond constructively, and not punitively.” He is also correct in suggesting that it is self-defeating for “leaders to demonize whole communities”.

When this is done properly, everyone will be encouraged to debate the issues pertaining to the subject matter, including the spot that the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights should occupy in the future.

The dark Sky and the silver Lining

In a zero-sum system, one man's dark sky can be another man's silver lining, and vice versa. In a winner-take-all system, the loser dies a sudden death. In a system that's equitable, everyone gets a piece of the pie commensurate with the effort they put into the shared enterprise and the nature of their contribution.

When civilized people sit down to negotiate over an issue, they have equity on their mind. What they do, therefore, is seek to apportion the duties and rewards that each participant will receive for an enterprise they plan to undertake jointly. In the event that they have already participated in an enterprise that took place without prior agreement, they negotiate to distribute as equitably as possible the gains and the pains that came of it.

This system has worked so well for humanity through the ages, we were able to go from the Stone Age to the Space Age in less than 10,000 years or a mere 400 generations. But this does not mean that all human beings were in harmony with each other all the time. On the contrary, our ascent to civilization was paved with all sorts of conflicts, many of which were so savage; we behaved at levels below those of wild animals.

Unfortunately, we have not completely freed ourselves of such tendencies. There are people among us who continue to believe in the Nazi creed that war – and all that comes with it – is the highest form of civilized conduct. At no time do you hear them counsel that “the other” may deserve to be treated well, or be spared. That's because these people are permanently seized with the idea that every conflict must be intensified till one side undergoes sudden death.

An example of how these people go about expressing themselves on such matters has come under the title: “Kerry's Syria Offer” and the subtitle: “The Secretary of State has a new sweetener for Vladimir Putin,” a piece that was written by the editors of the Wall Street Journal and published in their paper on July 16, 2016.

The editors tell the story of John Kerry's trip to Moscow where he presented the Russians with a proposal to end the 5-year old civil war in Syria. And right away – before anything else – the editors offered an opinionated piece of speculation that sounds more like a wish than a well reasoned out theory. Here it is: “Too bad another bad deal with Russia isn't likely to achieve that goal”.

These people wish to see the political if not the real sudden death of Syria's President Bashar Assad. It is an old wish that remains the driving force behind everything they say and do. They show this tendency in the editorial despite the effort they make to appear like they softened their stance in that matter.

Having rejected Kerry's initiative offhand, they go on to describe how he and the Russians may conduct negotiations over his proposal. They reveal that in the short term, America wants Assad's air force grounded in return for cooperating with Russia in the field of intelligence. In the long term, America wants Assad out of power. The editors call this a reasonable bargain, but shoot it down immediately, the way that Jews always do these things. Here it is: “...if only Putin had any record of abiding by previous commitments”.

This behavior points to the fact that Jews view life as a zero-sum game. They consider everyone that's not with them to be against them, which makes it so that what they win, the opponent loses and vice versa. This is why they can never bargain in good faith, and why they accuse others of doing what is known to be their trademark. Look what they say about Putin: “Russia will pocket U.S. intelligence while continuing to press their advantage.”

The truth is that there is no proof at all Russia behaves in that manner whereas Israel's negotiations with the Palestinians has been nothing but that. The truth is that Israel never reciprocated after pocketing the concessions that the Palestinians said they would make if Israel reciprocated. What happened time and time again is that the Jews kept their cake even after they ate the Palestinian lunch and ate their cake too.

So then, where does that leave the world? The Journal editors suggest that Putin might want to see an end to Western sanctions against his country, and recognition of Russian gains in Ukraine. They suggest that Putin should be hopeful this will happen because there has been a shift in American and European attitudes in this regard. They don't like it because the conflict has been averted in the short term. But they remain hopeful that there will be a bigger conflict in the future for, they remain as bloodthirsty as ever.

Tweedledee and Tweedledum have gone Zombie

If you wonder why a burlesque showman was able to dispose of two pillars from the Jewish establishment that's in control of America, look at Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio who are members of the chamber of horror known as the Senate of the United States.

On the first anniversary of the nuclear deal with Iran, each of them wrote a piece that was published on July 14, 2016 in National Review Online. That of Ted Cruz came under the title: “Iran Tries Again.” That of Marco Rubio came under the title: “One Year of Obama Failures on Iran”.

The two characters (call them Tweedledee and Tweedledum) must have consumed a hefty doze of the Judeo-Zionist Kool-Aid, the reason why they went brain dead and tried to navigate their way to the White House like a couple of zombies. They met the showman on their way there, as he was out trying to have some fun on a full-mooned night. Seeing them, he kneecapped them to amuse himself, thus made them as leg-less as they were brainless. And so they gave up on the idea of completing the run to the White House.

The two are back now, fueled by the Kool-Aid that is still in their systems. They are calling to ditch the Iran nuclear deal; something they promise they'll keep doing to eternity if they must … a la Jewish tradition.

The excuse that Ted Cruz is giving for doing so is that in the speculative mode to which his brainless skull has been switched, he determined that Iran will cheat on the deal. And so he speculates that: “enriched by the deal and emboldened by their engagement with the international community, the Mullahs will accelerate their nuclear ambitions, enhanced by their ability to make good on their threats against Israel.” It's all about Israel, you see. It is Israel, always Israel and no one but Israel.

Cruz goes on to list the things he says Iran has done wrong during the past year. Study them and you'll determine that none comes close to what the American cops do when murdering their fellow citizens in cold blood. And neither do they come close to Israel's continuing occupation of Palestine; a most heinous crime against humanity that any group of thugs can ever commit.

And to think that all the horror is financed, armed and protected in world forums by America, makes you wonder how much bigger the stain on that country's record will get. It is a record that's already soiled by the near extermination of the native population on the continent, and by the slavery that followed.

Mindful that he played the speculative trick very badly, Ted Cruz uses another trick the Jews taught him to employ when in a bind. It is to impugn bad motives to the opponent. Thus, he spoke of what he says are Iran's attempts to procure banned material in Germany. He put it this way: “The problem is Iran's ongoing attempts to do so.” He mentions Pakistan and North Korea, and then goes back to playing the speculative trick: “why would they [the Iranians] not turn to more agreeable trading partners?” The reality is that we cannot escape the conclusion Ted Cruz has become as hopeless as his Jewish masters.

As to Marco Rubio, he begins his article by citing the customary litany concerning the naughtiness of the Iranians. He then gets into the matter of America selling passenger jets to Iran, which is the latest preoccupation to consume the Jewish establishment. Rubio complains: “At every opportunity, Secretary of State John Kerry and others have encouraged foreign companies to do business with Iran … a recent concession was allowing Boeing to sell aircraft to Iran”.

Unable to come up with something smarter to say, he addresses his Jewish masters to tell them what he did and what he'll do next to please them: “I have joined with colleagues in the Senate to pressure Iran. We have introduced crushing new sanctions on Iran. We made clear that Congress will block allowing Iran to access the U.S. financial system. We are working to ensure that taxpayer money will not be used to finance Boeing's deal with Tehran. We have also targeted Hezbollah, making it more difficult for that group to fund its activities”.

He closes with this: “The Iranian threat has not disappeared … Tehran has exploited the nuclear agreement to expand its nefarious activities, including provocations against Americans and Israel.” It's all about Israel, always Israel and no one but Israel, you see. And the world has grown tired of it.