Sunday, May 3, 2015

'Democratic' Jerks trying to jerk the World

This article is my reaction to Matthew Continetti's “The Appalling Mr. Zarif Javad Zarif,” a piece he published on May 2, 2015 in National Review Online. Before I review it, let me tell you something about my personal experience over the more than half century that I lived on this continent.

The first thirty months or so that I had been here prepared me somewhat for what was coming, but not enough to withstand the ferocity of what came in the Summer of 1967, without being shaken to the last fiber of my being. What happened then was that Israel launched a savage blitzkrieg on the Sinai Peninsula using the most modern weapons that France had supplied it. In concert with that, the Jewish establishment of North America launched a comparable propaganda blitz on this society.

Thirty months had taught me that far from being independent in their thinking, the people who grew up here under the so-called system of democracy were not equipped with enough yearning for freedom of thought or conscience to compete with even a poodle that is yearning to jump off the lap of its master and free-range for a few seconds. And so, when 1967 happened, the audio-visual and print media of this continent fired at the Egyptian nation and its people a never ending barrage of slanderous utterances that came in every form of speech and every color you can imagine.

In fact, if you did not see who was speaking, you could not tell if that was a rabbi whose volcano in the belly had erupted, or a gentile that was imitating the bark of a thousand dogs in the hope of getting a raise or a promotion from his Jewish boss. And when people like me tried to join the conversation with a different point of view, we discovered that the sea in which we tried to swim was made not of free-flowing ideas, but of Jewish and gentile jerks pretending to practice free speech while physically turning off any voice that refused to echo the barks that the Jewish establishment stuffed in the mouths of the people it allowed to speak.

Whether radio talk shows or television talk shows (sometimes called cross-country checkup,) the jerks that ran these programs turned off the microphone on me repeatedly when I refused to answer a direct question by uttering the obligatory insult at my country of birth or my race. In fact, these people were trying to jerk not only Egypt but the whole world. They did so not because they were thinking but because the Jews told them to.

So I started to go visit these people in their studios and their offices. This is when they made it clear to me that even though there are a million voices out there echoing the Jewish and Israeli position, I had no right to try and balance that position with my lone voice. Hell, I did not even have the right to balance myself by presenting both sides of the argument. All I could do, if I wanted to be published, was to attack, attack and attack the race of people from which I came.

And this, my dear reader, is precisely the kind of mentality you see at work in the Continetti article. Here is the most revealing passage: “Zarif refused to accept culpability for spreading disorder in the Middle East, wouldn't say if U.N. inspectors will have access to Iranian military sites, said Iran has no intention of speaking to the Jewish state, and took every opportunity to fling sarcasm and insult and enmity toward Netanyahu, Senator Tom Cotton, and America in general.”

What this says is that Matthew Continetti does not realize this is the way that free people speak when they find themselves accosted by even a handful of people like himself. These would be people to whom every thought is political, whether it is reached by free thinking minds, or it is the echo of lies and disinformation spewed by the Jewish hate machine. Whatever else Continetti says to describe the Zarif visit to New York, he rendered it meaningless by suggesting, as he does, that the Iranian guest should have spoken not what he thought but what would have pleased Netanyahu.

In fact, Zarif was there to express his point of view and that of his country, not there to warm the lap of Netanyahu or his representative in America. If, as reported, most of the audience was polite and respectful, it is because the occasion dictated that it be so. As for Continetti judging it to be sycophantic, that's because he has not looked at himself in the mirror as he sat like a Chihuahua warming the lap of Netanyahu.

Hell, even Netanyahu would get tired of carrying in his lap a thing that lacks the spirit of independence as badly as Matthew does. It would bore him to tears.