Saturday, March 20, 2010

Faces Of American Moral Bankruptcy

Michael Oren, Ruth Wisse and Steven Plaut had something to say on March 18, 2010. The first wrote an article in the New York Times under the title: “For Israel and America, a Disagreement, Not a Crisis”. The second wrote an article in the Wall Street Journal under the title: “How About an Arab 'Settlement' Freeze?” and the subtitle: “Why are 21 countries with 800 times more land so obsessed with Israel?” The third wrote an article in Frontpage Magazine under the title: “No Compromise Over Jerusalem”.

When you take the sum total of what these three are saying, you realize that it is the Judeo-Zionist-Israeli narrative as it has developed over the decades. These people are narrating a fantastic story about any individual anywhere on the planet who would convert to the Jewish faith and thus obtain the right to go to Palestine whereby the locals who have lived there since the beginning of time must welcome him or her with open arms, hugs and kisses. This done, the locals must vacate the place as if they had been squatters occupying it illegally or guarding it for thousands of years waiting for the newcomers to show up and settle in it as if they were the rightful owners who have come home after a long absence. Short of being this welcoming, the longtime squatters must be regarded as a bad bunch and must be punished accordingly. And when the newcomers inflict such punishment on the locals, they ought to be praised and not rebuked by the rest of the world.

But America did rebuke Israel for continually grabbing ever more Palestinian lands and this is what prompted the government of Israel to respond through its ambassador in Washington. That ambassador is Michael Oren who had the difficult task of doing three things at the same time in his article. They are these: (a) smooth over the harsh words used by both sides (b) deny saying something he said before and (c) minimize the gravity of what Israel is doing in Palestine. How does he accomplish all this in one article? The Talmudic way, of course!

Look at these sentences as they appear in the same paragraph in that article: “Though not uncontested, Israel’s policy on Jerusalem did not preclude the conclusion of peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan. Nor did it prevent the Palestinians from negotiating with Israel for more than 15 years … Consistently, Israelis have demonstrated remarkable flexibility as well as generosity…” Believe it or not my dear reader, Michael Oren is here saying that it is the Israelis who should be credited with being flexible and generous because Egypt and Jordan concluded a peace agreement with them despite the reservation that the latter had with regard to Israel’s policy on Jerusalem. Michael Oren is also saying that the Israelis should be credited with being flexible and generous because the Palestinians continued to negotiate despite Israel’s demonstrated rapacity to grab ever more of their land.

Look folks, there is no way I can read something like this and not be reminded of the Jewish man who used to throw his hands up in the air and cry out in horror: “Light up the oven!” This man was old enough to remember the Holocaust, and he understood very well what it is that brought pogroms and holocausts on the Jews. And he feared that the sort of mentality here displayed by Israel’s ambassador will again make someone out there want to light up the ovens and consume all the Jews. Already known as one of the foremost intellectual masturbators in all of Judaism, Michael Oren has gone beyond the pale this time around and there is no way he can redeem himself. He is just too far gone.

And while we have Michael Oren asserting that the Arabs did not raise enough of a fuss with regard to Israel’s policy on Jerusalem however provocative that policy may have been, we have Ruth Wisse asking in her article why the Arabs are so obsessed with that policy. Of course, she knows that the mere asking of the question misrepresents reality and so, she does what Michael Oren does which is to reach into the Talmud and pull out a dishonest trick. She begins the article by invoking a toddler, her two year old grandchild, whom she uses as a prop to defend the indefensible. She says this: “Right now, I would have to confess to her that the hubbub over 1,600 new housing units in Jerusalem defies rational explanation.”

But Ruth Wisse wants to bolster her argument and so she lists the impressive work that the Arabs have done and are doing to accommodate their own growing populations, work that includes the construction of 10 new cities in Egypt alone since 1996. And this, by the way, is why she calls for an Arab freeze on settlements. But then, she turns around and says this: “It is unfortunate that Arabs obsess about building in Israel rather than aiming for the development of their own superabundant lands.” This woman has a PhD, she teaches at Harvard and yet she fails to see that she contradicts herself like an infant caught lying when she lists the massive construction done by the Arabs then denigrates them for not constructing on their lands. No wonder the subject she is discussing defies her power to reason so much so that she cannot explain it at the level of a two year old. And this raises a very serious question: Who the hell signs the paychecks at Harvard to give to this woman?

