How Jewish Haggling muddies the Waters

When a feud goes on for decades between individuals, families, tribes or nations, and the antagonists decide to end it, they sit together, go over their differences one item at a time and resolve them so that they can be put behind them, and the former antagonists move on with their lives.

This is what happened between the United States of America and Iran, having battled it for several decades over big things and small ones. They sat together in the company of other nations representing the rest of humanity, and they managed to resolve many of the serious issues. To make sure that superfluous issues did not get in the way of the negotiations, they agreed to disagree on them, and they set them aside for the passage of time to heal the wounds before they will be tackled again in the future.

That's how this sort of events was handled for ages, and that's why humanity has progressed with the passage of time despite the difficulties it encountered along the way. It is that in the midst of this advancement, there lingered the Jewish question ... a calamity imposed on the human race by recruits to an ideology whose destructive power has slowed humanity's progress but never managed to halt it completely.

Now that the deal between Iran and the world has been signed, sealed and delivered; and now that the outstanding issues are being cleared up pursuant to the clauses of the agreement, the Jews are trying to get into the act the same way they always did since coming into existence. They recruited people of all sorts, and taught them how to bark the right sort of refrain when the signal is given to do so.

Barking is what Fred Fleitz is doing in the article he wrote under the title: “Secret Ransom Payment Is More Evidence of the Enormous Fraud of the Iran Deal,” published on August 3, 2016 in National Review Online. Under the guise of exercising his right to free speech, he is participating in the Jewish haggling that used to stand in the way of resolving the issues … and used now in an attempt to derail the agreement with Iran.

Similar games were played by the Jewish leaders throughout the ages, and this is why ordinary Jews paid a heavy price each and every time. Despite the fact it is universally acknowledged that the anti-Jewish pogroms and holocausts came about in response to what the leaders were orchestrating, today's Jewish leaders are emulating the performance of their predecessors … and yet, no uproar is emanating from any quarter telling them to stop because humanity has had it up to here with them.

Thus, knowing that he will get away with anything he says – protected by the apathy enveloping all Jewish matters – Fred Fleitz writes the following: “This is not the first time Obama has paid a ransom to the mullahs … Obama officials have denied that the $400 million was a ransom payment. Instead, they say it was the first installment of an American payment to resolve a dispute over a pre-1979 arms deal with the Shah's government”.

In fact, what the Obama officials did is typical of what normal human beings have been doing through the ages, and why humanity has progressed as it did. But to cast doubt on the event – charging that the return of Iran's money to Iran was ransom paid in return for a dubious quid pro quo – is the kind of Jewish haggling that tends to escalate till it ends violently one way or the other, sooner or later.

And here is where the escalation might start: “Why the secrecy? Why did Obama fail to disclose this shipment? I am concerned that the negotiations to free the U.S. prisoners and the ransom payment were structured by the Administration so that it could avoid briefing Congress before it voted on the Iran deal”.

The fact is that there was no secrecy for the simple reason that there was no need for one. America had the right to get back its prisoners, and Iran had the right to get back its money. To say that one or the other paid ransom in this exchange is to be feeble minded if not an outright mental case.

What Fred Fleitz has done is pluck a piece of fiction out of thin air. He turned it into an accusation whose intent was to put the Administration on the defensive, thus force it to respond to something that has no substance. The expectation was that new occasions will be created for plucking more fictions with which to keep the haggling going, and keep the wounds on both sides festering forever.

And in the same way that the Jews have managed to freeze the situation in Palestine – thus maintain the occupation for an indefinite period of time – Fleitz and those like him are trying to freeze any rapprochement that might be achieved between America and Iran.

They want this kind of rupture to develop between the two because it will greatly serve the interests of Israel, always Israel and no one but Israel. And that's the bottom line.

Can they tame the Frankenstein they created?

Would you believe it? Arch-neocons Bret Stephens and Elliott Abrams are now rooting for Democratic Hillary Clinton to beat the Republican Donald Trump and win the upcoming presidential election.

Has there been a rupture in the space-time continuum upon which Planet Earth was hurled into a parallel universe? Are we going to meet the anti-matter twins of Captain Kirk and Science Officer Spock? Or are we stuck with Bret Stephens and Elliott Abrams for an eternity and a half?

