The Mutilators of History may yet blow it

 Do you remember the old saying about the blind leading the blind? Well, for the purpose of this discussion, try not to think of it as one blind leading the other to the ditch or the swamp or whatever. Think of it instead as the two blinds being led into an arena, each given a sword and told to go after the other. You can imagine that the scene would be comical if it were not so pathetic.

 

But you know what, my friend? This is how the scene looked at the time that the Jewish mutilators of history split into two camps. There was one camp that advocated the continued occupation of Palestine, and one that stood against it. Actually, the two camps coming into existence was not as simple as it may sound. What happened was that originally, the Jews were occupying the space that extended from the leftist liberal side of the political spectrum to the extreme form of communism.

 

This happened because Jews had come to America from Europe where the right-wing movements of the Fascists and the Nazis were gassing and incinerating the Jews anywhere they could find them on the Continent. At the same time, however, the left-wing Communists, who were well established in the Soviet Union by then, were more tolerant of the Jews; even allied with them in some cases.

 

And then it happened that a series of complex and intertwined events in the Soviet Union, the Middle East and America, inspired a group of liberal Jews to think more tolerantly of conservatism in America despite the fact that it was associated with the right, which they used to fear and detest but no more. The group surmised that it would be more advantageous for the Zionist movement if they thought of conservatism in America as being nowhere close in ideology to the Fascists or the Nazis of Europe.

 

And so, the group converted from liberal to conservative, thus launched what came to be known as the Neocon movement. The members vehemently attacked their former soul-mates who reciprocated by fighting back just as hard. And the two camps have been at each other's throat ever since, neither of which having any idea what they are talking about when it comes to the affairs of the Middle East. But they are throwing blows at each other like blind individuals equipped with swords and brainwashed to believe that they fight for the survival of their clan.

 

One soul that converted from near Communism to Neocon was Clifford D. May whose embrace of the Zionist movement and whose blind opposition to the Palestinians’ desire to go home from where they were pushed, made of him an icon of the turncoats. He is so blind to his destructive fanaticism, if a Conservative were to tattoo a Swastika on the back of his hand, he would see it as the Star of David and worship it. He wrote many articles that give him away, some of which were reviewed in this blog.

 

His latest foray in that realm is an article he wrote under the title: “After Abraham Accords, time to look at Palestinian-Israeli conflict with fresh eyes,” and the subtitle: “How peace was achieved and what the 'Palestinian cause' now requires.” It was published on September 22, 2020 in The Washington Times.

 

When reading the following passage from his article, recall that Clifford May was trained as a lawyer. Also note that when a prosecutor does not have a “slam dunk” case, he insinuates the guilt of the defendant without coming right out and accusing him. Lawyers are taught techniques to do just that when addressing the judge or the jury, and Clifford May is applying what he learned on his readers. Here is that passage:

 

“For decades, a herd of experts, diplomats, academics, journalists, politicians insisted that a deal such as President Trump facilitated was out of the question. Why couldn't the UAE and Bahrain have just continued to develop relations with Israel discreetly? Why go public now? Because the Israelis were planning, with the Trump administration's blessing, to extend sovereignty, call it annexation if you like, over a large swath of the West Bank. The Israelis had a chance to change facts on the ground”.

 

As can be seen, in order to go after the liberal Jews, Clifford May the Neocon, is mutilating history to insinuate a falsehood that portrays the President of the United States, Donald Trump, as being a rapist of children. What Clifford May is saying in effect, is that Donald Trump has conspired with Benjamin Netanyahu to bluff the leaders of the United Arab Emirates into believing they will rape the children of Palestine unless the Arab leaders publicly acknowledge they are having a clandestine affair with the Jewish leaders. And voila, the miracle happened, they have all been outed, they can now fornicate all they want in the open, but they will leave the children of Palestine unmolested, at least for now.

 

I say, “at least for now” because, being the Jew that he is, Netanyahu thought of making of the bluff a double play. Now that he ate the cake when the true story was outed, he believes he can still have the cake by promising his fanatic followers that all remains as it was because annexation is still on the table, and will happen sooner or later.

 

Poor Netanyahu. He does not realize that to have his cake and eat it too, he must first eat it, and then let his digestive system turn it into fertilizer.

