The urgent Need to modernize the Economy

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, the economies of the world were showing unhealthy signs that foretold of serious troubles ahead. After the pandemic, the troubles grew so large, they became impossible to size up, let alone devise a solution for them using the conventional economic tools. The suspicion is even there that the old tools may have played a role in creating the troubles to begin with.

But before we can begin thinking of an “out of the box solution,” we must identify the fundamentals that make up an economy so that we can stand on those fundamentals and erect a structure for a new economy that will lead to a better way of doing things without being devoured by the handful of individuals and institutions in the existing economy that have the habit of acquiring and stashing nearly all of what’s meant to be distributed equitably among the millions.

We must understand that before the industrial age, the farmers, miners and artisans relied very little on currency such as pieces of gold or silver to conduct business. Their main mode of exchange was the barter, which means they exchanged what they produced for what they needed. Other workers such as healers, entertainers and teachers exchanged their services for tangible goods or coins made of precious metals.

There was lending but the practice was limited given that those who needed to borrow had no means to pay back the loan. Other would-be borrowers were usually associated with an estate, and having a steady income, but were in need of an immediate infusion of liquidity for a specific purpose, and had the means to pay back both the principal and the accumulated interest.

The Industrial Revolution, which took decades to be fully established, changed all that. By the time it reached a high point, there was the need to create a supreme authority––later known as the central bank––that would be in charge of creating and disposing of promissory notes called money. During the time that the industrial age was getting established, the barter system was gradually vanishing, and the trading in goods and services was done more and more with money, being the new medium of exchange.

Money that is printed by a machine at the central bank, is not wealth. The goods and services that people produce, represent the wealth that belongs to those who produce it. The Industrial Revolution that helped produce goods in bulk thanks to the machine, and helped turn the dispensation of services into a communal act such as teaching a classroom of pupils, also made it so that money became the yardstick that's used to measure and represent the value of the goods or services someone produces. It was supposed to be the more work you do the more money you get, but things turned out differently.

In fact, from that moment forward, the size of your wealth no longer depended on how much you worked and produced, but how much bank notes you accumulated by hook or by crook. Those in the financial services being close to the central bank have the best opportunity to accumulate money––heretofore considered wealth. They accumulate via the manipulation of so-called financial instruments. These are tricks that allow the crooks to keep most of what comes out the central bank's printing press, causing the financial service industries to cease serving the public, and become part of a financial self-service syndicate.

But how is the economy supposed to work in theory, anyway? Well, stripped of the complexities of the modern economy, what is supposed to happen is the following: You wake up one morning, and think up a gadget that people will want to have in their homes. You need money to execute the project but have none, which is how things are supposed to be.

You go to the central bank, and borrow ten thousand dollars. You hire the people and buy the raw material with which you complete the project. You sell the gadgets as you produce them throughout the day. By the evening, you would have sold most of what you produced for ten thousand and one hundred dollars, which you give back to the bank. The remaining gadgets are your profit, which you sell or barter with you neighbors for goods and services they produce and you need for your family.

Suppose now that you did not have access to the central bank and were forced to borrow from a commercial bank. In the old days when the banking system was honest and devoid of tricky instruments such as derivatives, the commercial bank would have acted as conduit. It would have borrowed ten thousand dollars from the central bank, handed it to you and required that you return it as ten thousand and two hundred dollars at the end of the day. In turn, the commercial would have returned ten thousand and one hundred dollars to the central, keeping one hundred dollars to pay its own employees and settle other invoices.

Today, however, the commercial banks are more than conduits channeling money from the central to their clients. They call themselves investment banks, and want you to believe they are helping you invest your money when in fact, they would be scheming to become the senior partner in your enterprise, a position they achieve by hook, by crook and by every method they can think of. Their collaborators in this game are called portfolio managers, arbitrageurs, market makers, brokers, hedge fund managers, traders, financiers and what have you.

Whereas wealth is created by the farmers, miners and blue collar workers toiling in the shops, construction sites and what have you –– as well as the white collar workers toiling in the offices, classrooms, hospitals and what have you, the money that is printed to represent what they produce does not go directly to them, but goes first to the investment and commercial banks, and from there to those who produce the wealth.