These questions come to mind when you read two articles published on August 2, 2016. One article came under the title: “To the Go-Along Republicans,” and the subtitle: “Memo to Paul Ryan: Trump's problem is his character, not his 'ideas.'” It was written by Bret Stephens and published in the Wall Street Journal. The other came under the title: “Happy Talk for Anxious Allies,” written by Elliott Abrams and published in the Weekly Standard.

Realizing that he is talking to simple folks bewildered by what they see happening around them, Bret Stephens psychologically prepares those that have not yet crossed the matter/anti-matter barrier separating this universe from the next. Aware that they may still be afraid of what they'll encounter when they get there, he gives them the following mini lecture:

“There are no permanent victories or defeats … The turning of the policy wheel should comfort those unnerved by the prospect of a Hillary presidency … If she is everything they say she is – an opportunistic, dishonest, incompetent left-wing ideologue – they can look forward to a one-term presidency [just like Obama's]”.

Now that he comforted the simple folks and relieved them of their fears, he promises there will be justice at the end of the journey. However, speaking to those who may not take his advice, he warns that it “doesn't mean there is no permanent dishonor.” This done, he explains why the old guard he would have sacrificed half of America and all of Europe to defend only a year ago, is no longer the guard the folks should listen to or follow. Here is how he put it to them:

“This is where Republicans now find themselves with their presidential nominee … What makes Mr. Trump so foul is [his] sadism … His problem isn't a lack of normal propriety but the absence of basic human decency. He is morally unfit for any office, high or low … This point needs to dawn on Republican officeholders who pretend to endorse Mr. Trump, and pretend not to … The central issue is his character. The sin, in this case, is the sinner”.

Because the folks are supposed to make a choice between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, Stephens juxtaposes the sins of each, and comes down in favor of Clinton. Of Trump's sins, he lists the slander of other people; his nativism, protectionism, isolationism, mendacity, meanness, crassness and disdain for constitutional protections. As to Clinton, he describes her as being a corner-cutter and a liar who will appoint liberals to the Supreme Court. But here is the cinch: at least she's not a sociopath. That should make her candidacy more palatable according to Stephens.

We now look at the Elliott Abrams piece. Instead of tackling the subject matter head-on, telling the folks they should follow Hillary Clinton to the next universe instead of remaining in this one with Donald Trump, Abrams tells a long story, and hopes it will work on the electorate. He says he went to Japan and told the people there about the “pendulum theory” of American politics.

He says he reassured the Japanese that “the pendulum will swing back under Clinton [to] support a muscular foreign policy … and even under Trump whose slogan is 'Make America Great Again.' But the Japanese asked how he could be sure that Trump will ditch his own promise.

That is where Abrams proudly reveals that he “conjured up” a response … a flimsy one at that. He says he told his Japanese audience about the Jimmy Carter flip-flop pertaining to Korea. The story – in brief – is that candidate Carter had campaigned on withdrawing American troops from South Korea, but reversed his decision when he became president. And so, Abrams expects that Trump will do likewise. But because the Japanese did not seem reassured, he told them that Hillary Clinton will most likely win the election anyway. And they were happy to hear that from him.

To encourage the voters in America to make the jump to the next universe, Elliott Abrams tells them there are no supporters for Trump in 11 other capitals. They are Seoul, Taipei, Canberra, New Delhi, Riyadh, Amman, Abu Dhabi, Warsaw, Vilnius, Prague and Kiev. Whether or not this will work remains to be seen.

All in all, it looks like it was in a true Jewish fashion that the neocons created a truly menacing Frankenstein. It got out of control, and they are now trying to seize and tame the creature. The question is whether or not they will succeed.

I suppose, we'll know the answer to that in about three months.

The ultimate Fraud was the Creation of Israel

Another piece of work, which the editors of the Pittsburgh Tribune attribute to an outfit calling itself U.N. Watch, was published in that publication on July 31, 2016 under the title: “Fraud? What Fraud?”

If you have a difficult time figuring what the editors are after this time, all you need to do is look to see how they end their dissertation because that's where their intent becomes obvious. And so, here is how they end the thing: “How the U.N. doesn't handle fraud should be a wake-up call for Americans, who get stuck for about a quarter of the world body's operating budget”.

Those who are familiar with the activities of the Jews in America during the past half century will recall that these characters have acted like the relentless town criers that never stopped letting out shrieks of alarm, calling on the good people of America to wake up because a non-Jew was committing something terrible – whether or not there was a grain of truth in that claim. Moreover, it was clear to everyone that the Jews were shamelessly doing all this at the same time as they were claiming they conducted themselves like exemplary citizens of the community and the whole wide world.

