Journalism as a Noise making Machine

It had to happen. Someone had to come and make it official: American journalism is not only in the sewer; the sewer is overflowing with waste.

The honor of exposing this reality to the world goes to Ilan Berman of the American Foreign Policy Council who wrote: “Egypt's Economy Is in Big Trouble,” an article that was proudly published on September 28, 2016 in a rag calling itself The National Interest.

You know that an article pretending to discuss the economy is counterfeit when the writer does nothing more than quote the political statements of other writers, and does the kind of math that would make a 10 year-old laugh. That's exactly what Ilan Berman did, basing his article not on the analysis of any data but on the writings of other individuals and other publications.

He then does the kind of math that makes him sound like a floor sweeper pretending to give a lecture on brain surgery. He begins by establishing that 40 percent of Egypt's 90 million population is between the ages of 10 and 20 years. He does not realize that this means 36 million babies would have had to be born in a 10 year period – an average of 3.6 million per year. A simple division would have told him this brings the growth rate in Egypt's population to 4 percent. If he knew anything about demography, he would have realized that this rate of growth was never achieved anywhere by the human species.

In addition, the writer goes on to say that someone named Ghafar “noted that overall youth unemployment in Egypt stands at 30 percent.” If he knew anything about youth unemployment worldwide, he would have realized this is not unusual as it reaches 40 percent in many places, and 50 percent in some places. He then shoots himself in the foot by making this observation: “The unemployment rate for university graduates is a whopping 34 percent, compared to just 2.4 percent for youth with less than primary level education”.

The reality is that when unemployment falls below 5 percent in a sector of the economy, a shortage of labor develops in that sector. According to Berman, therefore, there should be plenty of jobs to absorb those with an education that's between primary and university levels. They may not be “sexy” jobs but with an unemployment rate of 30 percent among the young, not many would be finicky. In fact, they are not. The young are taking these jobs but also registering as unemployed because they want a better job.

As to the university graduates the word has gone out to future juniors: “If you want to work immediately after graduating, avoid the humanities and get into science and technology.” That's because even in Egypt, journalists and politicians are not doing well at all whereas engineers and plumber are doing very well indeed.

Having shamelessly made an ass of himself and of the publication that carried his article, Ilan Berman ended with the standard Jewish expression indicating wishful thinking. He did so in several paragraphs, but here is a condensed version of that:

“The IMF announced that it had reached agreement with Cairo over a package designed to increase investor confidence. This is a temporary measure – one that will be squandered. Meanwhile, the trends will frighten off the kind of investment that Egypt needs. A Bloomberg study concludes that Egypt can once again be a place worth investing in – but before that happens, a lot will have to change otherwise the country could descend into chaos”.

We must now ask the question: Why would someone want to do that? The truth is that we won't find the answer in the article, and must therefore look for it elsewhere. If we begin with the established reality that the Jews have turned American journalism from a means to disseminate information into a tool by which to spin friends, and a weapon by which to attack enemies, we would have the key to understanding what motivated Berman.

In response to their eternal obligation to badmouth Egypt, the Jews have developed the habit of producing works designed to create a thick layer of noise pollution around anything positive that's said about Egypt. And so you find that two events happened during the week that the Berman article appeared.

One event was a report issued by Moody's Investors Services in which Steffen Dyck, a Senior Credit Officer, stated that Egypt's economic and fiscal reform momentum support a stable outlook. He went on to say: “Economic growth has started to pick up, and investor sentiment has improved. Fiscal deficits and government debt levels will gradually reduce. The domestic market continues to provide a sizable funding base for the government”.

The other event was a meeting between the Egyptian President and the Chairman and CEO of Caterpillar after which the latter affirmed his company's commitment to Egypt's Infrastructure Development. He added that “Egypt is on the move and Caterpillar is committed to being a central part of the exciting developments on the horizon”.

The company said it participated in the work that was recently done on the Suez Canal, and continues to participate in the tunnels that link the Mainland to the Sinai. Its machines are also helping to build thousands of kilometers of roads as well as the New Capital City.

These being the events that rattled the hate-filled Jews, you can see that Berman's aim was to create a specific noise tailor-made to smother each and every bit of positive information that came out about Egypt.

These creatures are forever the miserable braying asses.

The Poison that's coated with Sugar

Imagine a situation in which America and its fighting allies in Syria beat the forces of the current regime and wreak havoc on the capital city of Damascus before seizing it and putting an end to the regime. Millions of new refugees are created as a result, some of whom are taken to America. Ten years later a human drama develops in America … a story that is not too far fetched to be true.