And guess what. Whereas members of the syndicate pay themselves millions of dollars when they get hired and when they get fired, those who produce the wealth live from hand to mouth when they get hired, and go on skid row when they get fired.

Clearly then, the system must change, and the only people that can change it are the chairs of the central banks. However, although they are supposed to be independent of the government that appoints them, they are not independent enough to overhaul the system. For this reason, and to make it so that the chairs of the central banks will be accountable to the public, they will have to be elected by the public.

The individuals that run for the chairmanship of the central bank will have to campaign for the position during which time they will explain what they’ll do to create a system that is equitable and civilized. The public will elect the right person and reelect them if they perform, or toss them out if they fail to produce what they promised.

When the lie is no longer possible to sustain

Except for monks who live a cloistered life in monasteries and spend a lifetime praying to God that they be made perfect in every sense of the word, nobody walks around while permanently visualizing a balance sheet that's made of two columns, one headlining the title: ‘All that's good about me’, the other headlining the title: ‘All that's bad about me’.

On the contrary, everyone walks around thinking they are near to perfect in every sense of the word, but if someone sees something wrong with them, it's because someone has a distorted vision of reality. And besides, if once in a while: ‘I am temporarily not perfect in a small way, it's because others made me like that, but I'll soon recover and go back to being perfect again’.

That is true about individuals as it is about societies regardless of their size. But when a socioeconomic shock hits a society, and its imperfections come to the fore, its people blame the old institutions for preventing them from seeing what was coming and preparing for it. Individuals react by attacking symbols of the old institutions as seen by (1) the Taliban of Afghanistan who blew up the ancient statues representing deities now deemed irrelevant to them, and (2) in Iraq when it was invaded by the US army, and crowds of young men ransacked the museums as well as the headquarters of government ministries.

The Jews are no exception to this rule but for the fact that when it comes to basking in what they see as the glory of their perfection, they think of themselves as surpassing by several orders of magnitude the ultimate in infinite perfection. This also applies to Israel in the eyes of Jews, but because Israel cannot survive without America, it is their judgment that when it comes to America's activities pertaining to Israel, the said activities also rise above the glory of infinite perfection by several orders of magnitude.

And this is how the Jews have conditioned the American media to paint the image of Israel and the Jews to the American public and the various populations around the world; populations with which the American media and/or politico-diplomatic arm of the government are in constant communication. One of the most prominent American politico-journalistic institutions having access to large swaths of the world is Voice of America (VOA).

For half a century VOA has acted as a megaphone informing the world about the infinitely glorious perfection inherent to everything that is Jewish or Israeli or Israeli-American. And then it happened that a shock known as social media, hit the world. It started to shake the confidence of the mouthpieces that have been blowing the Judeo-American propaganda into megaphones around the world, causing the mouthpieces to wobble. One of those is a mockery of a think tank calling itself Foundation for Defense of Democracies, conceived two decades ago, and still headed by Clifford D. May.

You can see the effect on Clifford May of the changes now sweeping America and the world concerning the undeserved position that the Jews used to occupy. Shaken by those changes, you see Clifford May treat the VOA that used to be the vanguard of Judeo-American propaganda around the world, with the same contempt that the Taliban and the Iraqi youngsters treated the old institutions when they came tumbling before their eyes. Here is some of what you'll encounter when reading the Clifford May article:

“VOA journalists were fired for accepting bribes. The Hoover Institution cited concerns about Chinese officials' influence on VOA employees working in China. Chairman Ed Royce called the US Agency for Global Media broken. The chief strategy officer pleaded guilty to stealing from it. Other examples of corruption have come to light. The Washington Post fumed that criticism of the VOA was outrageous. It endorsed VOA director Amanda Bennett, neglecting to mention that she is married to the former owner of The Washington Post. Here's what I think: Those who regard themselves as the resistance are determined to block President Trump's policies and personnel, leaving as much power as possible in the hands of ideologically aligned career bureaucrats. This seems undemocratic, an attempt to establish one-party rule. One more thing: If you were looking for a way to radicalize a growing number of Americans who fear they are being ruled by an unelected bureaucracy, you couldn't come up with a better strategy”.