Despite knowing how fake all that fear mongering was, America responded to some of the Jewish calls with dispatch, and the result has been that the superpower ended up hurting a great number of innocent people around the globe, thus got itself into trouble needlessly. As to the other powers in the world … well, they escaped making the same mistakes because they knew instinctively that they must ignore the Jewish calls, and maintain normal relations with everyone else. Each power acted separately as a sovereign nation, and collectively as a member of the United Nations.

But there was a single exception; a time when the world acted in unison thus committed a collective big mistake. That moment came when the world went along with the bleeding hearts and accepted the fiction that humanity was built with an inherent deficiency of character called antisemitism. It was explained that humanity had persecuted the Jews throughout time because human beings are imperfect creations whereas the Jews of every ethnicity represented absolute perfection.

That false narrative produced the impetus which caused the United Nations to accept the idea of creating a safe haven for the Jews in Palestine. Feeling a collective sense of guilt for sins they never committed, the attendees at the UN gathering felt it necessary to let the Jews create an enclave for themselves in Palestine. They envisioned it a place that will be so perfect, it will serve as model that will show humanity how to become as perfect as the Jews.

As time passed, however, it became clear to everyone how wrong headed that move was. Things went badly for the people of Palestine and for everyone that went along with the idea of establishing a Jewish enclave. That's when the world came to realize it had been conned by Jewish actors whose DNA was made not with perfection but with building blocs called deception. The fraud that is a Jewish homeland in Palestine was finally exposed.

The net effect has been that everyone involved in the project which ultimately acquired the name Israel, began to experience a period of buyers' remorse. It is that the world began to see it was impossible to reverse an experiment that had turned into a horror story.

What we have now is a situation in occupied Palestine whose continued metastasis – thanks to the umbilical cord that keeps feeding it from America's abundance – menaces not only the people of Palestine but the entire Middle Eastern region and beyond it the whole world.

And as always, America keeps paying the price for the horrific acts committed by Israelis who deliberately stress the point that what they do has America's backing … as there is no “daylight” between Jewish terror in the region and American support for it.

This is showcased by the open support that America gives Israel in the financial, military and diplomatic fields no matter what Israel does. And of course, Jewish publications such as the Pittsburgh Tribune, never fail to transmit this message to the world.

Donald Trump, you must redeem yourself

Now they raise questions about a mother grieving for her son twelve years after his death in the war. Well, I have a story to tell in this regard. It is the kind I like to keep private, but the circumstances are so overwhelming, I can no longer keep it in the family.

I have gone by the name Fred for nearly 52 years since we came to Canada, but I was born Farid (French spelling) or Fareed (English spelling). My parents – actually my mother – named me Fareed for a reason. It is that she was pregnant with me when her younger sister died. That was my aunt whose name was Fareeda, the feminine version of Fareed.

My mother was so grief stricken; she vowed that if I turned out to be a girl, she would name me Fareeda. Well, I turned out to be a boy, so she named me Fareed. Two years later, my mother had a girl, and so, she named her Fareeda. Me and my sister are alive and doing well but getting on with age. Every time I check into a hospital, and they see that I listed Fareeda as next of kin, they assume we are twins. I say no we're not, they puzzle, I explain what happened, and they say what a beautiful and touching story.

It is touching, but there is something even more touching than that. For a period of 40 years after my birth and 38 years after the birth of my sister, my mother could call us by our names but could not pronounce the name Fareeda when talking about her sister without choking. It is that her grief over the death of her sister had never ended. Instead of Fareeda, she would call her el-Ghalia which means the dear one. My mother kept referring to her sister by that name till she died.

What surprises me is that people defending Donald Trump dare to suggest that 12 years are too long for a mother to grieve over the death of her son in the war. Where have these people been? Do they not see 80 year-old soldiers weep on Remembrance Day for the death of buddies that were killed 60 years ago? Do they not see 90 year-old soldiers weep for the death of buddies that were killed 70 years ago?

Yes, this is surprising. But what is totally incomprehensible is Donald Trump equating his own sacrifice with that of a soldier who got killed defending his country. But what sacrifice does Trump say he made? Well, it is that he created jobs, he says. Did he lose a limb or die creating jobs? Oh no; none of that happened to him. In fact, he created jobs doing what he likes best, which is pursuing his dream: that of life, liberty and happiness.

