Nations boycott each other; they impose economic sanctions
on one another; America
even organizes what it can of the nations of the world to collectively sanction
one country or another. In fact, as far as I can determine, this American habit
of organizing the sanctioning of targeted nations was first acquired by the
Americans when the Jewish lobby pressured the administration of the day to work
on America 's allies, and
sanction Egypt
in an effort to prevent that country from building the Aswan Dam.
In time, the habit was progressively abused, and grew to the
point where it has become a self-defeating policy. You can see why this is the
case when you read the Bret Stephens column that came under the title: “Secretary
ScarJo” and the subtitle: “What the actress could teach John Kerry about
courage and clarity.” It was published in the Wall Street Journal on February
11, 2014.
When a country is sanctioned or boycotted, it does what it
can to break the affliction, and usually finds ways to mitigate it to one
degree or another. Egypt , Iraq , South Africa ,
North Korea , Cuba and a host
of Latin American, Asian and African countries did it. They all survived, even
flourished after that. It also happened to Israel but only because it was at
war with its neighbors, a condition that imposes a cease trade between the
combatants even if a ceasefire is worked out between them.
The difference between boycotting Israel
and everyone else is that the Jews see the treatment of Israel not as
an economic act they can work around to mitigate as much as possible, but see
it as something bigger than that. For this reason, the Jewish lobby that works
to impose sanctions on nations like Egypt ,
Iraq and Iran , also works to use American power to break
the boycott of Israel
by other nations. In fact, the lobby has managed to get the Congress of idiots
to pass a law punishing American companies that go along with the Arab boycott
of Israel .
Something like that was repeated in the Canadian Province
of Ontario ,
and I had a personal experience with it. Being a long time investor in Canadian
mining companies, I came to know many executives who always look out for new
opportunities locally and internationally. Upon hearing that gold was
discovered in commercial quantities in Egypt , I approached a number of
those executives and asked them if they would be interested to get involved in
that country. They told me about the law in Ontario
regarding the boycott of Israel .
They explained that the way around that law is to pour tons
of money in Israel
pretending to look for deposits you know are not there. If you don't do that,
you will be accused of antisemitism, dragged in front of the television cameras
where you will be expected to show contrition, even shed a few tears and ask
for forgiveness. This done, you will still be expected to pour tons of money in
Israel .
In any case, they said they will think about it and call me back. They never
did, but companies from other provinces and other nations went to Egypt where
they made big discoveries and are now doing good business.
Well, these were private conversations. No matter what I
could have done to express the savagery that the Jewish lobby employs to force
people to comply with their demands, I could not have done as good a job as I
can now, having the Bret Stephens column to illustrate my points.
He is telling the story of Scarlett Johansson, an actress
that was told to choose between being a Global Ambassador for the antipoverty
group known as Oxfam, or being a pitchwoman for an Israeli company. What
happens in a case like this is that the actors talk to their agents in Hollywood who advise them
what will be better for their careers. In this case, the choice between an
antipoverty group and staying in the acting business was no contest, and she
chose to stay in the business.
So then, what does someone like Stephens do with a story
like this? What he does is suggest that the actress can teach John Kerry
something about courage and clarity – as seen in the subtitle of the article.
But Kerry had nothing to do with this story, why drag him into it? Worse, why
suggest that he needs a lesson on courage and clarity so badly that he can
learn about them from an actress? You read the article and discover that the world
is as normal as it can be but that Israel and the Jews who support it
are out of step with the human character – which explains why the Jews continue
to be the pariahs of this planet.
In fact, the columnist sees that this incident is related to
another one in the sense that both have to do with the boycott of Israel . The
central figure in the other incident being John Kerry who warned the Israeli
leaders that if the talks with the Palestinians fail, Israel will face the kind
of “horribles” it fears the most; like that shown in the Scarlett Johansson
example. And so, our author advises that Kerry should have seen the boycott of Israel as an
affront and an outrage. This is irrelevant ... but who knows? Kerry may well
have felt that sort of outrage. The question however is this: what could he
have done?
To answer the question, Stephens does not specify what
concrete actions could have been taken, but chides Kerry for appearing to
express powerlessness. He then ventures to say a smart Aleck something: “A Secretary
of State Johansson would have shown more courage and presence of mind than
that.” And this is when you jump off your chair shouting the following: What
the bleep is this guy talking about? Did he expect John Kerry to call his agent
in Hollywood and
ask what to do?
This is the story that Stephens said he was going to tell.
As you can see, it leads to a series of questions that he could not answer, so
what does he do? He branches out into a number of other subjects, each of which
is loaded with inaccuracies that can only be responded to with a full length
article. Thus, he confuses the reader and leaves him with a bag full of
accusations leveled against the Palestinians. He makes it sound that because
John Kerry did not call his agent in Hollywood ,
he let the Palestinian President as well as the widow of Yasser Arafat and a
few others get away with things they should have been roasted for publicly. Is
this the duty of an American Secretary of State?