And so my friend, thanks to social media, the lie about the Jews being supremely perfect in everything they say or do, has been unveiled. The resulting appearance of the naked truth––what used to be hidden from the American public and much of the world––revealed itself. Losing confidence in the ability of the VOA to be the carrier of Jewish propaganda in America and around the world, Clifford May turned against the very institution that had been the Joseph Goebbels of modern Jews for longer than the gentleman has ever lived.

And this is how Clifford May ended his article, unable to suggest what to do that will revive the good old days when it used to happen that:

(1) every Jewish insult thrown at a Palestinian leader netted Israel a few million dollars deposited in its bank account; and

(2) every anti-Palestinian act of ethnic cleansing committed by the Jewish settlers in occupied Palestine, netted the settlers thousands of new settlements in the West Bank; and

(3) every Jewish attack on the unarmed children of the Gaza Strip by the genocidal army of Israel, netted Israel shiploads of new American weapons and munitions.

As you can see, the Jewish evil is still there as demonstrated by the articulated aspiration of Clifford May, but the respect for it has disappeared as shown by his moaning.

Confusion and Hyperbole serve nobody’s Interest

Do you want to know what difference there is between (1) thinking things up before you make your moves or thinking as you make them? and (2) trying to fix things after you've made your moves only to discover that something has gone wrong? If this kind of subject interests you, here is a case study you'll find interesting.

Some of us have been warning of problems waiting to affect the nations that have become too promiscuous in their pursuit of free trade opportunities with other nations in this era of globalization. Egypt and America were the two nations mentioned in particular, given that they have large populations and diverse economies which allow them to be self-sufficient both in the capacity to produce the goods and services that their populations need, and consume most of what they produce.

Unlike the smaller nations that need to specialize in the production of a small number of items and produce them in quantities large enough to be economical –– so as to trade with other nations for what they need that they do not produce themselves –– large population countries such as Egypt and America can do well economically without relying on trade with other nations.

Unfortunately, neither country paid attention to the warnings issued to them. America continued to sell products it made at home, and continued to buy products made abroad, much of which produced by American companies tied in a joint venture with foreign companies. As to Egypt, it was lucky in that the volume of trade it was doing with other countries had not yet caught up with the large number of agreements it had signed with those countries. The result has been that America learned its lesson from a bitter experience, whereas Egypt learned from having walked up to the precipice but stopping before falling down.

Had America not waited for COVID-19 to happen before rethinking its free trade practices, there would not have been a need for an article such as the one written by Sanjai Bhagat. It came under the title: “Outsourcing manufacturing to China endangers US security and public health,” and the subtitle: “High-tech manufacturing and manufacture related to public health and defense must be kept in the United States.” It was published on April 13, 2020 in The Washington Times.

Even though Sanjai Bhagat directs his criticism at America's trade with China, what he says would apply equally if the country were other than China. Thus, the article should be read without regard to the claim that China is the culprit, but thought about in terms of blaming foreign trade for the bad results. When you do that, here is how Bhagat's prologue would sound like: “The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic in the United States has brought into sharp focus the critical downside of too much foreign trade during the past three decades, and the outsourcing of manufacturing to foreign countries”.

Much of what Bhagat says after that opening, concerns the statistical realities that describe the current situation in actual numbers. And that's where you clearly see how precarious America's position in the world has become. In fact, someone else has noticed that precariousness as well, and here is how Bhagat has described that actuality: “US policymakers are concerned that China might weaponize medical exports to the United States. How did we get to be so vulnerable?”

But the fact that China did not weaponize medical exports to the United States any more than it did the rare earths, some of which it owns at the exclusion of everyone else, says a great deal about the maturity of the Chinese system of governance, especially when you contrast China's behavior with America's trigger happy disposition to shoot with the gun of economic sanctions at anyone that defies it.

In fact, having shown this level of maturity, China does not deserve being described the way that Sanjai Bhagat did, as shown in the collection of passages that follow:

“In the US-China trade relation, China subverted the US advantage by requiring US firms to transfer their technologies to China for market access. Another problem with the all-trade-is-good position is [China's] impact on US national security. As their economy has strengthened, China has become more aggressive toward the US armed forces. With China's entry into the WTO, a cartel of Chinese companies colluded on price. They sold these antibiotics and hospital supplies much below-cost and drove all US makers out of business, after which they increased the price several-fold”.