She recommends the artificial, not the natural

 It is clear that Melissa Braunstein hasn't learned that in human interactions, the artificial process is flimsy and ephemeral whereas the natural process is robust and permanent.

 

She wrote an article that came under the title: “How everyday people can help Israel and support peace in the Middle East,” published on September 21, 2020 in the Washington Examiner. She did so, not knowing that the apparent gain achieved so far in the Middle East –– though not measuring up to a peace deal –– is the product of a natural process that came about despite the artificiality that exemplified the half-century effort to impose peace of the grave on some Palestinians and peace of the diaspora on the rest.

 

There is only one kind of natural process in human interactions. It is organic, self-generating and noble in its execution most of the time but not always. By contrast, there are two versions of the artificial process. One version attempts to remain noble but not always succeeding in achieving its goal. An example of that is the Egyptian repeated effort to broker a permanent ceasefire between Gaza and Israel. The other process is devious and ultimately self-defeating. An example of that has been the Jewish manipulated, sham to the core, make-believe American effort to broker a peace deal between the Palestinians and the Israelis. It was a lie through and through from the Alpha to the Omega.

 

As to the organic process in human interactions, an example of how it has worked so far, is what happened in the Middle East when two Arab countries agreed to talk normalization with Israel. What makes that process organic is that it came about spontaneously because of a necessity that was not foreseen. It is that the American President Donald Trump woke up one morning and saw that the construct of his reelection, which he thought guaranteed his success, was now crumbling.

 

This motivated him to break 18 years of Israeli demonic stalling on giving a response to the Arab League's Initiative of 2002. It was the initiative that stipulated the recognition of Israel by all the Arab countries in return for Israel's ending the occupation of Palestine. Donald Trump called Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel and told him to take the Arab deal or else. Netanyahu that knows Israel cannot survive a month without American help, had no choice but to knuckle under and accept the Arab offer he could not now refuse or even stall any longer. It does not get anymore organic than that.

 

What's happening now is that the crowd which grew up on the artificial process and knows not a better way to interact with people, has moved in and started to work on hijacking the unfolding process. It hopes to steer it to the goal it could not achieve previously, while still using the same old self-defeating artificial means to get there. One member of this crowd is Melissa Braunstein whose article catalogs what other members are doing to make the artificial effort bear fruit. She also discusses her own recommendations to that end.

 

She began this part of her presentation by asking the question: “What can individuals or organizations do to further support peace in the region?” And she proceeded to discuss what's being done already by those who just started to get involved in the process. What she did not realize, however, is that she was exposing the artificiality of the work done by those who came into the game with agendas of their own; agendas that may be at odds with the aims of those aching to establish good relations with the Arabs countries. For example, she mentioned the following:

 

Dov Hiking whose agenda is to eliminate antisemitism in America.

 

Elder of Ziyon who recommends the launch of US-Israel-UAE partnerships, most certainly intending to get rich investing other peoples’ money (OPM) … this time abundant UAE petrodollars.

 

Roz Rothstein whose passion is to see Israel annex the West Bank and get rid of the Palestinians, sending them to their graves or to the diaspora.

 

Arsen Ostrovsky who cares more about what peace in the Middle East will do for American security than what it will do for the people of the Middle East, including those of Israel.

 

Varsha Koduvayur of the comical outfit known as Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) who wants to link the Israeli spy network to the Arab civil societies so as to do to the Arabs what America's enemies are now doing to America using social media.

 

Hen Mazzig who wants to use the events in the Middle East to change life on college campuses though he does not specify which campuses.

 

Well my friend, you're probably familiar with the saying that goes: “Too many cooks spoil the broth.” How true! But at least they are cooks that have the same purpose and doing the same thing. Now imagine what can happen with this many cooks, each having a different recipe for preparing the same menu, and they go at it with fanatic zeal oblivious of what the other cooks are doing. What do you think they'll have produced come dinner time?

 

It doesn't get any more artificial than that.

Here's why Holocaust Researchers are crucial

 Beth Bailey wants you to believe she is just a freelance writer who writes on subjects of interest to her. But when you examine her paper trail, you find it tracking what the Jewish High Command would want her to say at the time that she says it.

