The evidence is in that the Jewish Hate And Incitement
Machine (JHAIM) is running out of money or tricks or both by which to brainwash
its victims. That is clearly apparent at this time because the machine is failing
to attract even a semi-respectable character to do the hating and the
incitement for it.
To wit, the machine has convinced Frederick Deknatel – who
is no more knowledgeable in economic matters than a dog catcher – to attach his
name to an article that came under the title: “IMF Bailout Offers Little Relief
to Egypt Given el-Sissi's Track Record,” published on August 19, 2016 in World
Politics Review.
The JHAIM always had two main objectives. First, to sabotage
the economies of the countries whose blood the Jews cannot get to siphon off.
Second, to try and bring about regime change in the countries where the leaders
are no brain dead zombies of the kind that populates the District of Columbia .
As can be seen in the title of Deknatel's article, the leaders
of the JHAIM are predicting that no relief will come to Egypt even
after the IMF bailout, a speculation they hope will scare away potential
investors in the Egyptian economy. And they assert that President Sissi is the
problem, which is how they start every new project for regime change, thus
incite the Americans to drop everything they do, and work to realize the Jewish
fantasy.
You go through the article in search of one idea or insight
that may be identified as an original contribution by the author, and find
none. Instead, you discover that the article consists of using the sayings of
other writers, and placing them in a narrative that supports the JHAIM
objectives. Worse, despite the promise that the discussion is about the IMF
bailout failing to offer relief to Egypt , you find that the writer
never touches on that topic directly.
Instead, you find him say that Sissi has “pursued grandiose
development projects like the expansion of the Suez Canal
and a new administrative capital … designed to appeal to national pride.” He
adds that on top of that, Egypt
has “ongoing political turmoil that keeps the tourism industry down.” So you
wonder: Is that all he regards as Sissi's track record that will prevent Egypt from
allocating the IMF bailout money in a beneficial way?
To begin with, the political turmoil started long before
Sissi came to power. In fact, he came as a result of the turmoil. As to the
expansion of the Canal; it was made possible by a bond issue that the public
bought and paid for. As to the new capital city, it will be financed with local
and foreign private capital. The significance of all this is that not a single
penny of the government budget has gone into these projects or will go into
them.
Why is it important to mention all that? It is important
because the IMF loan is designed to offset the government fiscal deficit. Now,
if Frederick Deknatel were at least one notch more knowledgeable than a dog
catcher in matters relating to the economy, he would have talked about the
deficit, its causes and the possible solutions to it. But he did nothing of the
sort.
Even when he had the opportunity to add something of his own
to the discussion, he failed to see the significance of what someone he quoted
had said. Here is that part: “The IMF's mission chief in Egypt said that
the economic reform measures included a VAT and more cuts to energy subsidies …
According to the Times, he said that Egyptian officials have specified that the
added revenue would be used to increase food subsidies and social programs for
the poor”.
Would that solve the deficit problem or would it compound
the problem? There is certainly a legitimate debate that can be had here.
Instead of seizing the opportunity and doing something that is his own,
Deknatel the dog catcher, did this: “Sissi is surely fearful of stoking bread
riots like the ones in 1977, when then-President Anwar Sadat, as part of his
own loan deal with the IMF and World Bank, cut subsidies on basic foodstuffs”.
What's that about? It is the kind of talk that advances the
agenda of the JHAIM leaders but does nothing to raise the level of debate in America , or add
to the pool of knowledge that the citizens need to live their daily lives,
especially when dealing with a world that's getting more knowledgeable and more
sophisticated.