The nation of America is polarized, its culture
is polarized, its Congress is polarized … What's going on? This is a good
question that merits an honest answer. It is this: Jewish haggling was thought
to be an expression of democracy, and was allowed to permeate the American
culture. Instead of enriching it – as it was thought – the haggling had the
effect of injecting poison into the body of the American Republic
Look how many programs were broadcast electronically, how
many book chapters were written, how many articles were published ... in brief,
look how many millions of words were uttered over the years – all to haggle
over the phrase “Radical Islam.” And here it is, uttered once again by David
Harsanyi who wrote: “By Rejecting the Phrase 'Radical Islam,' Obama Rejects
Reality,” an article that was published on June 17, 2016 in National Review
Online.
For thousands of years, Jewish haggling has consisted of
something like character (A) saying to character (B): You did me wrong,
therefore you owe me an apology and compensation. And character (B) responding:
No, it's you who did me wrong, therefore you owe me an apology and
compensation. The accusations went back and forth like a tennis ball, with each
side mentioning words, events, personalities and what have you to make their
point … with (A) defining the words one way; and (B) defining them another way.
In the end the hagglers agreed on nothing, and remained polarized.
This is the state in which the American nation finds itself
at this time, having absorbed the toxic Jewish pretense of a democracy. The
country has been culturally and spiritually impoverished, having also forgotten
how to create the wealth that used to enrich it materially. But all is not lost,
say the Jews, suggesting that a set of pompous words – such as being an
exceptional nation – can be used to define America , thus make it look as
glorious as ever even when it no longer is. And they urge cultural America to go
to bed at night like the pauper who sleeps on the sidewalk, happy to have found
a morsel to eat in a nearby garbage can.
Feeding America
more garbage is what David Harsanyi is doing in his article. He begins it like
this: “Telling the truth is essential to winning the war against the
terrorists.” And he deplores the fact that President Obama has rejected the
suggestion made by the Republican candidate running for President, who equated
terrorism with Islam. But that is the truth, says Harsanyi; the two are one and
the same. He adds that we must say so even if it offends the Muslim World with
whom we live and work and share the planet.
Well then, if to tell that “truth” regardless of the
consequences, will make us win the war against the terrorists, we need to know
how this is going to happen. After all, we don't want to risk losing a war we
started, and find ourselves stuck with the consequences too. So you go through
the article trying to find out how he proposes that the mere saying 'radical
Islam and terror are equatable' will lead to winning the war against
terrorists. Alas, you find nothing that would tie that cause with that effect,
but find a rambling rhetoric that contains telltales which put together, say
something different.
You find the author objecting to President Obama demanding
“that Americans act as if all faiths are equally tolerant.” With that
objection, Harsanyi means to say that all faiths are not equal. He later
explains that “Islamic terrorism is a unique movement that threatens us in a
way that the random madman opening fire in a theater does not.” Setting aside
his weird preference, you realize he is saying that Islam is not just different
from the other faiths; it is that a Muslim madman is inferior to a madman from
any other faith.
Whether or not you agree with that argument, you consider it
a profound proposition. And when someone says something profound, he usually
ends the presentation with a big overarching idea. So you look for that idea at
the end of the article, and find the following:
“I'm not sure why a peaceful Muslim would not appreciate
being set apart from Islamists by the president. ’Radical Islam' distinguishes
between extremists and moderates … what purpose does ignoring this distinction
achieve? The president has yet to explain”.
No, David, no. The president has nothing to explain. It is
you who must explain why you do not discard the idea of Islam being a “unique
movement.” Why do you refuse to see that the difference between extremist and
moderate Muslims is the same as the difference between extremist and moderate
Christians, and the same as the difference between extremist and moderate of
any religion?
Had you done that early in the article, you would not have
made an ass of yourself suggesting that you would rather be in a movie theater
with your family, and be cut down by Christian bullets rather than be in a
nightclub and be cut down by Muslim bullets. The blood that is spilled will be
of the same color in both instances.
Finally, when America
will realize that Jewish haggling has nothing to do with democracy, America will
get back to making sense in its daily discourses. When this happens, the
country will find solutions to its problems.