Either the editors of the Wall Street Journal are in on it,
or they are the first people to be deceived by it. In fact, the game that's
being played at this time seems to go something like this: If you cannot trick
them because they know who you are, disguise yourself and go trick them or find
someone who will trick them for you.
The editors are telling how impressed they are by the letter
that was signed by 51 anonymous “diplomats” of the State Department. It is a
letter whose message they want the world to know they are buying. It “calls for
military strikes and the ouster of dictator Bashar Assad,” they assure the
readers. All that is contained in the piece that the editors wrote under the
title: “The Syrian Catastrophe” and the subtitle: “A diplomatic revolt against
Obama's determined inaction,” published in the Journal on June 18, 2016.
They go on to say that: “American priorities for Syria [should
be] regime change, the use of military force [followed by] hard-nosed U.S.-led
diplomatic effort.” Come to think of it, this has always been the neocon wish
for all the Arab and Muslim countries. Obama bought it for Libya ,
resulting in the horror show that continues to play itself to this day. But
then Obama came to his senses having realized he was misled by the neocons
populating the State Department. He rejected that same fate for Syria ; the reason why the neocons disguised
themselves as someone else, and came to advocate a Libya
encore for Syria .
To make sure no one will suspect there is a deception here,
the editors played a well known Jewish sleight of hand. They strongly asserted
a false viewpoint and followed it with the denigration of someone – the Left.
Here is how they did it: “This is remarkable. These rebels aren't the 'neocons'
of the liberal myth.” However, they refrained from naming the rebels. Until
they do, we must assume these were floor sweepers; a bunch of nobodies who were
promised a bonus if they signed a letter that might well have been written by
Dennis Ross, working for Israel 's
Likud Party like he has been for decades.
What you need to do now, my friend is study how that whole
thing was organized. When done, try to deduce from the study the mental state
of the organizers. By now, you'll find yourself marveling at the level of panic
and hysteria that is gripping these people. Indeed, not realizing how much they
are revealing, the editors begin their piece like this: “A day after CIA
Director John Brennan testified [in Congress] there's more disagreement in the
Obama ranks.” They just betrayed themselves like they can't begin to imagine.
How on Earth can 51 rebels – in a single day – get the same
idea, get organized and write a letter expressing the point of view that
America's priorities for Syria should be regime change and the ouster of Bashar
Assad through the use of military strikes? Not only that, it took these people
just another day to organize the leakage of that letter to the two most
prominent publications in the country. And they accomplished all that before
the head of the State Department, John Kerry, had had the time to read the
letter.
So marveled you are by now, you believe that the next time
Netanyahu goes to have his ego inflated and stroked on the podium of the United
States Congress, he should be rewarded not with 29 standing ovations for not
knowing what he's talking about; he should be rewarded with 99 of them for
contributing to the process of turning the American State Department into a
congressional-style bastion of brain-dead zombies in a panic.
Another indication that the editors of the Wall Street
Journal are more likely to be in on the trick than they are victims of the
deception, is the fact that they go on to strut many of the neocon talking
points. To this end, they start enumerating the horrors unfolding in the Levant
with this observation: “Syria's chaos has also incubated the rise of the
Islamic State...” and then make the remark that “Mr. Obama carries on with
business as usual … This is the President who stayed silent in 2009 when
Iranians took to the streets...”
That is, the editors of the Wall Street Journal are
lamenting the fact that Barack Obama did not double down on the horror that was
started by George W. Bush – something that Obama could have done by destroying Syria the way that Bush destroyed Iraq . They also
lament that Obama passed-up the opportunity to start the process of doing that
same thing to Iran when a handful of youngsters rioted there, apparently
demanding to have access to Chinese-made denims, and to American made
hamburgers served with French fries and ketchup.
Of course, those editors and others like them have not a
single brain cell with the ability to connect the correct dots, and realize
that when they try to impress the young of the other cultures with denims and
fast foods, the young of the other cultures will try to impress America's young
with an ideology that is far more consequential.
Do you want that for America , you editors of the Wall
Street Journal?