Michael Makovsky and Blaise Misztal wrote an article that
was published in the Wall Street Journal on July 9, 2012 under the title: “Iran
Has No 'Right' To Enrich Uranium” and the subtitle: “The U.S. and its allies
should make clear what the Nonproliferation Treaty says.” This is a great
piece, my friend, because it shows how the Judeo-Israeli mind works – in a
backward, upside-down and dyslexic manner. It is also self-defeating.
Before I point out the relevant quotes -- which are lengthy
-- let me explain how these two characters have presented their argument. I
begin with an analogy. Suppose I say to you, I have searched the laws of the
land and found nothing in the books that specifically say Makovsky and Misztal
have the inalienable right to be free of harassment therefore anyone who wishes
to harass them should be encouraged to do so. You would think I am ready for a
sojourn in a mental institution, would you not? Well, this is exactly what the
two characters have done. Therefore it must be that they are ready for a mental
institution, which is just about where they are now being published in the Wall
Street Journal.
Here is how they make their argument. The first they do is
say this: “a central Iranian negotiating demand is acknowledgment of its
'right' to enrich uranium under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Although
spurious, this assertion has gone without a forceful public challenge. By
categorically refuting the claim, the United
States … could fortify and clarify [its] stance against Iran 's nuclear
program.” What they are saying here is that because America does not like the
Iranian nuclear program, it should categorically refute Iran's claim even if
this will set a precedent that will detonate a free-for-all explosion for any
mentally challenged to tell a neighbor: You don't have a specific right to
breathe fresh air, you are breathing fresh air, therefore I stand my ground and
gun you down.
Further down the article, they expand on their screwy notion
like this: “its [Iran 's]
chief negotiator demanded that 'any right which is indicated in the
Nonproliferation Treaty should be respected.'” To which they respond like this:
“The Treaty … grants no such right. Its Article IV merely states: 'Nothing in
this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all
Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy
for peaceful purposes without discrimination...' If having an inalienable right
is not enough for these two, what do they suggest Iran must have? Netanyahu's
blessing? What do they think Iran
is? An American Congress of male bimbos and traitors?
And there is more as they double down on their screwy
notion. That's how they do it: “This raises two problems for Iran 's
assertion. First, enrichment isn't specifically enumerated.” Yes, no more than
the inalienable right of Makovsky and
Misztal to breathe fresh air. And guess what, my friend, they even triple down
on their screwy notion by quoting a dead nuclear strategist who said this: “the
NPT is, after all, a treaty against proliferation, not for nuclear
development.” Guess what, Mike and Blaise, against proliferation does not mean
against Iran .
It means this: Nothing shall affect the inalienable right of Iran to develop
nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination. Get it? Without
discrimination. Know what that is?
Then, in a typically Judeo-Yiddish fashion, they try to have
it both ways but manage only to torpedo what they have built up so far, however
flimsy that was to begin with. Here is how they do it this time: “Iran has
consistently … denied the IAEA unrestricted access to its nuclear
facilities...” Well, if this is the reason for opposing Iran 's nuclear program, the subject is being
discussed between Iran
and the (P5 +1). You cannot use this argument before the negotiations have
ended to say that Iran
has no inalienable right to enrich uranium – unless, of course, you are stupid
enough to torpedo the bulk of your earlier arguments; which you just did,
suckers.
This done, they go into a confused rant at the end of which
they acknowledge that Iran
is winning the world public opinion by the force of its argument and the
rightness of its cause. Thus, to trip Iran and defeat its effort, the two
authors urge the American administration to work: “to prevent Iranian
grandstanding from weakening [American] stance or skewing public opinion. It's
time to unequivocally refute Iran 's
fallacious claim of a right to enrich uranium.” What a weak presentation which
serves only to display the hate that these people are capable of generating; a
hate that boomerangs on them time after time, and consumes them in a hellish
fire of their own making.
Good people keep telling them they are their own worst
enemies, and they don't believe it. What can we do to save them from
themselves? They are a hopeless bunch.