The Need to deprogram Heads and Computers

Imagine I ask for some things, and people agree to do as I ask. So I ask that anyone who will be writing about the Middle East begins by acknowledging in print: there are hundreds of times more rail accidents in North America than in Egypt.

What do you think this will do to the conversation? In case you didn't answer the question, such act will dramatically alter the conversation because it will help deprogram the heads of the writers who cannot say something about Egypt without calling up the computer subroutine that adds to the article something to the effect that Egypt suffers frequent train accidents due to poor maintenance. It will deprogram the heads of writers who will, in turn, erase the misleading subroutine from their computers.

And while they are at it, those writers will want to deprogram their heads of the other false ideas that have been hammered into them. They will also want to erase the corresponding subroutines they have been keeping in the computer memories. It would be nice if this were to happen because the disinformation viruses that the Jewish propaganda machine has planted in the heads of people as well as the memories of computers, have reached such epidemic levels, the West is now doing the equivalent of cutting its nose to spite its face when it comes to dealing with the Arab and Muslim worlds commercially, diplomatically and militarily.

It would be even nicer if the North American writers understood that what they were told about the prevailing attitudes toward religion in the Middle East is pure disinformation. Take for example this assertion: “Our nation's 'elite' knows of the 88 percent support in Egypt for the death penalty for apostasy, and the 62 percent support in Pakistan.” Well, let me tell you, this is hogwash put out by pollsters who lost the confidence of the public in their own countries (bear in mind how wrong they were in Britain,) and so they got into the business of cooking survey results that stir up the hatred and the fear of the public.

The story that came out is to the effect that the people who say they conducted these polls first went to Iran, which is Muslim but not Arab, and asked for statistics on the death penalty for apostasy. They discovered that despite the fatwa on Salman Rushdie, no one was executed for apostasy in that country. Disappointed, the pollsters who wanted to remain relevant pretended to conducted surveys in several Arab and Muslim countries. But instead of being truthful about their work, they practiced demagoguery because they knew that hate and fear interest people so much, it pays to dabble in them.

Knowing all of this, suppose now that people agree not to write about the Middle East until they put down this set of truths: Islam never attacked Christianity and does not attack it now. What happened was that Western Christians started attacking Islam a thousand years ago, and never ended the habit. Despite all this, Islam is now protecting the Christians in its midst as it has done throughout the centuries.

If this were to happen, the relationship between the two religions will change so much that no one would ever again think of doing what Pamela Geller did. And there would be no writing like the two articles that appeared in National Review Online. There, you'll find: “Pamela Geller's Critics Are proving Her Point,” a piece written by David French and published on May 7, 2015. You'll also find: “Why Won't Pamela Geller Shut Up?” a piece written by Rich Lowry and published on May 8, 2015.

It is in the David French article that you'll find the quote on statistics mentioned earlier. Without it, there would not have been that article. Also, there would not have been a Rich Lowry article without the following misleading assertion: “Coptic Christians won't concede error for worshiping wrong God.” Instead, there would have been an acknowledgment that the Muslims of Egypt descended into the streets by the hundreds of thousands to circle and protect with their bodies, the homes of Christians and their churches.

And why is that? Because evil people from outside the country believed they saw an Egyptian “vulnerability” and decided to take advantage of it. They paid a few local provocateurs to stir up trouble, but got back very little for their money. It turned out that the bond connecting Egyptians to each other was stronger than the destructive power of the most demonic maniacs – Jews and their gentile running dogs – that feed on chaos.

There is a great deal of beauty in the Arab and Muslim worlds. Too bad the likes of David French and Rich Lowry cannot see it or be enchanted by it. They don't know what they are missing.