It is the story of a refugee that came to America as a child, got mixed up with a group of bad kids that burglarized homes, was caught by the authorities, convicted and sent to jail. Now ready to be released in a few days, the Syrian boy is visited by a social worker who came to help him reintegrate into society.

It turns out that the social worker was himself a Syrian refugee who came to America at about the same time as the boy and his family. The worker was one of those described as having: “sided with America and worked for America and whose lives were imperiled as a result.” His application to go to America was thus prioritized under a special visa program for foreign interpreters who serve America.

As to the boy, he is from what used to be a wealthy family in Syria till the civil war started. The family saw their wealth steadily evaporate over the years, and then completely disappear during the American led push into Damascus. They came to America under the provision of something called the “Religious Persecution Relief Act” because they are Christian, and their application was prioritized.

The boy – now a convicted young adult – asks the social worker if he is a Christian, and the worker says no, he is not. In fact he is a Muslim, someone that appreciates life in America, and looks forward to raising a family that should do well in this country. The young man tells the worker he is lucky he is a Muslim because in Syria, the Christians sided with the regime that America fought against and toppled.

When the family lost everything in Syria and came to America, his father who grew up in the import-export business and had no other skill could not accept spending his life doing the menial work he was assigned to do in the America that ruined him and his family. He took up drug dealing to make some quick money and start a legitimate business but was caught and sent to jail for 30 years.

On welfare and unable to raise the kids alone, the mother lost her mind, went to a mental hospital for a while and then taken by a church group that's now looking after her. The young Syrian has younger siblings who were taken by the children aid society and probably given for adoption to other families already. He lived alone for a while doing odd jobs and committing mischief till the day he was caught and thrown in jail.

This is a fictitious story that came to mind upon reading “Coming to America” an article that also came under the subtitle: “Who decides whom we welcome, and how many immigrants we can take in?” It was written by Clifford D. May and published on September 27, 2016 in The Washington Times. In fact, the quotes cited above came from that article.

Now let me tell you something, my friend. I normally do not write sad stories like what you see here. I prefer the uplifting cheerful ones that have a happy ending. But I lived 52 years on this Continent (actually Canada) and I have seen enough of what the Jewish organizations are trying to accomplish to call them not just evil people but savage animals motivated by a satanic force more destructive than any weapon you find in a country's arsenal.

Right now, they are motivated by a 4,000 year old dream; one for which they would sacrifice everyone on this Continent to realize. It is to start a religious war anywhere they can, especially in the Middle East – and most especially in Egypt – where they hunger to inflict the biblical plagues they have come to understand have not yet been inflicted on Egypt notwithstanding the stories of the Old Testament.

The Jewish organizations are recruiting institutions, groups and individuals of every stripe and every bent to spark horror of the kind you saw in the Lebanese civil war, and now see in South Sudan and the Levant. They have attempted to recruit me before they knew I was Christian, and they continued their attempts after they knew who I was.

Instead of succumbing to their advances, I studied them during all these years, and now understand what they could be doing to recruit the entire Congress of superpower America. I also know from first hand experience how they go about recruiting well-meaning but naïve Christian organizations to help them achieve their morbid schemes.

As of this moment, they are pushing the Congress to pass legislation that will add fuel to the fires already raging in the Middle East. And they are lining up Christian organizations to fan the flames of those fires in the belief that they are soothing the pain of the afflicted.

And nothing can be more savage, more demonic or more Jewish than this.

The Logic of a depraved Ideology

How can we make an educated guess as to what the consequences of an act or an ideology might be? There is a way we can try, but the probability is low we'll make the correct guess in any of the cases we tackle. Still, to get there, we may borrow from the logic of science and make the attempt.

Here is the reasoning: Even if we do not live billions of years while the stars take that long to form, to live their lives and to explode into supernovas, we know what happens because we see many of them, each at a different stage of its life cycle. Similarly, if we look at our own history, and we factor into the equation the applicable caveats, we can make an educated guess as to what an act we may execute today or an ideology we may adopt is liable to cause in the future.

Richard Cohen has taken that approach and drew a parallel between what happened in history and what's happening today, and made an educated guess. He wrote: “Aleppo is a symbol of American weakness,” a column that was published on September 26, 2016 in the Washington Post. He sees a likeness between what happened to a town in Spain called Guernica in the year 1937, and what's happening today – in the year 2016 – to a city called Aleppo in Syria. He tells how the two places were bombed, and concludes his presentation by predicting that “worse will follow” for Aleppo.