 

And so, she spoke on September 17 to inform the world that, “Lacking Holocaust awareness just the surface of bleak anti-Semitism picture,” which was the title of an article she wrote that made waves. This blog participated in the discussion that followed with an article that came under the title: “Getting ready to eat someone else's lunch,” published two notches below this one, on September 20, 2020.

 

As it happened, another article discussing the same subject was published two days earlier, on September 18, 2020 under the title: “Stop fear-mongering. Holocaust education is good – and it works.” It was written by Dr. Stephen D. Smith and published in The Jewish Forward.

 

Unlike Beth Bailey who claims she is just a freelancer Dr. Stephen Smith does not hide his credentials. He doesn't mind that we tell he's Executive Director of the USC Shoah Foundation, a professor of Religion and a theologian by training. He founded the UK Holocaust Center in England and cofounded the Aegis Trust for the prevention of genocide. He was the inaugural Chairman of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust, the project director for the creation of the Kigali Genocide Memorial Center in Rwanda, and trustee of the South African Holocaust and Genocide Foundation. He holds the UNESCO Chair on Genocide Education.

 

To illustrate his points, Dr. Stephen Smith quoted from a survey that was sponsored jointly by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), Yad Vashem and the USC Shoah Foundation. Its purpose was to examine the effectiveness of Holocaust education in America.

 

In contrast, to illustrate her points, Beth Bailey quoted from a survey that was sponsored by the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany. Its original purpose is obvious; it was to serve as vehicle to level material claims against Germany, which is what you see spelled out in the title of the Bailey article. But being who they are at the Jewish High Command, they saw the opportunity to double-dip. And so, they had Beth Bailey open another treasure chest for them, this time an American chest.

 

Here is what Smith found in the survey of the ADL/Yad Vashem/USC Shoah Foundation: “With the Holocaust taught broadly throughout American high schools, 80% of US college students reported receiving some Holocaust education, and knowing a lot or a moderate amount about the Holocaust. In addition, 55% of those who received Holocaust education met a survivor or watched video testimony.”

 

To put this thing in perspective, he added the following: “The Claims Conference survey defined 'Knowledge' of the Holocaust as follows: A person has 'definitely heard of the Holocaust' (78% said they had), can name at least one concentration camp, death camp and ghetto (52% could name at least one), and knows that 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust (37% did) … [on the other hand] How many Americans can cite the number who died at Hiroshima? For how long the Vietnam War raged? The racial terror known as Jim Crow? Let's say Jews were surveyed, and it was found that a large number did not know the number of African slaves that were brought to this continent. Would that make Jews racist?”.

 

Despite satisfying the definition of the Claims Conference as described optimistically by Dr. Stephen Smith, here is how Beth Bailey has pessimistically presented what she says she found in the survey that was sponsored by that same Conference: “While 44% were aware of Auschwitz, only 1% were aware of Buchenwald and Treblinka. About 23% believed the Holocaust did not happen, were not sure whether the Holocaust occurred, or thought that the number of victims was exaggerated. A startling 11% believe that Jews caused the Holocaust”.

 

To put this thing in perspective, she added the following: “It doesn't seem privileged for Jews to make up 2.2% of the nation's population and yet face 57.8% of its religiously motivated hate crimes”.

 

Bailey's suggestion is that the Jews have not been privileged in the past and they are not privileged now. But she affirms that they are at a point where they need to be privileged over everyone else because they are paying a price for being who they are. And this, my friend, is a subtle way to call on the Federal and State governments to do more for the Jews than they have already done.

 

Which forces us to ask a serious question: Don't these people know that the more they are privileged, the more they are resented by the public –– as would be anyone –– and the more they’ll interpret that resentment as being manifestation of antisemitism?

 

Of course, they know. They have been at it for hundreds of years, and they saw the death spiral play itself out several times before. The problem is that those who appoint themselves leaders over the Jews don't care what happens to the rank-and-file.

 

When they see that the day of reckoning has approached, they'll protect themselves by the many ways they developed to dodge the Holocaust while letting the little guys pay the price for the resentment that society has built up watching the Jews pile up privileges at the expense of its hardworking non-Jewish population.

