There was a time when Rudy Giuliani was mayor of New York City . He
instituted a tough anti-crime policy, which different people appreciated to a
different degree. In fact, a number of his policemen appreciated it so much,
they cited it as reason for committing horrible acts against the citizens they
were supposed to protect. The most outrageous of these acts came to be known as
the “plunger horror”.
What happened in this case was that a squad of New York 's “finest” did
not like the look of a Black Man's innocent demeanor, and so they called it a
crime. To punish the man on the spot, they grabbed him, stripped him naked, and
shoved a toilet plunger in his anus so deep, they ruptured much of his internal
tissues and some organs. When asked why they did it, they said it was in
furtherance of the Giuliani policy for which they had developed an unshakable
devotion. Here is a question: Is Rudy Giuliani responsible for the animal-like
behavior of the beasts in blue?
Well, no human being would answer that question with a yes.
However, there are groups who want us to believe they are human beings, and yet
would respond with a yes to a similar question in similar circumstances. The
editors of the Wall Street Journal are a group that wishes to be so recognized
and so honored. This is why they deputized Dorothy Rabinowitz, a member of
their board, to express those sentiments in writing. She did it in an article
that came under the title: “Denying the Obvious About Islamist Terror” and the
subtitle: “After another ISIS-inspired shooting, Philadelphia 's mayor joins the chorus; It's
not about religion, no sir.” The article was published on January 12, 2016 in
the Journal.
Rabinowitz seized on an incident that took place in Philadelphia to argue
that because the criminal who carried out a violent act, said that he did it in
the name of Islam ... Islam was responsible. Now this question: What's the
difference, if any, between this criminal individual, and Giuliani's rogue
cops? The answer is that when it comes to the reason why the two have
associated what they did with an existing ideology – their motivation is the
same in some ways, and different in other ways.
In both cases the perpetrators wanted to convey the notion
that they were not alone in thinking the way they did. They found solace in
believing that Giuliani must have been on the side of the New
York rogue cops; ISIS must have been on the side of the Philadelphia criminal.
This, in their view, should diminish what people see as being their bad
behavior. As to the difference between the two parties, it is that the Giuliani
cops must have thought their idol will use his position to reduce the
punishment they will receive. When it comes to the Philadelphia
criminal, his reward has been the notoriety he gained for saying he did it for ISIS . From the obscure criminal who was going to rot in
jail unnoticed by anyone, he instantly became a media star rivaling Donald
Trump's appeal.
Having understood the reality of the situation, the mayor of
Philadelphia
explained it to the citizens of his city. Hundreds of miles away, the editors
of the Wall Street Journal saw things differently, and had their Dorothy
Rabinowitz say so in her article. Here is that passage: “The mayor's comments
[were] bizarre in their determined denial of the deluge of facts delivered by
top police officials standing next to him.” The trouble is that she did not
quote those officials directly because, in fact, what they said did not
contradict what the mayor said.
But the contradiction to the falsehood that she, herself, has
uttered came from another direction – from higher up as a matter of fact. And she
reports about it with regret because the truth does not match her point of
view. Here is what she says: “Americans have learned … that such assaults
should in no way be connected to Islamic faith of any kind.” And this leaves us
with one final question: What on Earth is going on?
What's going on is that the Jewish Establishments in America and
worldwide have been trying to destroy the Muslim Establishments in two dozen
Arab countries and three dozen non-Arab Muslim countries. They nurtured,
mentored and motivated the unhappy youngsters in those countries, urging them
to turn against their own Establishments, and shake them up from within. The
attempt failed, then took a serious turn when unhappy youngsters in the “West”
learned the lesson of the Jews, and turned against their own Establishments …
like it happened in Philadelphia
and elsewhere.