But how did Donald Trump get to be so privileged? Well, you know how it is. There are people who put their lives at risk to make the country safe for people like Trump to live a full life and pursue their dream. Yes, it is true that Trump has created jobs, but that's no sacrifice. That's a measure of his success. In fact, the more jobs he creates, the more successful he proves to be, which means the happier he must be.

In effect then, what it all boils down to is that Donald Trump is equating the death of the soldier defending him, with the success he is having in life. There sure is equivalence here, but it is an inverse relationship. It means that the happiness of Trump, who made a fortune, is equal to the sadness of the mother who lost a son. These are equal in weight, but they point in opposite directions. How can someone be so confused about this reciprocal relationship?

Trump's happiness is the gift that the dead soldier gives him every day he is alive. And yet, Trump sees fit to mock the mother that bore that soldier, nurtured him and raised him to be the fine person that chose to die to save the men under him, and to secure the happiness that Trump is enjoying so much.

The least that this heartless and awful man – Donald Trump – must do now to redeem himself is compose not a tweet, but a hand written letter inviting the parents of the dead soldier to come to the Trump Tower where they will all celebrate the life and sacrifice of a fine young man that deserves to be celebrated.

Rug pissing Dog losing Control of Rags

Beside the nickname chicken-shit, Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel has also earned the appellation rug-pissing-dog. That's because he goes everywhere in the world and behaves like a house-trained dog except in the English speaking necks of the wood where he takes liberty relieving himself on the rugs where he is allowed to trot, and where the owners continue to treat him like a member of the human species … regardless.

He came to Canada and chided the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) for being only 100 percent biased in favour of the Jewish and Israeli causes. He went to Britain and did the same thing with regard to the BBC. And I hear he also did it in Australia. But the most celebrated event is the stir he caused when discharging his verbal bladder on the rug of some White House situated in the American District of Columbia.

In any case, controlling or dominating the rags of the world has always been his most burning desire. He covets them all, be they supermarket or civic tabloids, or be they broadsheets delivered in print form or broadcast electronically via the ether or cyberspace.

Of course, Netanyahu could not have done any of this had it not been for the work that the rabbis and their disciples did to brainwash the house owners receiving him. Some view an Israeli leak on their rug the way that the wildebeests of the Serengeti desert view rain. To see that, you only need to view the record of the Israeli guests that the electronic tabloid named Fox News was inviting in 2012 to go on the air and warn the incumbent President of the United States running for re-election that he better comply with the demands of the pissing dog or the hordes of Jewish voters will haul him to the helicopter of regret and kick him out of the District.

But the world is now spinning at such a fast rate, old paradigms are falling by the wayside, and new ones are forming to take their place. This shift being at an early stage, it is difficult to tell how far it will go and how much it will change what's on the ground. What we can tell at this point, however, is that attempts are mounted to control the old dog's bladder problem.

A proof of that is an article that has appeared under the title: “How Benjamin Netanyahu Is Crushing Israel's Free Press,” written by Ruth Margalit and published on July 30, 2016 in the cyberspace rag calling itself New York Times. The discussion is based on a report that was issued by an outfit they call Freedom House, a group whose knowledge about freedom is as genuine as Netanyahu's knowledge about good manners. It is nevertheless heartening to see a dogfight between two dogs of equal disrepute, an indication that they will, for a while at least, be restrained from committing mischief against the good people of the earth.

While the article is about Netanyahu's machinations in Israel – most likely done in broken Hebrew and in Yiddish since only the Arabs can speak perfect Hebrew – it is easy to project what's happening there, into places like America where the Sheldon Adelsons of this world pull the same sort of intrigues. They even pull them ten times more severely and get away with it because political correctness and the threat of being labelled anti-Semitic inhibit anyone from criticising these characters no matter what they do or how outrageous they are.

Thus, whereas “Freedom House focused on the outsize influence of Israel Hayom, owned by the American Sheldon Adelson,” like says Ruth Margalit, you do not see Freedom House or any such outfit focus on the outsize influence that the Jewish Hate And Incitement Machine (JHAIM) has on the Anglophile rags of North America, for example.

This is why someone like Naftali Bennet in Israel can state that “Israel Hayom is Pravda – the mouthpiece of one man [Netanyahu],” but no one in America would dare say that Fox News is Pravda – the mouthpiece of the one and only Netanyahu. That's because an utterance of this sort would be enough to send its vocalizer to the Gulag of eternal oblivion.

