If you are a Lilliputian and you befriend a Gulliver, you may be tempted to train your giant friend to do things for you that you could not do for yourself. You may, for example, turn him into a beast of burden that nevertheless possesses some human attributes such as a limited capacity to reason and the power of speech. Think of what could happen if you got caught in a situation akin to that of “Paranormal Activity 3” and had no one but him to come to your rescue. Well, it looks like PA3 was not enough to keep the editors of the Wall Street Journal awake at night, but they seem to say that having read the assessment of the International Atomic Energy Agency about Iran's nuclear activities, they lost their sleep. Consequently, they look to their designated Gulliver to rescue their designated alter ego that is Israel.
This is the message that comes out of the editorial they published on November 11, 2011 under the title: “If Iran Gets the Bomb” and the subtitle: “The world immediately becomes a far more dangerous place.” They say that much in the first paragraph of the article, and they add that the annex alone “...lays to rest the fantasies that an Iranian bomb is many years off, or that the intelligence is riddled with holes and doubts, or that the regime's intentions can't be guessed by their activities.” Well my friend, I read the report and concentrated on the annex where I encountered what I consider to be the most damaging evidence. It came in the section titled: “Integration into a missile delivery vehicle” where the end of paragraph 63 reads as follows: “While the activities described as those of Project 111 may be relevant to the development of a non-nuclear payload, they are highly relevant to a nuclear weapon programme.” This, however, did not keep me awake at night. But being no expert on the subject, I researched all that I could research, and verified all that I could verify but found no one of consequence who would support the Journal's assertion that we should lose sleep.
And to be honest, I would not have been swayed one way or the other because my position has always been that the Middle East -- if not the whole world -- should be free of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. As to the situation specific to the Middle East, keeping the region free of nuclear weapons is something that will be achieved when every nation in there will have signed the non-proliferation treaty and opened itself to inspection. This is a proposal that has been on the table for a long time and was accepted by all the nations in the region except one. It is that Israel is rejecting the idea because it wants to continue playing the juvenile game of ambiguity, and America is willing to kill and get killed to support this behavior. Consequently, if someone should be told to mind their own business and leave the world of adults for adults to manage, it is juvenile Israel and that weirdo nation which America is fast becoming.
This said, what prompts me to discuss the Journal editorial is that it represents something new about that rag. I see that while the piece was written with the same old Judeo-Yiddish mentality behind it, the authors have tried to hide their collective face behind the mask of a style of writing that is more gentile than Jewish. Free of the convolutions that used to characterize their old style; this piece tries to reflect a more honest face -- at least on the surface. However, it still fails to completely hide the true face behind the mask, and I feel that the readers should be made aware of this change in style so that they can remain on guard and not take anything the rag says at face value. To this end, they will need to develop sharper analytical skills because the Journal will be more subtle from now on. Indeed, having been criticized for being too Judeo-Yiddish in the past, they seem determined to become more persuasive by reflecting a new face however fake it may be.
Look at the Journal editorial. It is one that combines the style of a gentile with the mentality of a Judeo-Yiddish. You detect this odd blend because you sense that the message is the gentle rehashing of the harsh views of olden days. Here is how these people do it: “So much, then, for the December 2007 National Intelligence Estimate, which asserted … that Iran had abandoned its nuclear-weapons work in 2003...” Had they stopped here, they would have reflected the mask of a gentile and only that. But they went on to say this: “...and ended any chance that the Bush Administration would take action against Iran.” This is speculation and not any speculation but that of the worst kind because it is about a past you cannot revisit. Normal speculation being about a future you can wait for, see coming and check things out; to speculate about a past that is gone for ever is to tamper with history. This is what these people are doing, and nothing can be more Jewish than that.
Having lamented the end of something no one can verify, they now hitch a ride on the coattail of the lamentation to advocate the end of any attempt by the Obama Administration “...to move Iran away from its nuclear course … with diplomatic offers … sanctions and covert operations.” This is the strongest manifestation yet of the Judeo-Yiddish mentality at work behind the mask. And you know this to be so because it is a preparation put down by the authors to lead to a call for bloodshed. And here is that call, the punchline for which the authors have prepared you: “The serious choice now … is between military strikes and more of the same … [which] means a nuclear Iran, possibly within a year.” Whoa! Say that again! Did they say a nuclear Iran within a year? Have they not been saying within a year ... within a year ... within a year for the last ten years or more? These people have again chosen the path of terror as they never gave up accusing someone (this time Iran) of being dangerous while inciting another one (this time America) to go after him. They have been pulling this trick since time immemorial, and nothing can be more Jewish than that.
Confident that they are able to hide their bloodthirsty mentality behind the mask of a gentile, they now mimic the talk of a responsible adult. This is how they do it: “It's time … to consider … what that choice means,” and they do eventually consider what the choice means but before they do so, they want you to know it's not the first time they spoke like adults. To this end, they quote themselves from their past writings: “In the run-up to the war in Iraq, we wrote that 'the law of unintended consequences hasn't been repealed … no war ever goes precisely as planned.'” They now fulfill their promise by warning that this time: “[in] an aerial campaign to demolish or substantially degrade Iran's nuclear facilities … Planes could be shot down and airmen taken prisoner. Iran could close the Straits of Hormuz, sending energy prices upward … or fire missiles against U.S. military installations in the region, or spark … another insurgency in Iraq.” But you ask: What on Earth are they talking about?