Richard Cohen cannot be faulted for reaching that conclusion. However, he goes further than that and speculates as to what could have been done to stop the carnage in Aleppo but was not. He says this: “Obama takes pride in being the anti-George W. Bush. He did not get us into any nonsensical wars of the Iraq variety. The consequences for Syria have been dire.” Aside from the unconvincing view as to why Obama did not act, Cohen has failed to factor a huge chunk of data into his hypothesis. We can talk about that in the abstract or we can take advantage of another article published on the same day to illustrate the point. We choose the second.

On September 26, 2016, a doctoral student named Spencer Case published an article in National Review Online under the title: “Unthinking the Thinkable” and the subtitle: “Iran and the bomb.” The writer begins the presentation with this assertion: “Wishful thinking won't prevent the ayatollahs from bombing Israel.” He goes on to make the point that it is near absolute certainty Iran will launch a nuclear attack on Israel.

In a manner that is eerily similar to that, it is now entrenched in the history of Bush's Iraq war that the most consequential piece of evidence to convince the Western intelligence services that Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), was a thesis written by a doctoral student speculating about such a possibility. The paper was presented to those intelligence services not as a student thesis but a secret report.

That fictitious report was said to be so secret in fact, its origin could not be divulged. However, everyone was deliberately given the impression that it was the work of the “infallible” Israeli intelligence service. But as it turned out, the report was not theirs. On the other hand, the deception regarding the authorship of the paper that convinced W. Bush to commit a most horrific crime against humanity was their doing. It was a Jewish deception of the first order.

As the events unfolded over the years, the evil act committed by W. Bush began to spill into Syria, creating the horror that's there now, including Aleppo. Despite the clarity as to who is responsible for that history, we have Richard Cohen saying that Obama is the one. He is, says Cohen, because he did not do more of what caused the horror in the first place. We also have Spencer Case writing the kind of thesis/report that is meant to repeat in Iran what the fictitious report has accomplished over the past 13 years in the Levant.

Is it logical to infer or conclude that Obama or the next President will again be so deceived as to repeat the Bush horror? Cohen insinuates that deception or not, she (or he) should get involved in Syria. But that's only because Cohen did not take into account the data that came to light during the discussion on the Spencer Case article. It means that, absent a caveat, his guess cannot be said to have risen to the educated level.

Had Cohen factored that data into his presentation, he would have seen that behind any attempt to involve America in another military adventure in the Middle East is an ideology that's based on a most depraved logic. In fact, sheer depravity is what the Spencer Case article is all about.

The hell with correctness; I tell it like it is

There is a saying that recurs in many languages and comes in different versions. Some versions would be considered politically correct (PC) and some would not. One that is a borderline case goes like this: Respect them and they'll urinate all over you; urinate all over them and they'll respect you.

Mindful of the reality that the more the Jewish pundits urinate all over America, the more the American Congress respects them, Benjamin Netanyahu made the mistake of believing that he can treat the world the same way that he treats the toilet of 29 standing ovations. He stood before a nearly empty General Assembly of the United Nations the other day, and treated it the way that a pissing dog treats the rug at the White house.

Netanyahu started his speech by correctly predicting: “What I'm about to say is going to shock you.” The reality is that he said some very shocking things, but they were not of the type that the world had in mind. Whereas the world thought for a second he'll announce the end of Israel's habit of pissing on the UN resolutions and running like a rat to hide behind America's boots, he chose to shock the world with the following statement: “Israel has a bright future at the UN”.

Here too, the world expected to hear Netanyahu say that Israel had seen the light and had decided to join the human race, but he chose to disappoint everyone again and again throughout the speech. Rather than reject the idea of antagonizing the world and perennially look for compensation and handouts to feed his “people,” he chose to attack the UN expecting respect in return. It is that he was powered by the mentality which motivates the Jewish pundits whose attacks on America and its President earn them the respect they crave from the good-for-nothing Congress.

Netanyahu called the UN General Assembly disgraceful, the UN Human Rights Council a joke, and the entire UN organization a farce. He did so believing that this attitude will make the members love Israel so much, they will accept it as is, and reserve a bright future for it in their midst. So you ask yourself: Notwithstanding the bordello that is the axis of Jewish-pundits/Congressional-whores of America, how can someone think like Netanyahu and consider himself to be a functioning human being?

The answer is self delusion. You see, my friend, Netanyahu spoke of Israel having diplomatic relations with over 160 countries of the 200 or so jurisdictions in the world. This would be 80 percent of the world. So you would think that the assembly sitting in front of him was 80 percent full. But that's not what he was seeing. Aside from the full delegations of Israel and the United States, there were only one or two members from a dozen or so other delegations, a handful of journalists, a few guests from New York's Jewish community, and some UN guards. That was not enough to deter the man from imagining a full assembly as well as a fuller and brighter assembly in the future – perhaps one that will give him 29 standing ovations.

