It has always been said that while the Jews have grandiose
fantasies regarding what they wish to acquire, they show little imagination
when it comes to getting there without tripping themselves. They have been
trying for centuries to run the world in a manner they thought will prompt
someone to hand it to them on a silver platter, but humanity has repeatedly
mauled them for trying.
Yes, human beings have at times let the Jews go a long way
towards implementing their goal before stopping them … and this is due to the
fact that they are a tolerant lot. But as the Jews have discovered to their
bitter chagrin, the humans may be tolerant to a point, but the point does not
stretch to infinity. Human beings have limits they sometimes express with lots
of warnings, and sometimes explosively without warning.
The truth is that grandiose fantasies develop in the
imagination of the Jews like nowhere else because their religion is not only a
religion but also their folklore. And that is based on a history, some of which
has roots in reality, but most of which is mutilated to a point it cannot be
matched with the record of proven facts. And what the Jews say about themselves
leads them to believe they have it in their DNA to create a Jewish Empire that
will equal the sum total of ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, Assyria, China, India,
Greece, Rome, Britain, France, the Soviet Union and America.
And so, what their leaders do at this time is rummage
through those histories to see how things were done then, and try to duplicate
them now. Their current preoccupation being Israel , they find that the work of
the French and the British a century ago suits their purposes just fine. And
that would be the Sykes-Picot Agreement according to which the two colonial
powers divided the Middle East and North Africa
into the kind of jurisdictions that served their own purposes.
And this is what you see John R. Bolton, a prominent Jewish
leader, do in his article: “Destroy the 'Islamic Sate,'” that was published in
National Review Online on August 25, 2014, and will appear in the September 8
issue of the National Review magazine. Because Bolton
is a lawyer by training, he does not show his hand as he lays out his case.
Instead, he looks for false reasons on whose coattails he can hitch a ride from
the periphery to the core of his argument. When he finds them, he inches his
way to the center where he takes a bow, and then pushes on the table a small
package inside of which his grandiose fantasy is described.
The first convenient coattail he finds is this: “The recent
military successes of the Islamic State have created a strategic crisis for the
United States .”
And here is another one: “the air strikes provided the refugees breathing space
[but] the Islamic State still has the initiative.” And here is how he comes
close to the core of his main argument: “We must now decide on U.S. strategic
objectives … This will require some unpleasant choices, as well as the
recognition that many policy options are unavailable until Obama leaves office
in 2017.”
Despite the fact that Obama still has two and a half years
to go before leaving office, Bolton starts to plan for what America must do
after he departs. Here is one of the suggestions: “America 's basic objective is clear:
We must seek to destroy the Islamic State.” Is this a novelty? Of course not.
In fact, the people on whose behalf Bolton is writing, had planned the invasion
of Iraq
and its destruction in the 1990s, fully a decade before the evidence to do so
was fabricated, and the actual deed was carried out.
Having decided on the destruction of the Islamic State,
Bolton goes on to describe his plan to reconstitute the Middle
East a la Sykes-Picot. You may call it Sykes-Picot 2 or
Sykes-Picot-Bolton. This done, he comes to the central point of his argument:
“Obviously, the central problem is Iran
itself, America 's
main regional adversary.” He wants to see a regime change in there, and no
nuclear deal. But how to achieve all that? Here is how: “concentrate on regime
change in Iran
by overtly and covertly supporting the opposition.” Here we go again.
Supporting the opposition is euphemism to mean fostering the
existing ethnic and confessional divisions. This is what brought the Middle East to the point where it is now. It is also the
reason why youngsters with Western passports go there to get trained and return
to do to the West what it did to their ancestral homelands.