 

In the past, the Jewish leaders got away with their schemes because it was difficult for the rank-and-file to know what was going on. Things have now changed due to the progress achieved by the technology of communication. This is why the rank-and-file has started to revolt, and may find a way to neutralize its demonic leaders.

 

Also, given that the Jewish High Command has saturated the public square with the likes of Beth Bailey, it is urgent for governments around the world and their universities to encourage and protect the researchers who wish to work on digging out the real stories of the Holocaust, not those told by the likes of Beth Bailey.

They wish to subvert the process of life

 As far as science can tell, it has been about half a billion years since life began on this planet of ours. And every indication there is, says that life is a process that begins with birth and ends with death. Between the two extremes, however, there exists the process of reproduction which allows life to continue under a different conception while still rooted in the one that spawned it.

 

This is not only a process that's proper to natural organisms; it is also a process that governs everything which exists as an organization and everything we call institution. It is true of the tiny atom that is well organized, as it is of the massive galaxies––and everything between the two. It is true of the family that is governed by a simple hierarchy, as it is of the empire that is run by a complex government––and everything between the two. The reality is that they all begin to exist at some point in time, and instantly begin to decay into a disorganized state till they are no longer what they were. But when they die, they leave behind a remnant of themselves which yields elements that become the next generation of what used to be.

 

Even before we became human, the organizations and artificial institutions we have created to govern our interactions with each other, and to organize the world on which we depend to stay alive, have followed the pattern of birth, growth, decay and death. However, despite these realities which are common to all, there is one thing about the life form to which we and a few other species belong, that makes us unique in all of creation. It is that we have developed the tendency to try having a permanent existence by defying the natural order which necessitates that we gracefully accept our gradual decay, and the peaceful end to our existence. We want to live forever and be on top of things all the time. Alas no one has achieved immortality.

 

You can see that tendency in some species, including the human, where the Alpha individual at the head of an institution, would fight rivals that appear to have the potential to succeed him or her. They fight to maintain the status quo instead of stepping aside gracefully and allowing the natural order of things to take its course.

 

This is what you see playout at this time when you look at an America that's going crazy trying to prevent China from replacing it as the Alpha jurisdiction that will lead the world into the future and spread its system of governance. Of course, when this happens, it will only last till such time that someone else will grow big enough and rise high enough to challenge China's supremacy and win the battle that will inevitably take place unless our species will have matured by then to develop a better way to interact among ourselves.

 

One of the mouthpieces expressing the American point of view in this matter, is the group that sits as the editors of the New York Post. They came up with a piece whose title reads as follows: “China's drive to control is only getting worse,” and had it printed in their publication on September 19, 2020.

 

What happened that caused the editors of the Post to express the opinion seen in the title of their piece, is that Beijing and Washington have accused each other of “hegemony and provocation.” The editors sided with Washington that accused China, and they called laughable the Chinese accusation that Washington was the culprit. And so, like good scholars, the editors gave their reason for taking the stance that they did.

 

They said that despite the Chinese accusation being laughable, they are not laughing at the Chinese joke because the governing party in China is cracking down at home and seeking influence abroad. The proof that the Chinese are guilty of the latter, say the editors, is that the American military establishment known as the Pentagon, has issued a report which says that China has modernized its resources and technology in nearly every respect, so much so that its military now ranks ahead of the American in certain areas.

 

Being the level-headed, normal human being that you are, you fail to see how this indicts the Chinese leaders of anything except that they are darn good at fulfilling their duty to advance and protect the society they are responsible for. And so, you continue to read the Post editorial to make sure that you're not missing something. What happens next is that you encounter the accusation about the goal of the Chinese being “nothing less than to revise aspects of the international order”.

 

Looking closely at what the Chinese did in this regard, you find that outside of their neighborhood, the Chinese did nothing that's not in the realm of trade, commerce and economic development. You feel that the editors of the Post can discuss economics all they want, but they'll never convince every economist they are correct to indict the Chinese for what they do. The people who are at the receiving end of China’s largess like what they are getting, and that's the important thing.

 

As to what the Chinese are doing in their neighborhood, especially in the realm of military preparedness, we first note that given the size of China and the number of neighbors that surround it, the military encounters it has had with neighbors since the Second World War, and the duration of such encounters, indicate that China has had the most peaceful relation with neighbors that are near and those that are far. That’s unlike America which had the most encounters with the rest of the world.