First they tell you they behaved like adults when they warned of the possible consequences in the run-up to the war against Iraq, and now they admit that one such consequence has been that Iran gained the upper hand which allowed it to spark an insurgency and gave it the ability to spark it again and again at will. But instead of being apprehensive about this development and conclude that America should stop here to consider another course of action, they say that such development is acceptable because: “These are among the contingencies that military planners would have to anticipate, though Iranian leaders would also have to think twice before responding to a strike with attacks that could mean further escalation.” My God, you shout to yourself, we're not dealing with retarded juveniles; we're dealing with murderous lunatics who depend on the good sense of the Iranians to save America and the world from their incitement. And they do this at the same time as they tell America to double down on a misadventure they created themselves, one that has ruined the country already and promises to turn it into a second rate power which will probably happen even if it stopped immolating itself right now.
They ignore all this and justify an attack on Iran by listing the wrong things they say the Iranians did without mentioning what America was doing in the meantime. And they go on to say this: “These acts were perpetrated by Teheran without a nuclear umbrella. What would Iran's behavior look like if it had one?” They answer their question by saying that some people advocate a strategy of containment in which case Iran's behavior would not change much because the U.S. and its allies could warn that if it did, it would face nuclear annihilation. But they counter this argument by saying it is a red line that “would be hard to credit once the U.S. squandered its credibility by allowing Iran to go nuclear after spending a decade warning that such outcome was 'unacceptable.'” And they paint an even more horrifying picture of the future by speculating that other Middle Eastern nations will go nuclear or fall into Iran's orbit.
But seeing that there is no logical scenario by which a few non-events can be used as raw material to construct an apocalyptic fantasy of this magnitude, you ask yourself: What is it that these people aim to accomplish? You know they pushed America to attack Iraq in the past for no reason except that it made the fanatic Jews among them feel good. You know and they know this act triggered a series of unintended consequences which escalated to a point where they are now saying the region has moved closer than ever to a nuclear arms race. And they say that this will trigger a new series of unintended consequences whose reach they cannot fathom and yet, instead of being perturbed, they feel comfortable with all this. They feel comfortable because they count on the Iranians doing the right thing to save themselves and the world. Failing this, the editors count on the American planners to respond in the appropriate manner which is to annihilate Iran.
In fact, these people are so committed to push America on the path of war; they are creating loud and shrieking noises to divert attention from the sane solution that is on the table. It is a quick and permanent solution that will fix the troubled Middle East and bring calm to it for ever. The solution is for Israel to come clean and start working with its neighbors to make the region free of nuclear weapons, and free of other weapons of mass destruction. And this is where you find the answer to the question you posed earlier. Sadly and simply, what these people aim to accomplish is destroy the Middle East and the whole world if need be to please the bloodthirsty and ghoulish Jews among them. In fact, emptying the Middle East of trouble is to these people what emptying a fish tank of water is to the fish in it. They both die.
But this is not what they say it's all about. Instead, they say this: “The question … is whether those dire consequences are worse than the risks of a pre-emptive strike.” Okay, you say, have it your way but at least you expect to see an attempt at formulating a reasonable response from one who says he has matured and can talk like an adult. You read on, and you are shocked to find that what you expected is not what you get. Instead, you get this: “We think we know what the Israelis will decide.” And to bolster their argument, the editors of the Journal mention this: “Israel's strike on Iraq's Osirak reactor in 1981, without which the U.S. could never have stood up to Saddam after his invasion of Kuwait.” Oh yes. What you see here, my friend, is the mentality of a rapist who believes he is God's gift to women and to all mankind.
The historical fact is that whatever Saddam's plans were for the Middle East, the Osirak reactor was never meant to make nuclear weapons. But the bombing of the reactor (achieved with information stolen from the American spy agencies by a Jewish American traitor) is what prompted Saddam to want to be a friend of America as he realized it was the only way he can commit murder and get away with it. He thus attacked Iran which was America's enemy in the region, and having done this, he expected America to let him get away with the swallowing of Kuwait. This is exactly what happened initially but the Arab countries said no, this cannot be and they hired the American mercenary army to get Saddam out of Kuwait, paying something like 30 or 40 billion dollars for the service. And this is when the Iranians discovered it was not Israel that was facing an existential threat but Iran itself. To protect their country, they cultivated their influences in Iraq, something they achieved with brilliant success, and did so to the detriment of America. On their part, Israel and the Jewish organizations that were seen to have raped America, now claim credit for doing what they consider to be a wonderful thing.
Instead of looking at the series of consequences that began more than thirty years ago when a Jewish traitor in America betrayed his country, the new American traitors -- like those working for the Wall Street Journal and other media outlets -- now look to Israel for guidance as to what they should incite America to do next to maintain the murderous adventure and thus keep raping America in the process. Here is a sample of how they achieve this: “A nuclear Iran on Mr. Obama's watch would be fatal to … his legacy.” As you can see, if they cannot threaten to ruin someone's chances at getting elected or reelected, they threaten to make his legacy meet a fatal ending.
These people never start an adventure they do not take to a calamitous end. They started this adventure more than thirty years ago, they never suspended it for a moment, they are fueling it like mad at this time and they will continue to fuel it till something happens that is more horrifying than anything we saw before. What that thing will be remains a mystery but what is noteworthy is that these people took the American giant to hell and dropped him there enough already. Things can still get worse; which is the reason why it stands to reason that this time, America should tell Israel: It's your turn to go to hell and stay there. We, as a proud and free people, shall have nothing to do with you anymore; not now, not ever.