Wednesday, March 26, 2008

Horsemen Of The Zionist Apocalypse

At the beginning there were the big ideas then came the bumper stickers and now there are the single words. You say a word that is considered inappropriate by someone and you are asked to resign whatever you do because you are no longer fit to carry on in that position.

Fearful of this outcome, people go through life nowadays mindful of the fact that what they say or do can render them toast before they know what hit them. And what adds to the confusion is that by the simple trick of being used and abused, the single word can acquire several meanings which were never meant for it.

This situation started to take shape one day when it became fashionable to think of someone who says something not one hundred per cent pro-Israel as being partially pro-Israel therefore partially anti-Israel. And this last part was the menacing part because it was the insidious thing about a person's character which said he is most likely to be a closet anti-Semite. It also said he may be waiting for the right moment to burst onto the scene and say horrible things about the Jews, like maybe deny that the Holocaust ever happened.

When a tendency like this is injected into the culture with regard to one subject, it proliferates into all other subjects and becomes the norm. In the English speaking World, the air became so saturated with the tendency that someone's utterances were readily labeled insidious, virulent or inflammatory. Those were the words that characterized the person as someone to be treated with hate, fear, envy and jealousy. And these were the horsemen of the Zionist Apocalypse which ended up destroying the American culture, a culture that was once glorious enough to conquer and dominate the World.

Now deprived of the intellectual force that was the source of its glory, America's culture has slowly been transformed into a pathetic has been, relying on the bizarre and the extreme to attract attention and give the impression it is still relevant. In consequence of this, there is now the urgent need to take a serious look at the whole sad situation.

If you are not a right wing blabber mouth shooting the crap on the radio to let off some steam, your words are called inflammatory or incendiary even if people sympathize with you and see the reason why you need to get some things off your chest.

Those who sympathize with you will admit they feel the same way as you do and will further admit they could have said the same thing themselves. But they will hastily add that you are supposed to be tactful when you present your arguments so as to avoid being offensive to other people. Unless of course, you are sitting in front of a microphone that has the right wing stripes etched on it in which case you are allowed to say shocking things that will, at most, get people to chuckle over them.

So why is it that the suspicion of someone being anti-Semitic is taken seriously enough to destroy the person's career while other things are chuckled over and dismissed as innocuous? The reason is to be found in the maneuverings that led up to the situation in the first place. It is that the debate about anti-Semitism has always been a one sided debate taken to its absurd extreme as it was allowed to move along without opposition to the point where the absurd became the inescapable conclusion.

This done, the envelop is pushed further and the one who is labeled anti-Semitic is said to have the potential to turn virulent if not violent then go on to participate in the holocausting of the Jewish people. It is further said that he may go beyond that and advocate, if not actually work on the design and the implementation of what the Nazis have called the Final Solution to the Jewish problem. As can be seen, the situation here is strikingly similar to calling a foreign leader Hitler-like then start a hundred year war to depose him which is how the Iraq war happened.

When a single word can potentially trigger a chain of ideas that stretches this far, we are forced to ask how do the Zionists manage to construct a mountain of intellectual refuse this immense without being opposed by someone anywhere along the way? To answer this question we must go back - way back to the beginning of time. This was a time when speaking your mind was the privilege and the preserve of the powerful.

For example, women and children could not speak at a social gathering unless given permission to do so by the patriarch of the gathering. Also, no one spoke in the king's court who was not authorized to speak anymore than anyone can today speak in a court of law unless permitted to do so by the presiding judge.

Some people found this situation so revolting that they actually revolted. Later these people came to be known as the Founding Fathers of the American Federation. This is because they declared their independence from the oppressive regime under which they lived by writing a Constitution whose First Amendment says that Congress shall not make any law which may have the effect of diminishing someone's right to conduct free speech.