 

In fact, if everyone in the world did what the Chinese are doing, which is to keep their military near home and mind their own business, we would have the world we've been dreaming about since Adam and Eve were kicked out of Paradise.

Getting ready to eat someone else's lunch

 Marc D. Angel who is a retired New York rabbi, and now director of the Institute of Jewish Ideas and Ideals wrote an article to say that: “Jews won't be your scapegoat any longer,” which is the title of his article. You can find it in the September 18, 2020 edition of the New York Daily News.

 

It is unclear how Angel proposes that the Jews will cease to be scapegoated since no one chooses to be in that situation, therefore no one can prevent it happening when, for whatever reason, a society decides that the Jews deserve to be so treated. The only hint that Marc Angel gives as to what kind of approach the Jews might adopt is contained in the following words:

 

“Jews have been the world's scapegoats for many centuries. We have suffered scorn, ghettoization, violence and murder. We want to notify the world: We resign, we no longer will serve as your scapegoat”.

 

But Rabbi Marc Angel does not say the Jews will resign to whom? Whether or not there has been such resignations before? Whether or not any of them were accepted? What happened after the acceptance or rejection? And what guarantees he has that the new resignation will be accepted –– but if not, what then?

 

And while Angel is mulling over those questions, there is something we can study that will help us formulate an informed opinion as to what happened in the past that put the Jews in their predicaments, and what might happen in the future that might put them back into similar predicaments. The thing that's there for us to study is an article that came under the title: “Lacking Holocaust awareness just the surface of bleak anti-Semitism picture,” written by Beth Bailey, and published on September 17, 2020 in The Washington Examiner.

 

The immediate question that comes to mind is this: What was the purpose of writing this article in the first place? And the answer is as simple as it is obvious. It is to say there is serious antisemitism in America, it can lead to horrible situations, and it exists because there is a lack of education about the Holocaust. To remedy the situation, therefore, and eliminate the horrible situations it could engender, we must teach the children of America as much as possible about the 40,000 concentration camps that were built in Europe a century or so ago to exploit and mistreat the Jews before gassing them and incinerating their remains.

 

This kind of talk, accompanied by a flood of statistics such as you see in the Bailey article, was so novel and so intriguing when first used decades ago, it motivated the political peasants of the American Congresses and White Houses of the past to buzz like busy bees, and mortgage America's power and prestige to force the Europeans to fork out billions of dollars, thus compensate the instant converts to Judaism who were already living the high life in America –– for suffering inflicted on others far away and long ago.

 

And so, you can only surmise that the reason why there is now an attempt to restart the cycle, is because the Jews are seeing that the opportunity is here to get something for nothing. How to do that? By climbing on someone else's shoulder; someone who seems to be getting somewhere after centuries of paying a price that no human imagination can ever fathom.

 

Here is how reality looks like on the ground at this time: The Jewish High Command, which is made of several organizations, has each of these organizations sit on studies and articles that were pre-written in point form and ready to put in a final form for the purpose of exploiting any occasion that might come along and appear like it is ready for use in the service of a Jewish or Israeli purpose.

 

When the proliferation of handheld electronic cameras vindicated the claim of the African American citizens that they were mistreated by the police, and when arguments were advanced to the effect that to rectify the situation, the study of the Black American experience should be increased in the schools, three things happened almost simultaneously. They were the following:

 

One, voices rose to make that suggestion a reality in American schools. Two, right-wing voices in the White House and elsewhere opposed the suggestion, in some cases opposed it vehemently. Three, the Jews started to publish articles such as that of Beth Bailey intending to convince the mentally retarded politicos of the Washington Beltway that the Jews are worthier than the Blacks, therefore the Holocaust of Europe and not the history of Black America should be taught in America's schools.

 

But what was it that encouraged the Jews to do this? It is that they saw how the African American civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s was hijacked by the movement to “liberate” the women. They saw it spirited away by some women who made it their own, leaving behind the African Americans.

 

In no time at all, the women had managed to break through the glass ceiling, winning more than they ever dreamed they could. But while this was accomplished, the African American citizens were getting as many as a dozen bullets in the back for a malfunctioning tail light, for a fake 20-dollar bill, for panicking at the sight of a White cop and running away, and for being a Black child just playing in the park.