And there is more to this man's power of self-delusion. Actually, it is something he inherited from those who came before him. You see, the Jews used to con the English speaking world by telling it they have the right to push the Palestinians into the desert and take their properties because Jewish jewelers, tailors, violin players and synagogue cantors from Eastern Europe had a gift no one else had. Even though they never walked in a farm before, they could stick a finger into the ground and make trees grow in the desert. Like manna from the sky, they imagined the trees producing food that fed the gun-wielding settlers of yesterday.

This was the Jewish self-delusion that also deluded the children of America decades ago. In fact, it is these children who grew up to become today's Congressional bimbos; those that tear the flesh off each others' backs to be first at kissing any Jewish ass that comes trotting into their wretched lobby of shame.

Netanyahu has tried to sell to the whole world what the Jewish pundits have been selling to the English speaking world. He did so claiming that “many seek to benefit from Israel's ingenuity in agriculture, health, water, cyber, the fusion of big data, connectivity and artificial intelligence”.

The problem is that kids from the Third World proved to be better hacks than Israel's cyber professionals who got caught trying to sabotage Iran's nuclear installations. And the world has concluded: If they cannot be good hacks, they can never be security experts. Thus, when Netanyahu says that many seek to benefit from Israel's mastery of cyber matters, he is lying to himself.

By the way, this kind of lies (a flood of them comes out of Israel every day) are but the modern version of the Jew sticking his finger into the ground and making trees grow. They were damned Jewish lies then; they are damned Jewish lies now.

Has the exceptional Child matured yet?

When you are so exceptional that you cannot raise your own children well enough to see them grow up and help maintain your success as a nation the way that the foreign children you adopt do it for you, it can only be said that you have some ways to go before you're mature enough to lead the world that supplies you with the children that maintain your success.

This is the story of a child that was born a physical giant but has the mind of an ordinary kid his own age. It is the story of America, a nation that came of age materially at a time when the rest of the world was tearing itself apart. This condition enabled America to score a string of important successes that nevertheless came too early to be long lasting. The problem is that America's maturity was not given the time to develop and match the country's scientific, technological and industrial prowess.

There is no situation you can think of that is more propitious than this for a charlatan to exploit the child. The latter has the muscles that make a power-hungry charlatan salivate, and the lack of maturity that makes a seasoned charlatan play him like a fiddle. In fact, two power-hungry and seasoned charlatans came along and played America like a fiddle. One was the English fox; the other was the Jewish weasel.

At first, he Brits and the Jews played America like a fiddle but quickly developed a taste to ride the superpower like a horse, and use it to implement their respective agendas. Too large to be saddled like a normal horse, the Brits sat on his right shoulder to be close to his right ear. As to the Jews, they sat on his left shoulder close to his left ear. This done, they started shouting commands telling the horse where to go and what to do.

The Brits told America to fear the Soviet Union. They advised Washington to start encircling the Communist 'enigma' with military bases lest it expand and swallow the world, including America. Because Karl Marx – who was the father of Communism – had falsely predicted that America will be the first nation to go communist, the Americans took the threat seriously and began to develop a deep paranoia about being invaded. The fear permeated the culture so deeply it spilled into the film industry, the most popular art form of the day, and spawned the science fiction and fantasy genre of movies about aliens from outer space invading Earth.

Something else was also brewing at that time. Because Karl Marx was a Jew, and because many Jews were sympathetic to Joseph Stalin of the Soviet Union, a new era (later named McCarthyism) was triggered in America during which time all Jews were suspected of being treasonous. They continued to sit on the left shoulder of the mighty horse but their voice was muted throughout the years of that era. When the storm calmed down, the Jews started once again to shout commands in the left ear of the horse.

Being the weasels that they are, they devised a plan to outfox the fox. They used his argument as a model to denounce and betray the Soviet Union, the regime that did much to help them realize their early dream. But having succeeded to monopolize both ears of the horse, they thought that betraying the Soviets was the right thing to do. In any case, they managed to buy the goodwill of America because the latter was taking a beating at the hands of the Vietnamese Communists who were thought to be the first chip to fall in a Communist domino scheme that aimed to topple other chips in Asia and beyond.

Because history never ends, things have evolved in such a way that the fox will most likely never again talk America into joining it in a Falkland type adventure. It is also difficult to see what the Jews can do to drag America into another Iraq type horror. But while the Brits do not seem interested in using America ever again, the Jews do not seem to relent in their quest to suck America's blood to the last drop … and then some.