There are five accusations here that were made to sound serious when in reality they amount to less than a hill of beans. In fact, if you visit any courtroom in North America where commercial disputes are litigated, you'll find that this kind of accusations are dismissed at the outset or at best, adjudicated and disposed of in less than one hour.

Where to, Human Beings of Planet Earth?

To simplify the discussion on a complex subject, we divide our civilizational journey into the pre-industrial and post-industrial ages. And let’s restrict our discussion to the latter. So we ask: What did those who were in charge of humanity, try to accomplish since the start of the industrial age?

Well, we begin by observing that they were in charge of humanity because they had the guns that made it possible for them to impose their will on others. In fact, imposing their will has been the hallmark of their character. It is not surprising, therefore, that they became the colonial powers that exploited the planet for the benefit of their people at the expense of everyone else.

But then, those powers became so greedy conquering other lands, they fought each other over who gets what of the spoils. But while this was happening over several decades –– culminating in two world wars –– other activities were taking place. It is that, movements for independence, were forming in the colonies. In fact, by the time the Second World War had come to an end, most colonies were liberated. Those that were not, continued the struggle for another decade or so till they too gained independence.

While that was the main plot characterizing the civilizational drama that carried us from the Industrial Revolution to the present, two subplots –– one Jewish and one American –– were running parallel to the main plot. The subplots began to mesh with the main right after the Second World War, adding complexity to the unfolding drama of our journey on the road to civilization.

The Jews are the supposed offshoot of an ancient tribe called Hebrew. Its members never settled the land to create an empire, preferring instead to infiltrate the existing ones, and plot to take them over from within. The Jews tried their luck in ancient times going after Egypt, Persia and other jurisdictions. Centuries later, they were in Europe plotting to take over one or more of the nation states there. Having failed at every turn, they turned their attention to America in the New World.

There is very little historical evidence as to how close the Jews came to taking over any of the ancient empires. As to their gamble with the nation states of modern time, their experience in Europe has been a horrifying nightmare. As to their ongoing relation with America, it shows that they learned nothing from their sordid past. Two articles shed a great deal of light as to what the Jews –– who now run America's foreign policy –– are trying to accomplish.

One article came under the title: “Maintaining Western influence in Africa as China seeks world domination,” and the subtitle: “Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco and Mauritania offer great strategic and regional importance.” It was written by Bob Kasten and published on April 8, 2020 in the Washington Times,

The other article came under the title: “Mapping China's Health Silk Road,” and the subtitle: “As part of its effort to position itself as global health leader in the COVID-19 pandemic, China has resurrected the 'Health Silk Road' moniker, suggesting that the concept may take on new importance.” It was written by Kirk Lancaster, Michael Rubin and Mira Rapp-Hopper, and published on April 10, 2020 on the website of the Council on Foreign Relations.

What comes out the article authored by Lancaster, Rubin and Rapp-Hopper, is that China looks like the eminent elder statesman who was incapacitated for a while, but has regained his strength, and exerting his moral authority the way he used to in ancient times. What is striking about the article, however, is that it brings in juxtaposition two radically different mentalities. On the one hand, you have a China that speaks of all humanity as if it were one family. On the other hand, you have the three writers, posing as “Westerners,” who speak in terms of the us-vs-them mentality. This makes them imagine a scheme designed to take over the world in every good deed that the Chinese propose.

And while the three writers see China as guilty of something, you encounter the true culprit in the Bob Kasten article, where he speaks of four countries –– Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco and Mauritania –– in the Northwest of Africa, not as independent nations filled with people that have aspirations and plans for the future, but strategic assets and important players that the West must bring into the fold, and keep them there.

In fact, this is how the Jews modified the colonial game to make it look more palatable to the Europeans who experienced an “Amazing Grace” moment, feeling remorse for what their forefathers did. But that’s what made them resolve to combat every kind of modern colonization they see forming anywhere in the world.

For now, the battle is ongoing between the Europeans and the Jews who call themselves Israelis, now busy strengthening their colonial grip on Palestine and its powerless people.

And while those Jews are engaged in that kind of activities, other Jews are exploiting America's might to do battle against the Chinese whose philosophy of “live and let live” is preventing the Jews from doing to other places what they are doing in Palestine.

