The Jewish propaganda machine is again in full throttle mode with all the power generators patched to the thrust engine feeding it the maximum output they can deliver. And this is because the machine has two important missions at this point in time: First, to derail the Middle East peace process. Second, to stop the Palestinians from obtaining recognition for their state at the United Nation. What is perplexing to most people with regard to the approach taken by the Jewish organizations that make up the propaganda machine is the fact that they represent a culture which says it wants peace but then demonstrates its intention by killing the peace process. And they represent a culture which says the United Nation is a useless and irrelevant body but then sounds the existential alarm when the Palestinians try to join the United Nation. And the question is this: Can that odd behavior be explained? Yes, it can be explained but it cannot be explained away. We must, however, understand the difference between the snapshot and the developing narrative before we attempt to explain. And this means we need to do a little philosophizing before anything else.
So here we go. On the one hand, if things go well, you want time to stand still; but if they promise to go better, you want time to move on. On the other hand, if things go badly, you want time to move on; but if they promise to get worse, you want time to stand still. Since the “now” is the frozen snapshot of a moment in time while the future is a moving narrative that begins now and goes on forever, what you seek in effect is to hang on to the snapshot or ride the narrative depending on which of the two will offer the greatest reward. But human beings are what they are and they will at times try to have it both ways. And so the question to ask is whether or not these people should be granted all that they ask for. Logic says no, they should not but a few greedy ones will try anyway to have it both ways and they will find backers who will accept their arguments.
In the context of the situation thus described, to have it both ways means to be treated with preference all the time whether everyone else is going through good times or going through bad times. But since the people who want it both ways know that the random nature of probability prohibits good things from happening to the same person each and every time, they change the process to get around the law of probability. To do this, they use the invention called code of conduct which is the human answer to the laws of nature and they make the code work for them against all probabilities. But then, when their expectations outgrow the code's ability to deliver, they bend the code and make it serve their new set of expectations. And they will do this whether or not what they seek matches what society will tolerate or goes against the grain.
So then, what is this code of conduct? The short answer is that it is a book of laws, bylaws or just rules. A society begins to construct a code -- be it a civil code, a criminal code or a set of binding rules -- when an observed behavior is deemed to be desirable and the society responds by making it obligatory. The same applies when a behavior is deemed reprehensible and the society responds by prohibiting it. To incorporate the obligations and the prohibitions into the culture, the sages of society – now called legislators -- codify the responses by defining them and giving them what is referred to as the force of law which means you obey them or else. When a mass of such responses has accumulated on paper, a complete code of conduct is said to exist. Thus, we see that a code is constructed when a developing narrative is frozen in time, when it is cropped to define its parameters and when the process is repeated over and over again. By the time the process is completed, we have a handy book of snapshots that mirrors the evolution of past narratives. In fact, the book contains several entries each one being a commandment that tells us how to respond to different situations should we be caught in one of the narratives. The thing to remember, however, is that these laws, bylaws and regulations are adopted by all sorts of jurisdictions and are modified or even nullified when they become obsolete and they no longer serve the purpose for which they were adopted.
But how can someone make the system work for them both ways? As it happens, there exists a culture which operates solely on the basis of making things work both ways for its members. It is the Jewish culture; and the best way to see how it operates is to look at two recent examples. The first is the time when the United Nation deemed that Zionism was a form of racism. What happened then was that the Jewish organizations used America's power and influence to have the resolution rescinded. The second example is the time when the Jewish organizations made America legally designate Hamas a terrorist organization. What is remarkable about these two examples is that each of them tells one half of the same story. When you combine the two halves, you see the full picture of the immense destructive power that the Jewish organizations possess.
The thing is that Zionism is an idea. It is therefore a snapshot that is frozen in time and a cluster of commandments that tell its adherents how to respond to specific situations. When the United Nation says that Zionism is a form of racism, it says that Zionism should be nullified unless it can be modified enough to make it acceptable to civilized societies. For the Jewish organizations to have this kind of advice rescinded instead of engaging the world in a dialogue to modify the provisions of Zionism is to insist on accepting the snapshot as it is and make it a permanent feature of the human existence. But this is not how laws are treated in advanced jurisdictions for, even when the law is the constitution, its amendments can be modified or nullified when the time comes to update the law. However, this is not to say that Zionism is never amended. In fact, it is amended by those who adhere to it and only by them; something they do in order to have the idea serve them better when the circumstances change and new responses are called for.
As for the Hamas question, to designate this organization a terrorist group is to turn human beings into objects for a bad reason. In fact, the Jewish organizations did it for a convoluted reason. It is that events do change all the time and the Jews knew there will come a time when the Americans will want to negotiate with the Hamas people. They reckoned that America will want to do this to stay in the loop and have the opportunity to play a role and influence events where its own interests are involved. To negate this possibility before they get there, the Jewish organizations turned the Hamas narrative into a snapshot and froze it in time. In doing this, they put the American decision making process on automatic pilot and kept the password to the flight computer for themselves. Thus, the Jewish leaders not only blurred the line between what is a snapshot and what is a developing narrative; they made it so that they can switch any event from being a snapshot to being a narrative, and the other way around depending on what will work for them at any given time. And there lies the secret to the immense destructive power of the Jewish organizations.
