Sunday, May 5, 2013

Public, Public, Public, Always Public


Just look at this: “Putting this message into practice will require much sharper, clearer public responses by the White House and State Department to violations of basic democratic and rule-of-law norms.” What do you think this is about? It's another unsolicited advice to the American government as to the best way to tell the world that America is still run not by elected Americans but the unelected leaders of AIPAC and the Tel Aviv/New York (TANY) axis of hate, incitement and disinformation.

The quote is from an article written by Thomas Carothres and Nathan J. Brown under the title: “Recalibrating U.S. policy in Egypt” published in the Washington Post on May 3, 2013. It fits the current AIPAC-TANY axis policy of planting make-believe journalists at conferences where an official of the American government would be standing to fill the media on the state of legitimate concerns. Instead of pursuing legitimate news, however, the plants interrupt the flow of information by cornering the official and getting him or her to say something that send a PUBLIC message to the world informing it who is in charge of what used to be superpower America.

With this in mind, what do Carothers and Brown talk about in the article? This is a good question because they have adopted an approach that is smarter than their predecessors. Unlike what those guys were doing over the past two years, our authors avoided writing an article that could have made them look like bulls in a China shop. Instead, they started with a conciliatory tone and gradually built up to the inevitable call that the elected leaders of Egypt do what the elected leaders of America do. It would be to serve not the people that elected them but the Jews of Israel and everywhere else in the world who did not elect them. And when this will be done, call the whole exercise a perfect example of democratic performance.

Thus, after the pleasantries, Carothers and Brown switched gear with this: “Yet, in the past five months, Egyptian politics has taken a seriously troubling turn.” They went on to describe a situation that may not be very pleasant but that is not much worse than to say, for example, they saw people wear brown shoes on a Wednesday in Cairo. Well, I assure the two “thinkers” of whatever tank they come from, that many in this world, including some American cities, would trade their troubles for those of Egypt.

The authors of the article then do something that makes you change your mind about them being smarter than their predecessors. They give examples of what the government of Egypt is doing wrong. This is what they list: “Examples include rushing through a new constitution and appointing a new prosecutor general … Supporters have gone to court to harass their critics.” Hey, guys. This is what you do when you follow the rule-of-law. You cannot at the same time accuse the government of not following the rule of law, and chide it because it does. Writing this kind of nonsense makes you sound not like the solid thinkers of a think tank but the solid substance of a septic tank. You stink.

They already sound almost as bad as their predecessors and, worse, they don't stop here. They come even closer by taking up the subject of Egypt's finances. They do, however, avoid sounding like the in-your-face assholes that their predecessors have sounded like. Instead of barking: “Pressure the IMF and the allies to deny Egypt the financing it may need,” they say this: “The Obama administration is commendably trying to help Egypt … yet Obama officials are clinging to their narrative in which the [government] is well-intentioned, even if inexperienced and sometimes heavy-handed.” A softer new approach but just as stinky as the old.

All in all, what Thomas Carothers and Nathan Brown have done is speak softly to better succeed at convincing the Obama administration to publicly bark at Egypt as loudly, sharply and clearly as it can.

They want this to happen not because they want Egypt to hear whatever message there is, but because they want the world to hear a message to the effect that America is still controlled by the Jews.

That's the bottom line. That is the intent of the article.