But fear not this crazy world of the Talmud, my dear reader, because Steven Plaut has come along and has clarified the whole thing in terms so simple that we can all understand. He says this in his article: “To put the Obama Administration’s temper tantrum over Jerusalem into perspective, one has to try to imagine the following reasoning. How dare the Jews construct housing in their own capital? Just because Washington builds housing in the District of Columbia without asking its allies for permission does not mean that the Israelis can build the same way in their capital!” Having reasoned the situation in this way, he concludes that Israel must not compromise over Jerusalem, a thought he sticks into the title of this article.

But what correlation is there between Jerusalem and the District of Columbia? Well, this is where we go back to Ruth Wisse and seek the answer. She says this: “Arab countries benefited disproportionately from the exchange of populations between Jews and Arabs … Since 1948 upward of 800,000 Jews abandoned their homes and forfeited their goods in Egypt, Iraq, Morocco and Yemen. In addition to assets valued at hundreds of billions of dollars, the property deeds of Jews from Arab lands is estimated at a total area of 100,000 square miles, which is five times the size of the state of Israel, and more than Israel would include even if it were to stretch over all the disputed territories of the West Bank.” Of course, all of this is more than baloney; it is rotting Jewish salami that has been floating around for some time now put out by characters much smarter than her.

To see what is behind all of this, we notice that Steven Plaut and Ruth Wisse are saying in ways that are not so subtle Israel has the right to grow in size to 100,000 square miles which is 5 times its present size because America has the right to build homes in the District of Columbia and so does Israel in Jerusalem, in the West Bank and perhaps beyond that. And these ideas have now gone past being floating trial balloons. In fact, the people making up the Judeo-Zionist-Israeli axis started to scheme for a new source of funding so as to continue their expansionary processes after they began to meet with difficulties monetizing the Holocaust much further. They murmured about Jews having forfeited land, goods and other assets in some Arab countries, and this is what Plaut and Wisse are repeating except that they are doing so at a level that is louder than murmur.

The vision these people have for the first phase of their upcoming operation is to ethnically cleanse the West Bank as much as they can and to annex it to Israel. They will claim they are taking this land in exchange for what the Jews have forfeited in Morocco, Egypt, Iraq and Yemen. As to the idea of compensating the Palestinians for what they were robbed in Israel and what they will be robbed in the West Bank, well, these Palestinians should be paid from the value of the goods and assets that the Jews left behind in those Arab countries.

But what other phases of the project do the schemers envision and what will such phases entail? Look at it this way: Jews are alleging to be forfeiting lands and other assets everywhere on the planet, and if the Judeo-Zionist-Israeli axis can make their current scheme stick against the Arab countries, they will be able to make it stick against all the other countries. When you rub this idea with the ancient superstition which says that Israel must extend from the Nile to the Euphrates, you can see the limitless dimensions of the potential future phases. Just imagine taking more land from the neighboring Arab states and receiving the money to compensate for the resulting ethnic cleansing from the whole world, and you can see how the superstition will be turned into a realistic vision then turned into an inescapable reality. Once there was no Israel; now there is one. Now there is no Israel extending from the Nile to the Euphrates; tomorrow there may be one. You’ll see.

After all, the schemers of the Judeo-Zionist-Israeli axis have learned a great deal from the fiasco that followed the Shamir cry: “Zey know nossing about za damacracy” where they dragged America into a project to conquer all of these Muslim lands for their causes without offering comparable pieces of land in exchange, or a monetary compensation for the people who were affected. But if the Israelis can duplicate the success they are having in Palestine and implement that success on a planetary scale, they reckon they will have a better chance at a victory they can savor as opposed to getting America shafted and left with nothing to show for their effort but a bitter taste in everyone’s mouth.

And so, the schemers now plan to go to the members of the US Congress and to the other politicians in America with a message they know would intrigue any morally bankrupt character. After telling them of Israel’s wish to see the Arabs absorb the Palestinians into their own lands and to compensate them for the robberies that the newcomers have committed in Israel and still plan to commit in the West Bank and beyond, the schemers will instruct the Americans to start biting each other in the back, and to jockey for position as they compete for the AIPAC title of being the most favored hooker and pimp in the service of that lobby group, and laboring hard for the glory of Israel.