Thus, while a columnist in Israel said that Netanyahu's “obsession” with the news media showed him to be “gripped with fear and paranoia,” the columnists as well as everyone else in the politico-journalistic sphere of North America are the ones who remain gripped with fear and terror in their own country – obsessed with what a distant monster can order done to them if they refuse to toe his line.

What a pathetic democracy this place has become … and so remains!

How Jewish Haggling can kill a Democracy

If you wonder why there exists a paralyzed superpower called America that's run by a paralyzed political apparatus that's made of two paralyzed political parties, wonder no more my friend, because you'll now have answers to all your questions.

Actually, you have Elliott Abrams to thank for that. He does more than answer the questions pertaining to that situation; he plays the role of the lowlife scoundrel who might have participated in the fifty-year-old exercise to haggle America's democracy to death. He plays the role so well, in fact, that you'll come to think he's not acting, but that he is the real McCoy … or maybe not. Well, see for yourself.

Abrams wrote: “The New State Department Assault on Israel,” an article that was published on July 28, 2016 on the website of the Council on Foreign Relations. What the State Department did that caused him to accuse it of hostility toward Israel, assault on Israel, and display of sheer ignorance – is that the Department voiced “concern by reports that the Government of Israel has published tenders for 323 units, following [a previous] 770 units” in occupied Palestine. And this was enough to bring a ton of Jewish bricks on the Department's head.

How can something like this happen when Israel lives by America's charity, and could not exist for a day without the generous help it receives on an ongoing basis? To answer this question, we need to take a quick look at some history. When the Jews tried to take and keep the Sinai, the late President Nasser of Egypt said what was taken by force will only be returned by force. He started preparing Egypt for the fight ahead but died before completing the job. Anwar Sadat took over, and was the one to kick the Jews out of the Sinai.

When the Jews tried to take and keep the Golan, the Syrians fought back and managed to retake half of it. When they tried to take and keep South Lebanon, Hezbollah fought back and kicked them out. When they tried to take and keep Gaza, Hamas fought back and kicked them out. But when the Palestinians tried to kick the Jews out of the West Bank, the latter went crying to America and haggled their way into convincing a Congress of zombies that America must do what's necessary to prevent this from happening.

The congress agreed, and that's when America started sliding down the slippery slope … all the way to a cistern full of mythological beasts called Jewish haggling. These are creatures whose diet consists of preying on democracy twenty four hours a day. It is fair to say that the congress had no clue what was going on, anymore than a far gone drug addict realized his wife and children were out in the street hustling donors and offering favors for a handout that helps them eat and maintain a roof over their heads.

So the question is this: How did Jewish haggling suffocate the democratic process? To answer the question, we look at one example. Without saying why the Palestinians had 'shut down' on negotiation with the Jews after 50 years of occupation and 20 years of fruitless talks to end it, Elliott Abrams cites history by quoting words that were written in an Israeli newspaper, itself quoting a Jewish American of Australian descent who apparently had said: “Netanyahu moved to the zone of possible agreement. Abbas for his part did not show flexibility.” This would be the hearsay of hearsay of a hearsay that no one but the likes of Elliott Abrams takes seriously.

So now you want to know what the 'zone of possible agreement' was. And you find a passage in the article that gives an indication of what it may have been. Here is a condensed version of that passage:

“The position of the U.S. has been under Clinton, Bush and Obama that Israel and the Palestinians should engage in land swaps … Swapping for what? Swapping for major Israeli settlement blocs such as Maale Adumim, population 40,000. Same for Gilo and Har Homa. In 1997, the United States vetoed two UN Security Council resolutions demanding that construction in Har Homa stop … the president at that time was a democrat , and the husband of the current Democratic nominee … One might wonder if the Department has no other matters to concern it these days. It seems nothing is as dangerous to the world as Jewish settlements”.

He asks: Swapping for what? Well, swapping lands is what the UN and America have been insisting on since 1967. It is what Clinton, Bush and Obama reiterated several times. When the Jews promised they will take the settlements down at the end of negotiations, America swallowed this crap and vetoed UN resolutions demanding that the construction activities stop. The Palestinians knew that the Jewish promise was crap and 'shut down' after 20 years of giving the Jews the benefit of the doubt. So now, Abrams is rubbing the crap in America's face, and blowing his entrails out of the belly crying out: But you vetoed two UN resolutions, you vetoed them, you vetoed them. Now you change your mind. Why do you change your mind? Why? Why? Tell me why.