Thus, the world in which we live today, has become the battlefield on which combat is raging between China that wants to live and let live, and an America that’s controlled by Jews whose philosophy of life is rooted in the pre-civilized Stone Age of thousands of years ago.

Only time will tell where that combat will take the rest of us.

Between the Dread of Realism and the Fantasy

Will a big event such as COVID-19 be responsible for causing a major shift in the course of a nation? The short and quick answer is no, it will not cause a major shift. But there will be small changes here and there.

It is true that after something big has happened and the dust that was raised has settled, the various players descend onto the field and start jockeying in an attempt to find the highest position on which to stand, from which to describe what they reckon has happened, and from where to sell their vision of what should be done next. In fact, we can see that the jockeying began to happen already.

Two authors have recently published their views on the subject, and they show how far apart they are. The first author is Richard Haass who wrote: “The Pandemic Will Accelerate History Rather Than Reshape it,” the title of an article that also came under the subtitle: “Not Every Crisis Is a Turning Point.” It was published on April 7, 2020 in Foreign Affairs. The second author is Michael Rubin who wrote: “Iran's Military Likely Can't Fight Thanks to Coronavirus,” an article that was published on April 10, 2020 in The National Interest.

Michael Rubin is known for being solely driven by the maniacal obsession of exploiting everything he can lay his hands on to maximize the effort of serving the interests of Israel. The destruction of Iran being the fantasy that preoccupies him the most at this time; it is the subject he chose to write about. Knowing that Israel will be crushed like an eggshell under the boots of Iran if it tried something funny, Rubin wants to motivate America, and have it “soften” Iran so that Israel may move in, stand on the dead bodies of American soldiers and declare that it destroyed Iran without American help, then walk in and claim the spoils.

But be careful now! Rubin and all those like him in the Jewish establishment are well aware that the American people have had it up to here sending their young men and women to die on foreign soil for the depraved reason of serving the interests of Israel as well as serve the treasonous American politicians who get quid-pro-quoed by the wealthy Jews who grease their palms for being loyal to Israel by being disloyal to America, and being nonchalant toward American lives.

And so, Rubin and all those like him in the Jewish establishment no longer speak of the glory in sending American boys and girls to fight evil forces that hide in foreign lands, or of the glory in seeing the triumphant boys and girls return home to bask in the glory of standing in a rolling convertible that moves through the streets of New York being doused by a shower of ticker-tape.

No, that's not what the Jews are saying now. Rather, they sing a different tune. What they sing to America is this: “send your boys and girls to do useful field training by fighting Iranians who are so weak, they will not fight back.” And the Jews expect that the American public will take this insult and not recognize it for what it is. See for yourself, my friend. Here is a condensed version of what Rubin is saying:

“If the Revolutionary Guards fight against COVID-19, they will not retain combat readiness. Even if the Iranian leaders adopt best-practices, it is too late to control the virus's continued spread. It is likely that the Guard Corps and their families have suffered when Iranian authorities put them in charge of the domestic response. Any outbreak among the Guard Corps will have ramifications beyond military readiness. Those who served to fight the pandemic and suffer long-term health complications will breed resentment toward the government. The Revolutionary Guards will also likely suffer future recruitment woes. Beyond eroding Iran's military readiness, the impact of the virus on public perception will be huge”.

Unlike Michael Rubin who based his analysis on what his imagination, his childlike desires and his wild fantasy have shown him, Richard Haass based his analysis on what he observed in real life. Here is a condensed version of what he included in the preamble of his article:

“The world following the pandemic is unlikely to be radically different from the one that preceded it. COVID-19 will not so much change the basic direction of world history as accelerate it. The world that will emerge from the crisis will be recognizable. Waning American leadership, faltering global cooperation, great-power discord: They are likely to be even more prominent features of the world that follows”.

It is between the realism that's dreaded by some people and the fantasy that's rejected by most people that the battle of words will be fought in the coming months.

Still, considering that even those in the camp of Richard Haass will not want to see America withdraw completely from the world stage, expect to see subtle calls for America to stay involved.

You can see an example of that in the epilogue of Richard Haass's article. It went like this: “The more relevant precedent to consider may be the period following World War I––an era of declining American involvement and mounting international upheaval”.

