The more people become civilized, the more they reject the
notion that they can judge something based on feelings alone. At the same time,
they embrace the idea that observation and analysis are the way to do things.
And so, having reached the height of its scientific and technological
achievements, America
became that kind of nation and so remained till the decade of the 1960s when
something happened that started a new trend.
People got tired of relying on reason alone to determine
what they should or should not do in their daily lives, and wanted to explore
what their emotions were telling them. It was a sound idea designed to bring
balance between the dictates of the mind and those of the heart. The trouble
was that many parallel developments were taking place in America and the world at the time, and there
were groups in America
doing their utmost to exploit the situation because they had hidden agendas
they wished to service.
Foremost among these groups were the self-appointed Jewish
leaders who were having difficulty distorting reality with their disinformation
apparatus because the multiplication of information systems in the hands of
others was rendering the Jewish propaganda machine ever more useless. And so,
those Jewish leaders began to tell the American people they should dismiss the
proof they see with their own eyes because what matters is not what they see;
what matters is what lurks in the hearts of people. That is, the American
people must not be disturbed by the savagery they see the Jews commit in Palestine ; they must
worry about the evil intent of the Palestinians themselves. And if they don't
know how bad that is because they don't see it, the Jewish journalists, pundits
and commentators will gladly describe it for them.
What's more, in the same way that a prostitute will make you
believe she is a virgin by constantly accusing others of having lost their
virginity, the Jews made the American people believe they have good intentions
by the mere fact that they kept accusing the Palestinians of having bad
intentions. And that was the moment when the Jewish propaganda machine managed
once again to have the upper hand. It did so because it could boil every
incident down to a simple message: Trust us and not them because we have good
and saintly intentions, and they have bad and evil intentions.
And like every cultural trend that does not confine itself
to the area in which it was initiated, this one too started to spread to other
aspects of American life. You can see how this happened in the editorial that
was published on February 1, 2014 under the title: “After Russia 's INF
Violations” in National Review Online (NRO). Not only will you recognize it as
being the product of Jewish influence, you will see how the trend metastasized
in time and in space by the fact that the late Jack Kemp used it in 1987, and
the editors of NRO are using it now.
Actually, the editorial begins with a quote from Kemp in
which he accused the Soviets of cheating on arms-control agreements way back
then. What the editors of today probably do not realize is that Kemp was fully
aware of the fact that the most egregious violation of arms-control was first
committed by the Americans who exploded a nuclear device in outer space when that
was strictly forbidden. They lied about it till they could not lie anymore at
which time they admitted to what they did, and quickly bragged that they were
able to do something the Soviets did not have the capability of duplicating.
Does that sound similar to today's NSA activities around the world? The more
things change ...
So you go through the editorial to see what it is that the
editors of NRO are trying to communicate but you only meet a number of
unresolved puzzles. First, they say this: “Russia recently violated [the]
agreement … We know that many arms-control advocates simply don't care.” So you
want to know how the editors know all that. And they tell you: “Evidence of
violations has been popping up in the Russian press.” Russian press? That's
where American editors get their information from? Then, they say this:
“Opponents of treaties worry about the effectiveness of monitoring and
compliance systems.” Well, do they believe or do they not believe what the
Russian press is reporting?
The editors of NRO do not answer that question but they tell
you this: Forget what is happening now and look what happened during the Reagan
era: “The U.S. 's
withdrawal of nuclear forces weakened the position of our [European] allies and
raised the risk of war on the continent.” But that was decades ago and no war
has erupted. Why are you whining now? True, no war erupted then but “today, it
is no better.” Why is that? Because China ,
India , Pakistan , North
Korea and Iran
are building the same sort of weapons, and they have malice lurking in their
hearts. How do you know that? We know because we sense it. And this is why you,
the people of America ,
must not mind what you see; it is what we sense that counts. So let us tell you
what you need to know; and let you believe everything we say.
Is there something else that you sense? Yes. Putin of Russia
wants to expand his influence over his neighbors, and the only way he can do
that is by building more intermediate nuclear missiles. How bad is that? He is
probably already cheating on the agreement. So then, what do you suggest? There
are reports the congress will do something. Is that good enough for you? The
trouble is that the “president has already entered into one agreement, New
START,” with the Russians. Why did he do that? “He would like more agreements …
and reductions in warheads.” Is that bad? He should have been more “honest
about evidence of the Russian INF violations. New START never would have
passed” congress if he were honest. What violations are you talking about? The
ones that appeared in the Russian press.
Did you say the ones that appeared in the Russian press?
Yes, and also the New York Times. You mean the violations appeared in the
American and Russian press, and the congress did not see them? Yes, but the
important thing is not that the congress did not see them; the important thing
is that the president was not honest about them. He should have told the
congress to read Pravda and the New York Times.
So where does that lead you? It leads us to distrust Iran . Did you
say Iran ?
Yes, Iran .