Can this sort of behavior – when repeated over and over again for half a century – paralyze a superpower and bring it to its knees? Yes it can. That's because a democracy relies on intellectual honesty and mutual trust. The Jews, on the other hand, view these qualities as a weakness. And so they fashioned an ideology that takes advantage of the people who live on honesty and practice mutual trust.

When a country becomes infested with that ideology for the first time, it gets paralyzed as if stung by a scorpion. Anything can happen after that, ranging from overt antisemitism to full blown holocaust. America is in the paralysis stage at this point in time, and no one knows how far things will go, or how they will be resolved.

Suffice it to say that when the Nazis realized the Jews had killed their judicial system, they killed the Jews. What will the Americans do when they realize that the Jews are killing their liberal democracy? Time will tell.

Murdoch's Pornography as bad as Ailes'

Roger Ailes is no longer at Fox News and for now at least, Rupert Murdoch is said to run the show … whether in actual or titular fashion. Thus, Murdoch bears responsibility for what goes on at that network.

And if there is a remedial action that needs to be taken, Murdoch better not fail taking it at once lest he cement the notion that he is as much an “easy profit” predator as Ailes is accused of being a sexual predator.

One of the most cowardly acts of pornography that the politico-journalistic crowd has the habit of inflicting on its chosen enemies of the day is to make them vanish from the public arena. And this is what happened at Fox News during the fourth night of its covering the Democratic National Convention.

What happened was that the Muslim parents of an American-born army captain had walked onto the stage to tell the convention and the nation about the heroic act that was made by their son … the result of which was that he saved the lives of the men under him but died in the process. As to the act of pornography committed by Fox News under Rupert Murdoch; it was that the moment the Muslim parents appeared onto the stage, the network cut to a series of commercials.

When it returned from that mode, the father of the dead captain was telling what his son had done; an act for which he was awarded the Bronze Star and Purple Heart posthumously. Instead of going back to the stage, and letting the audience see and hear a true story of Muslim heroism, Fox News conducted an interview in the studio. It did so and maintained this act of pornography till the Muslim family left the stage. Only then did Fox News return to the convention, leaving a home audience with no idea that Muslim American soldiers do sacrifice themselves so that their buddies may return to their families.

This is not the first time that the filthy hand of the Jewish Hate And Incitement Machine (JHAIM) made people vanish. It has been vanishing them for 50 years in the English speaking world … among the victims being a former president of the United States. The Jews also did it to the Egyptian Secretary General of the UN, Boutros Ghali. And they tried to do it to the head of IAEA, Mohamed Baradei, also an Egyptian.

But the most insidious of their acts, is what they did on two occasions in Canada. One act took place during the 2004 Olympics when during the opening ceremony of the games, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation would cut to a commercial each time that an Arab team appeared, not to return to the parade till the team had moved out of sight. Thus, anyone that didn't know better would have thought there were no Arabs on this planet … except for the awful Sudanese who were accused by the show’s politicized hosts of doing bad things in the province of Darfur.

The other act is one that came to my attention only recently. Having checked several sources, I am confident there is enough truth in what I heard to publicly reveal what I know. It was a time when the Jean Chretien team and the Paul Martin team (both Liberal) were knifing each other in the back to have their man or woman elected next prime minister of Canada. The Jews in the Chretien camp approached Paul Martin and told him that for a price that will not cost him or his faction a penny they would ditch their own team and help him become prime minister.

He asked what they wanted in return, and they said that President Sarkozy of France was planning to invite Egypt to join the G -7 meetings. They wanted to kill the idea, and the best way to do it, was to create another group containing 20 jurisdictions other than Arab or African. Well, they would not mind South Africa, they said, because it had received much acclaim already, and one more was not going to make much of a difference. And Paul Martin said: Yes Master Jew, I hear and I obey.

And so, while the Jews worked to ditch Jean Chretien and make Paul Martin prime minister, the latter started to work on implementing the Jewish orders to the letter. This is how the G -20 came into being. It is also why China has moved to remedy the horrible situation created by the Jewish messing of democratic principles.

Those were the principles in Christian hands that created greatness in the past; these are the tools in Jewish hands that create pornography now. How much the world has changed! How heavy a price the Jews will pay for what they do!