 

And so, duplicating the habit of the early Jews, which they developed during the first Passover thousands of years ago as they killed the babies of Egypt and robbed the temples, and duplicating the habit they play out every day in Palestine as they murder and rob the Palestinians –– the Jews of America, out of pure selfishness, have now readied themselves to eat Black America's lunch, and not even say: thank you!

 

The UN is inclusive and peace endures

 Clifford May says that the UN General Assembly needs to be reformed. It does not take him long before he goes on to complain that, “The big tent of the UN has 193 members. Each –– big or small, rich or poor, free or unfree –– gets one vote.” And this tells you that he wants to go back to the days when some people were considered equal to 3/5 human or some such fraction.

 

You can see how that mentality works, and what else it is capable of devising, in the article that Clifford May wrote under the title: “At 75 the U.N. General Assembly in need of reform,” and the subtitle: “It's not the organization it used to be and never was,” published on September 15, 2020 in The Washington Times.

 

In fact, to show how confused that mentality is, the writer admits that there exists a 1955 agreement which guarantees universal membership at the UN. And so, while you'd think that this settles the issue, Clifford May complains that Taiwan has been denied membership. So, you ask: What's wrong with that? Well, the reality is that you have one country that's called China, and two governments that claim to represent both parts. The important thing is that neither government has declared independence of the other, which means that both agree there is only one China.

 

Given that the government in Taiwan rules over 24 million people, and the one in Beijing rules over 1.4 billion people –– which is about 58 times the population of Taiwan –– and given that you cannot have two representatives speaking for one government and one people, the UN chose to recognize the one that rules over the larger population, as did the rest of the world. What's there to complain about?

 

Well, you'll understand what the complaint is about when you make the effort to understand why, in the view of Clifford May and those like him, it is bad to apply the one-nation, one-vote principle at the UN General Assembly. And the best way to understand this riddle, is to study what Jews like Clifford May did to the one-man, one-vote principle in America.

 

What they did is kill the idea of open debate when issues pertaining to Jews or Israel come up for discussion and evaluation in America. Instead of letting the people participate in the debates at the kitchen tables and the water coolers of the nation, and let them decide what's good for the country and what's not, the Jews killed the idea of holding public debates on Jewish or Israeli issues.

 

What this has done to the American democracy is that instead of the people having the right to guide their representatives as to which way they should vote on the issues, the Jewish leaders have replaced the voice of the people, and given themselves the right to whisper in the ears of the representatives behind closed doors how they will be rewarded or punished depending on how they vote.

 

And this is the system that Clifford May wants to see transferred from America to the UN General Assembly. When you study carefully how it might work, you'll find that it resembles to some degree the one that existed at the time of the League of Nations a century ago. This was a time when groups of nations had preference for some and dislike for others. They all schemed to bring their friends into the league, and keep the others out. The net result has been the creation of a system that was so fragile, it could not maintain the peace for more than two decades, after which the world exploded into World War Two.

 

This is why –– desirous to establish a robust system –– the United Nations made its membership universal in the year 1955. It is why peace has lasted 75 years, with indications that it will last as long as the Jews are kept from destroying it. But this is precisely why people like Clifford May want to see the UN crushed under the guise of reforming it. What these people want is a UN that resembles the American political scene of the bipartisan evildoers who would give the Jew what belongs to others for a promise that the Jew will keep his mouth shut concerning the skeletons he knows are in the closet of the evildoers.

 

This is why we must all keep in mind that the day the Jews will make the United Nations look and function like the American political system, is the day that the United Nations will start to look and behave like the old League of Nations.

 

And that will be the day when we'll have to start worrying that the next world war may not be more than 20 years away. It is how a century ago, the League of Nations found itself helpless at doing anything to stop the world from sliding onto the path of World War Two, and the Jews are now working to make it happen again.

 

What people like Clifford May are working on, has the potential to lead the world into the endless war that the neocons have been dreaming about. They are pushing America to spark it, not knowing what the end result will be except that a prophecy will be fulfilled and they would have played a part realizing it.

Example of obnoxiousness that backfires

 Seth J. Frantzman wrote a piece about an event that is so small, it would not make it on page 6 of a high school publication and yet, here it is occupying a large space in a major online publication.