The trouble is that in modern times the Congress of the United States seldom if ever gets into the business of interfering with the right to speak freely but some organizations do, among these the numerous Zionist outfits that pretend to represent the Jewish causes. And the consequence has been that the American Constitution sat useless in the face of the savage assaults on free speech which the outfits mounted over the decades and by which they destroyed the American culture along with everything nice it brought to the World.

In the same way that the Zionist organizations abused the Holocaust to steal Palestine from the Palestinian people, they abused the Holocaust to steal from the American people their right to free speech. And the two robberies went hand in hand through the simultaneous orchestration of the events that have unfolded over the past few decades. It happened that while the genocidal war against the unarmed people of Palestine was progressing in the Middle East, the demonic war against the constitution of America was progressing on this Continent under the guise of defending the Jews from those who would holocaust them once more.

Being in control of a number of media outlets and in a position to blackmail everyone with the threat of being labeled anti-Semitic, the Zionists used the four horsemen of the new Apocalypse: fear, hate, jealousy and envy to play people against people by feeding and nurturing their petty jealousies. In this way, they got everyone to contribute energy to the hand that strangled the American Constitution. And that document died a slow death in parallel with every innocent child that died in Palestine with American-made Israeli weapons.

The irony is that at a time when the rest of the World was beginning to adopt the principle of free exchange of ideas, America was descending into the darkness of a cultural Alzheimer that made it forget the pleasures of conducting a vigorous debate. Not only that, but Israel and the Jewish Establishment even managed to get the American Administration and the Congress to criticize those countries which began to allow free speech to flourish within their borders.

Time after time reports came out of the US Government accusing just about everyone on the planet of saying the wrong thing because people refused to prostrate themselves before Israel or before the principle of Jewish supremacy. And things went further than that when the Americans actually put down a plan to bomb the Al Jazeera network in the same way that Israel repeatedly bombed the Palestinian media outlets.

And lest anyone believe that this was a recent development, here is an excerpt from the book I wrote but whose publication was blocked by none other than the infamous Jewish Establishment: "In 1967 the Israelis used their air force…to carry out a worldwide public relations campaign. One of the things they did was to take pictures from the air of strategic sights such as the television building…They printed these pictures in a booklet they called: What we can bomb in Cairo if and when we decide to do so."

It is clear from the behavior of the self-anointed Jewish organizations that radical Judaism, being the first patriarchal society to emerge in history, has not modernized its dictatorial ways in thousands of years. And these are the same outfits that managed to drag America down to their stone age level where they now languish and from where they threaten the World if it does not do things the way it is told to do them.

What then can be done to turn things around and put an end to this insane situation? The answer is that the American Congress and the people must get to work and amend the Constitution so as to make interference with someone's free speech a crime no less serious than murder in those cases where the interference results in serious damage befalling someone.

The statutes that will flow out of such an amendment will then include the following points:

1 - The affirmation of every citizen’s right to express themselves freely.

2 - Writing into the criminal code articles that prohibit individuals and organizations in a position of power from attempting to intimidate someone with the view of abridging their right to speak freely.

3 - The penalty should be severe enough to deter the perpetrators.

4 - The articles should be written in such language as to set the stage for civil action to follow.

A public debate should also be launched to shed light on the frivolous accusations of anti-Semitism that have become endemic. These accusations continue to result in the holocaust of good people and the destruction of their careers. The accusations cause more hardship than can be imagined without the accusers stepping into a courtroom to prosecute or to prove any wrongdoing on the part of the person they pick on.

The purpose of the debate will be to make the point that the label of anti-Semitism can be used on someone if and only if it is proven in a Court of Law. The debate will also establish that the penalty for disobeying such a law must be as harsh as with the one proposed above.

At the end of the day, it should be no more acceptable to accuse someone of anti-Semitism than it is to accuse someone of murder. Both can lead to the total destruction of the falsely accused and both should be treated with equal firmness. Unless the destroyers of lives and careers are made to understand that their own lives and careers will be destroyed, they will continue in their evil ways.