Ever since Marshall McLuhan studied seriously the impact of
the media on cultures, much has been said and written about the subject by
other authors whose works continue to appear in the print and the audio visual
media. And the one thing we can take from this mountain of works is that
perception creates its own reality because the media has the ability to make
and shape the message – not only relay it from point A to point B.
And you know what, my friend? Someone else has known about
this – at least instinctively – for hundreds if not thousands of years. They
are the leaders who took the Jews from place to place; leading them into one
adventure after the other across the continents and throughout time. At first,
the Jewish leaders succeeded at creating false realities by using the medium at
hand to shape the message thus be received with open arms everywhere they went.
But being who they are, they overplayed their hand where they were allowed to,
only to see themselves kicked out from where they used to be the honored
guests.
The way it happens that the Jews manage to abuse the gift
they have at falsifying the message, is that the generation which suffers the
humiliation of being kicked out of one place, always fails to teach wisdom and
humility to the next generation. By the time that three or four generations
have passed, there would have risen Jewish leaders so grotesque as to look
someone in the eye and say to them: “I am saying these awful things to scare you
and force you to respect me. You should therefore take the cue from my posture,
be scared and start respecting me.” And the answer invariably has come back in
this form: “Go screw yourself, little stupid Jewboy. And when you're done,
remove your pornographic sight out of my face.”
That scenario has been playing itself out in America until
recently but with a twist that reflects the modern era; a time in which the
message is magnified by megaphones, and transmitted in every direction to
millions of receivers. This is also the era where communication travels not at
the speed of sound anymore but the speed of light which is nine hundred
thousand times faster. Thus, what we've been having till a few days ago were
Jewish leaders who banged their pieces on the computer keyboards, and Jewish
leaders who popped in from of cameras and microphones to tell the Iranians that
they are standing up and speaking out to scare the hell out of them. They
demanded that the Iranians be scared, and that they start respecting the mighty
Jew.
When the Iranians told the Jewish leaders in no uncertain
terms that they can go do it to themselves, the Jewish leaders got the message,
and started singing a different tune. This goes to show that it pays to treat
the Jews the way they try to treat others, and the way they demand that their
American lackeys treat the world. You can see how much the Jews have changed,
and how fast they did by reading two recent articles written by them.
The first appeared in the Washington Post on November 20,
2013 under the title: “U.S. should be wary of Iran's goal to dominate the
Middle East.” It was authored by Joseph Lieberman and Vance Serchuck. The
second appeared the next day, November 21, 2013 in National Review Online under
the title: “The Iranian Rapprochement Fantasy” and the subtitle: “The
foreign-policy establishment thinks Iran should concede nothing in
negotiations.” It was authored by Clifford D. May.
After a long introduction in which Lieberman and Serchuck
describe the history of negotiations with Iran the way they understand it, you
see them refrain from saying the things that Jews used to say – things like:
The way to get the Iranians to respect us is to force them to go down to their
knees because they know they must fear us. No, the Jews don't talk like this
anymore. Instead, Lieberman and Serchuck say this: “As with the Soviet Union,
Washington should understand that it faces a determined and resourceful
adversary.”
And if you want to know why this change of heart occurred,
you'll find the answer in the last paragraph of the article: “This may be the
irony of an Iranian agreement: Rather than pivot away from the Middle East, a
breakthrough with Tehran would increase the need for U.S. [presence] across the
region.” What's that about? Well, it's about America having it up to here with
an Israel that is using it like a shield to spread terror and mayhem in the
region then complain that the region has become a tough neighborhood. For this
reason, America has realized the time had come to look after its own legitimate
interests rather than the demonic interests of World Jewry. Now, it is the Jews
who are so scared they beg America to stay in the Middle East.
As to the Clifford May article, it begins by quoting the
Iranian foreign minister who said: “Any agreement that does not recognize the
rights of the Iranian people and does not respect these rights, has no chance.”
After that, May demonstrates what effect this Iranian stance has had on
American Jews and the non-Jews who used to parrot them. He does that by quoting
Leslie Gelb who is president of the Council on Foreign Relations. He also
quotes an editorial in the New York Times, and Jen Psaki who is spokeswoman for
the State department. And he mentions the New York Times columnist Tom Friedman,
and the Washington Post columnist David Ignatius.
He then comes up with his own “modest proposal.” It is not
idiotic bluster, it is not “let's scare them” and it is not “let's force them
down to their knees.” Instead, it is something that John Kerry can say to the
Iranians. Here it is: “Look, I'm a reasonable guy. But there's also Congress –
those guys are cynical. In the U.S., we have the warmongers and don't have your
freedom [from Jewish tyranny.] So help me, and all those warmongers – we'll prove
them wrong.” And to that, I would say amen.