 

The piece came under the title: “A Pilotless Pilot Program,” and the subtitle: “Israel–U.S. drone cooperation could revolutionize what soldiers carry into battle.” It is an article that was published on September 14, 2020 in National Review Online.

 

As indicated in the title and subtitle of the article, the discussion covers a certain level of cooperation between the United States and Israel in the production of a drone that’s supposed to counter enemy drones, “like the kind ISIS used in the battle for Mosul,” says Frantzman. To put this event in perspective, we recall that in this age of globalization, even the American defense establishment, subcontracts some of the work it has to foreign companies in foreign lands such the work that's done in Turkey for the F-35, for example.

 

You can imagine that compared to Turkey's F-35, making parts for a drone in Israel; one that's supposed to counter the home-made toy-like drones produced by the ISIS kids, is such a small thing that to write about it, must have been motivated by the desire to propagandize the most trivial of events for the simple reason that nothing more substantial could be found to feed into the propaganda machine.

 

Come to think of it, talking about the American act of subcontracting parts of a toy to an Israeli company, could not in itself be important enough to generate the kind of propaganda that Israel needs to siphon the billions of dollars which it does out of America every year without someone yelling: We're being robbed by them Jews, and no one is working to put an end to the madness. Thus, the need to do something else in addition so as to render the propaganda so effective as to silence the critics.

 

But what could that be? It would be the use of language that can describe a mound in such a way as to make it sound like a mountain. Look how Frantzman has used the preamble to make Israel's tiny part sound like a major contribution: “The US and Israel reached a new milestone. This sounds like futuristic innovation using augmented reality. Wearable goggles like the ones, gamers use to guide the drones. The soldier can put on virtual-reality glasses and guide their own drone in for the kill”.

 

Look also how Franzman has used a lie that was added to false innuendo and wild speculation, to make it sound like Israel is helping to save American lives: “This project is part of a wider cooperation between Israel and the US. For instance, the military is evaluating Israel's Iron Dome defense system. Americans have been killed this year in Iraq by pro-Iranian groups firing rockets at bases where soldiers are housed. An Iron Dome-style system could help protect them”.

 

First, Frantzman says that the American military is evaluating Israel's Iron Dome System. This is a lie because the truth is that the Americans are no longer evaluating the thing called Iron Dome. America has already evaluated the thing, found it to be a piece of junk and rejected it. Second, the innuendo is that the Americans don't have a system of their own to protect them from enemy rockets. This too is false because the Americans have several systems, some of which are installed in Israel. Third, the speculation is that the Iron-Dome could have saved the American soldiers that were killed in Iraq when a group fired rockets at them. No, the Israeli system could not have saved them because it was found to be an unmitigated piece of garbage. In fact, to use it in lieu of the American system would add exponentially to the risk of losing lives.

 

But this kind of cheap propaganda is what the Jew often uses to get a free ride on someone else's wagon. When they all reach the final destination, he jumps off the wagon, runs in front of it and claims to have guided it to its destination all by himself because no one else was smart enough to do it. And this is the kind of obnoxious performance that is as Jewish as matzoh bread. In fact, these people can never participate in a project without capping it with a claim as sickly as that. And this is one reason why people who work with Jews once, develop a rejection to working with them again.

 

The only people who seem to fail detecting this creepy Jewish habit––or if they do––know how to ignore it and continue collaborating with the Jews, are the gentile politicians who would trample on the accomplishments of their own country if this would satisfy the insatiable appetite of the Jews to be praised for work done by others; work they shamelessly attribute to themselves.

 

But that sort of behavior will not sit well with Arabs such as those of the UAE and Bahrain who will find themselves compelled to work on projects with Jews. The moment that the Arab will contribute an innovation to the project, and see the Jew attribute the contribution to himself, the Arab will denounce the Jew and call him a disgusting thief with whom he will refuse to continue working.

 

When an incident such as that will repeat itself several times, the revolting pattern of Jewish behavior will have been firmly established, and the idea of cooperation between Arabs and Jews will be seriously endangered.

 

This is why the Jews who will be sent to work with Arabs, should be trained in civilized behavior –– if that is possible to do –– before sending them to their assignments.