Haass’s point is clear, but the people of America and the world still ask: And what has American involvement brought but disastrous wars named: Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and a few other smaller but equally disastrous American involvements?

America's unexpected evolutionary trajectory

Victor Davis Hanson asked the following question: “Will America awaken from the COVID-19 crisis as a roaring giant or crying baby?” and made the question the title of his column.

The column also came under the subtitle: “We must ensure Americans control food, fuel, medicine and strategic industries.” It was published on April 8, 2020 in The Washington Times.

To answer the question, Hanson first brought up the example of WWII when America that was still in a state of lethargy in the wake of the Great Depression, was invigorated by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, and grew to become the military giant that destroyed the Japanese empire. Hanson offered that example as a possible pattern that America might repeat in the wake of the COVID-19 attack on its people.

But being the realist that he is, Victor Hanson realized that times and circumstances between then and now were not exactly the same. And so, he drew up a list of the obvious differences that exist between the two situations. In so doing, he highlighted the fact that in the twentieth century, America had an industrial potential that grew so big in a short period of time, it gave the country a GDP that was greater than the combined domestic products of all its friends and enemies in Europe and Asia.

As to the situation today, America is not fighting an enemy that can be defeated by relying on its potential to build fleet and escort carriers. Instead, America is fighting an invisible enemy by relying, to a large extent, on the resources of China, a rival that could someday become America's foe. Victor Hanson is confident that the corona virus will be defeated, but he worries about the future relation with China.

Hanson is worried because he realizes that America is lacking the social cohesion and political maturity that will make it possible for it to push back against a China that seems to have designs for the world; plans that are incompatible with America's interests, at times even directly opposed to them. He realizes, as do the pundits and the politicians, that America needs to bring back the vital industries it used to have and were moved to China from where America now imports what it no longer makes to keep its economy going.

But he warns that to bring back those industries will not happen unless and until Americans stop bickering and suffering amnesia. They should stop scapegoating and playing the blame game, he suggests. They must face the fact that America is in a crisis, he goes on to say, instead of engaging in idle talk about the effect of the virus on particular groups, for example. As to the conduct of politicians, he wants to see a prohibition on the possible setting of congressional inquiries on who said what and when about the virus.

Instead of playing those silly games, Hanson wants to see, “bipartisan commissions decide how best to return key industries to the United States, prepare for the next epidemic, and pay down the enormous debt that America incurred to defeat COVID-19.” He also wants to see a probe into the idea of curtailing the business of fracking as well as a probe into the release of fresh water into the Pacific Ocean. This said, he posits that, “the choice is ours whether America awakens as a roaring giant or a crying baby”.

As to America's relation with China, Victor Hanson wants to recalibrate that relationship. He questions the wisdom of allowing 15,000 Chinese to fly into America each day, of having 360,000 Chinese students enrolled in US colleges, and of funding hundreds of labs on university campuses where they conduct joint research with Chinese academics.

To someone familiar with the history of the world as it unfolded during the last two and a half centuries, Victor Hanson's presentation sounds like the complaint of a former colony that is feeling a neocolonial pressure exerted on it by a former colonial master. And so, on behalf of the colony, Victor Hanson is blaming the colony’s current woes on the would-be neocolonial power.

On the other hand, to someone familiar with the life cycle of organisms, what’s happening to America sounds more like the description of an organic entity whose evolution started like any other but was suddenly accelerated such that the organism that had grown normally from infancy to puberty to adolescence, has unexpectedly skipped maturity and gone directly into a steep descent to a state of politico-cultural senility.

Now, senile America depends on caregivers to provide it with the essentials of life that sustain it. They also provide it with advice on how to conduct itself on both the national and international stages.

That is, China and a number of other countries provide America with the goods and services that keep its people supplied with their daily needs.

As well, the Jews provide America with the advice that maintain its domestic political system in a state of paralysis, and make its foreign policy look like a burlesque kind of pathetic joke.

It is a sight that makes America's foes laugh, and makes its former friends weep at what happened to the good old USA.

How they squander America's political Capital

Having political capital means having the power to influence others. To achieve this status, you may accumulate the material means to do it, such as building a powerful military with which to coerce your foes, or a powerful economy with which to persuade friends and foes of your point of view. Or you can garner the moral authority that will earn you the respect of everyone.