In fact, it is happening right now that the Americans find it necessary to talk to Hamas to serve America's security interests but they cannot do so because they have their hands tied by the law they passed themselves designating the group a terrorist organization. As can be seen, the net result is that the American legislators have robbed their own country of the ability to act independently, leaving it to the Jewish organizations to speak for America and to act on her behalf. Indeed, the legislators have turned the US Congress from being a legislative body that is supposed to be in the service of the American people into an institution that has become a tool in the hands of the Jewish leaders who serve the interests of a foreign government. And like masochists, the odious legislators of America have said yes to the Jew then castrated themselves to show their full and irrevocable devotion to him.
What kind of America has America become? No one seems to know.
These regrettable developments happened in America because of the confluence of two trends; the American trend which is not unique to America and the Jewish trend which is unique to the Jewish culture. When something of dubious value begins to happen in America as in other places, a number of people step forward and ask that a moratorium be declared to give the public time to review the matter and decide if the country should stay on the current path or move away from it. But these people are usually drowned out by a more influential group that insists on letting the thing play itself out to the end. At times, however, when the end comes, the nation will have realized how close it came to having an apocalypse. An example of this is when they let the financial houses do what they want, and the public learned in 2008 how close they came to the edge of the precipice.
As for the Jewish trend, it is the very definition of insanity. As predictable as the cycle of the moon, the Jewish lunatics who pass for leaders keep doing the same thing in the hope of reaching a different result but when the result comes, it always looks like the apocalypse they refuse to believe they brought on themselves and their people. And what is noteworthy in this lesson is that pogroms and holocausts have happened to Jews everywhere on the planet since the beginning of time except in the Arab countries because the Arabs never let the Jews get away with nonsense but stopped them on time to save them from themselves. Can America now learn the Arab lesson and duplicate it at home to save the Jews from themselves and save America from the folly of their leaders?
But what would the Arab lesson be in this case? To find out, we reason the thing from beginning to end. When we think of the Jewish migration into Palestine from the Nineteenth Century onward, when we think of the early activities of the Jewish leaders in Palestine and when we think of the behavior of the successive Israeli governments inside the armistice line and outside of it in the places called occupied territories, we see and we understand the narrative that compelled the United Nation to formulate the snapshot saying that Zionism is a form of racism. Moreover, we understand and we accept the snapshot because we see that it faithfully reflects the narrative that led to it. On the other hand, when we learn that Israel was the one that originally formed, funded and trained the organization called Hamas and when we learn that Israel equipped that organization with the necessary tools and weapons to go after the group called Fatah, we fail to understand the logic by which the American legislators have agreed to designate Hamas a terrorist organization.
To be clear, what happened here is that Israel tried to abuse Hamas soon after creating it which prompted the latter to rebel and to turn against its creator. Israel then ran to America and asked that Hamas be designated a terrorist organization, and America acquiesced despite the fact that only Israel possesses and uses the weapons of terror handed to it by America. To a fair minded person, the snapshot in this case does not match the narrative it is supposed to reflect; and the designation of Hamas a terrorist organization is rejected both instinctively and rationally. This is how the Arabs would reason this thing and so, if America wants to designate Israel a terrorist state, it will be a move that the whole world will welcome and applaud America for making it. As a bonus, the move will also be one that will break the habit of the Jewish leaders to provoke the next holocaust right after they have received the last payment for the previous holocaust.
Failing this, we see where America will go; and it's not pretty out there. When we look at the activities of the Jewish organizations, we see that the people who populate them work to create false snapshots that reflect not the narratives they witness on the ground but the fantasies they carry in their heads. And when we compare these fantasies with the stories of the Old Testament, we see a remarkable match between the two. In fact, when we listen to the hotchpotch of old Jews, new Jews, converted Jews, pretending Jews, fake Jews, quack Jews and Jewish imposters -- all of whom collectively call themselves the Jewish people -- we should be alarmed. It is that we can hear them say to each other and we see them teach one another lessons that are genuinely frightening and almost literally from out of this world.
And when we pay close attention, we see that they want to turn the Talmud into a Jewish New Testament to rival the Christian New Testament and tell the story of modern Jews not the story of Jesus and the apostles. To succeed in this, they want to model their New Testament after the form and the content of the Old Testament. But the reality is that the Old Testament describes a religious history that does not match the history which is revealed by traditional means. In fact, the Old Testament is a book of religion where fantastic feats that defy the laws of nature are attributed to people who are said to make miracles. But even if we accept the claim that miracles happened in the past, we know they do not happen now and so do the current Jewish leaders. Thus, to make the work of modern Jews look like the miracles of old, those leaders have resorted to using theatrics as well as smoke and mirrors to make things appear fantastically more grandiose than they really are. It is not an accident that the words hubris and chutzpah are Yiddish words. And what is truly heart wrenching in all of this is that the Jewish leaders can operate in this manner only in America where they have perfected the art of making the legislators stand on their heads and claim to see the world right side up. Thus, it is in America where the Jewish organizations practice their most outlandish activities and make their most absurd of claims.
What kind of America has America become? I hate to think of the answer.
All this leads to a bone chilling realization; it is that the aim of the Jewish leaders is to use whatever means they can get their hands on to make the history of the modern world unfold along the lines of the Stone Age history described in the Old Testament. If a law of nature intervenes and prevents them from succeeding, they manipulate the laws of man to make the scene look like they wish it to be. To succeed in this endeavor, they need the power and prestige of America which is why they work to isolate America from the rest of the world and monopolize it like they would an obedient sex slave. And this is what the American Congress has agreed to become for all practical purposes.
What kind of America has America become? You tell me, my friend, you tell me.