Two Jewish so-called pundits, writing in the same
publication a day apart, represent a case study on how deeply into the cesspool
of confusion they, and those like them, were able to drag America over the
decades – they who are never satisfied with what they get from an America that
already caters to Israel's every whim at the expense of its own people and to
their detriment.
The pundits are (1) John Podhoretz who wrote an article
under the title: “Both Obama, GOP sound ridiculous discussing ISIS,” published
in the New York Post on November 17, 2015; and (2) Benny Avni who wrote: “France 's
president has always been tougher than Obama.”
Being members of the Jewish Establishment, otherwise known
as the Jewish lobby, both pundits responded in writing to the events that saw
young terrorists conduct a murderous operation in France . In fact, most nations on
the planet responded to those events – each in its own way – including the United States of America .
As can be seen from the titles of the two articles, our two authors are
expressing unhappiness with America 's
response while admiring that of a foreigner. No, it's not Benjamin Netanyahu or
David Cameron or Winston Churchill this time but – believe it or not – it's
Francois Hollande, the President of France whose nation was shaken by the
terrorist attack.
The two pundits would have liked to see Barack Obama, the
American President, act more like an aggrieved Frenchman than the French
President. They would have wanted him to lunge head-on into the fray before his
counterpart had the time to do so. This would have allowed the American to take
the lead – which is what the Jews always counsel – because in their view,
America must remain the policeman of the world or, to put it another way, the
never-asleep and always trigger-happy sheriff of the global village.
Podhoretz began his article by attacking “the would-be
leaders of the Republican Party” who are running to be President of the United States .
After reporting on, and denigrating what each of them had said, he dismissed
them collectively with this remark: “The sheer mind-numbing, stomach churning
unseriousness on display is beyond appalling.” This done, he quickly turns his
attention to Barack Obama, and says the following: “But then, so was the
response of the Leader of the Free World.”
The author uses the word “response” to tell how President
Obama responded verbally and militarily to the attack that took place in
France, describing the president's reaction like this: “Obama took to a
microphone to declare his anti-ISIS policy was sound,” and no mention of
ordering the military anywhere. This being opposite to the kind of policy that
the Jewish lobby has been advocating since they took control of America 's
foreign policy, Obama took pain to explain the rationale behind his thinking.
He said this: “I'm not interested in pursuing some notion of
American leadership or America
winning, or other slogan that has no relationship to what will protect the
American people.” Based on this lack of swagger in the W. Bush style, Podhoretz
concludes that Obama does not intend to win against ISIS
because he thinks that victory might hamper the goal of protecting the American
people. Oh, what a scandalous stance!
So much for John Podhoretz. As to Benny Avni, this one has a
difficult time believing that France
is no more a part of the United States of America
than Israel
ever was. In fact, he always wrote about Israel
as if it were a part of America ,
and now writes as if France
were a part of America .
Or maybe he believes that the world is the jurisdiction of sheriff America , the
superpower that's under the control of Jews like himself.
Given that the President of France responded militarily to
an attack on his country, and that Obama failed to do likewise, Avni views the
latter as having neglected to discharge his duty as commander in chief. To
punish him, he contrasts the two leaders, praising one and not the other. Here
is how he does that: “Francois Hollande is showing resolve, maturity and global
leadership – just what wars require.” Take that as a reprimand, Barack Obama,
and don't you ever forget it.
Avni continues to make a case for war despite the fact that
Obama explained he was avoiding war to protect the American people. In fact,
our pundit – like all Jewish pundits – assigns a higher priority to the Jewish
interest in seeing ISIS defeated, than to America's interest in sparing the
lives of its people … lives that President Obama wants to protect at all cost,
including the chagrin of the Jews. Oh, what a scandalous stance!
But Avni is not done yet because he still has another
comparison to make. Look at this: “Unlike Hollande, who has advocated war
regardless of public resistance, Obama keeps telling American voters that this
isn't our war … That's too bad … Regrettably, we're unlikely to get American
leadership till the next president takes residence in the White House.”
As you can see, even the Jews cannot change the commander in
chief like they change socks; they must wait for the right time as designated
by the Constitution. But give it time, and you'll see them try to amend the
Constitution to make it so that they can replace the American President like
they change socks.