Seeing this game unfold in real life is like watching a never-ending international Olympiad played out by countries and groups, each of which goes onto the field with material and moral resources to pit against the other players in a friendly and sportsmanlike spirit. Everyone knows the rules of the game, and tries to respect them, even if some cheat by treating their players with performance enhancing substances, for example. But that is the extent of dissonance you normally see at the Olympics.

Of all the groups on this planet who fight for a place under the sun, the Jews never achieved the political capital that would have allowed them to seriously coerce or forcefully persuade anyone, or legitimately earn the respect of someone long enough to mean anything. What the Jews did instead, has earned them––not a respectable place under the sun but––the scorn of every soul that came to know them or had to deal with them at any time throughout space and throughout time.

You can see an example as to why that sort of thing happened in the article that came under the title: “Assad's torturers should save their own lives and free their prisoners,” written by Josh Rogin and published on April 9, 2020 in The Washington Post. To better understand the content of the article, we need to know something about its author, Josh Rogin. So, here is a brief summary of what he represents.

There was a time when John Kerry was America's Secretary of State. In that capacity, he gave a speech to a gathering interested in Middle Eastern affairs. To feel free to speak his mind without raising a political storm at a critical time, everyone agreed that Kerry's remarks will remain confidential. All those in attendance pledged not to leak Kerry's remarks, and certainly not to video him or record his voice.

One of those making the pledge was Josh Rogin. And guess what, my friend. He recorded John Kerry saying that Israel was becoming an apartheid state, and published his act of treachery. It was a move that plunged a Jewish dagger in America's heart, meant to help Israel continue its genocidal policy in Palestine. When rebuked for what he did, Rogin denied he was the one to record Kerry's words. Cornered with a number of facts he could not deny, he admitted he did the recording, and lied to protect himself.

This is the unsportsmanlike manner in which the Jews have at times managed to garner undeserved influence. But as you can imagine, they enjoyed that status for only a short period of time. They lost in the end because the truth has the habit of always coming out. When it did this time, Rogin’s Jewish act of treachery earned him and all of them the damnation of everyone.

So this is Josh Rogin who wants his readers to believe he is now telling the truth –– not because he wants Israel to collect on a propaganda windfall from the calamity of the coronavirus that hit the world, including Syria, but –– because he wants to help Syria in its hour of need, he says. And so, we ask: to what kind of truth is Josh Rogin privy this time, that no one else knows about? Here is what he says in this regard:

“The most vulnerable people in Syria are those rotting in dungeons. For them, the coronavirus is the least of their worries. Men, women and children are packed into cells like animals, taken out only for their daily torture sessions. Most prisoners die at the hands of humans, not viruses. Prisoners are killed for simply revealing that they are sick. The torturers are not going to care about prisoners' health just because of the coronavirus. The doctors themselves are killing prisoners. How can you expect doctors who kill prisoners to give them treatment? The guards would eat their food and throw scraps at the prisoners. Sometimes they spit or pee in the food and give it to the prisoners after that”.

With a text like this, Josh Rogin is telling his readers that he acknowledges he lied to them before, but they must believe he is telling the truth now. And the truth, according to him, is that every morning, the guards and doctors at a prison in Syria get the prisoners out of their cells to torture them for the pleasure of torturing someone. They take the prisoners back to their cells, bring some food, eat it themselves and throw scraps at the prisoners. But before they do that, they spit or pee on the food and then throw it to the prisoners. How so very unbelievable! How so very Jewish!

With that, Josh Rogin still wants to send a message to the Syrian guards and doctors telling them they would be better off letting the prisoners go free because if they catch the coronavirus, they too, as guards and doctors, will catch it.

And Rogin promises his readers that the Syrians will listen to his advice and release the prisoners. And we should expect that everyone involved will walk into the sunset like a drama blessed with a Hollywood style happy ending.

When a story like this gets circulated around the world, and when people notice that it was published in the once prestigious Washington Post, they see the face of an America like they never thought could sink to this low level.

But this is how the Jews, pretending to be Americans, squander America's political capital, day in and day out, with the clear intention of inflating Israel’s chances at robbing its neighbors and getting away with it, protected by America’s diminishing political capital and moral authority.