You can see that mentality at work in the article that came under the title: “The Gathering Nuclear Storm” and the subtitle: “Lulled to believe nuclear catastrophe died with the Cold War, America is blind to rising dragons.” It was written by Mark Helprin and published on September 24, 2016 in the Wall Street Journal.

Unable to fathom they can be on their own without an America to use like a beast of burden, Helprin is expressing the desire of Jews to own America by commanding it to do what it was prepared to do on its own in the first pace. That was to pivot to Asia, a move that the Jews used to dread because it meant pivoting away from the Middle East where Israel is beginning to feel vulnerable and in need of America's protection.

The difference is that America wishes to forge a peaceful accommodation with all the nations in the Asian region, whereas Helprin – who speaks in the name of the Jewish establishment – wants to see blood, chaos and mayhem, even a nuclear confrontation if that's what it will take.

America's response to that idea in the coming months and years will tell how much the big child has matured.

The Cure that aggravates the Malady

It is common to draw parallels between actual illnesses and the ills of society. The practice exists in most languages, most cultures and most societies because it illustrates and explains what's happening in real life.

Malpractice in medicine can take many forms, the worst being misdiagnosing an illness and trying to cure it by doing the opposite of what needs to be done. It used to happen – a century or two ago – that almost every illness was thought to be caused by an excess of bad blood. Thus, the physician that didn't know better drew blood from patients that were actually anemic and in need of a blood transfusion, not of shedding blood. The patients died in most cases, letting everyone believe that more blood should have been drawn.

This is the image that comes to mind when you read “Whether or Not in Syria,” a piece that was written by the editors of the Wall Street Journal; a piece that also came under the subtitle: “Obama could arm our friends the Kurds, but he probably won't.” It was published on September 24, 2016 in the Journal.

What is alarming about this piece of work is not only that it exudes ignorance but that it celebrates it. Look what the editors say near the end: “Mr. Obama could arm our Kurdish friends, destroy the Assad regime's air force and its armor reserves, and redraw the map of Syria to take account of the new dividing lines of a broken country. He could also impose further economic costs on Moscow for its Mideast adventurism.” Have these people not read history?

The tragedy of the Sykes-Picot Agreement, which divided the Levant along the lines that suited the colonial powers of the day, has been discussed a great deal in the past few months to have escaped the attention of the Journal editors. Thus, for them to come now and recommend that the map of Syria be redrawn and the country divided, cannot be interpreted as an act of ignorance. This means it can only be seen as the demonic expression of souls that have degenerated to the point of depravity.

The Levant's catalog of disgust being caused in part by that Agreement, the Journal editors are shamelessly declaring that what they see in the region pleases them so much they wish to see it go on steroid and see it intensify to a higher level of horror. So the question we must ask is this: if these people are not acting on ignorance, what is it that motivates them to say what they say?

Believe it or not, what motivates them is still ignorance. Granted, they know what will be the immediate consequence on the people in the region if what they wish for comes to pass. At the same time, however, they are ignorant of the side effects that will inevitably catch up with them.

What the editors of the Wall Street Journal – and many like them – ignore is that the world is not a static place, and they are not alone in it. On the contrary, the world is full of other players, all of whom are on the move at a fast pace or a slow one. In fact, the world is a place where every action causes a reaction which, in turn, causes an action elsewhere and the obligatory reaction that follows. In the manner of this vicious/virtuous cycle, good or bad events happen on and on indefinitely, thus shape life, cultures and civilizations into what they are.

Even if nobody can predict the future, we can say that when the same people do the same thing, the probability is high that they will obtain the same result. In fact, America has been doing the same thing over and over, and has been obtaining results that no one in America or elsewhere is fond of. It is that America is bankrupting itself while creating a legacy that is so bleak, it will shame future generations even as they are forced to pay for the debt left to them by today's leaders.

The irony is that America has been incurring mountains of debt as it creates bleak legacies by meddling in the affairs of other nations. And what the editors of the Wall Street Journal are advising is the continuation – indeed the intensification – of the same old vicious cycle. Thus while the White House has understood this reality and has pondered at every turn whether or not the benefits of doing something outweigh the potential losses, the Journal editors are mocking that approach.

As far as they are concerned, what America must do now is arm the Kurds, destroy Assad's air force and armor, redraw the map of Syria, and impose new economic sanctions on Russia. Do that, America, and see your debt triple before today's toddlers will be old enough to join the endless war you will have unleashed for them to fight.

Muted Panic throbbing the Heart of Zion

If you had any doubt that the horror you're witnessing in the Middle East can be attributed to a handful of Jewish barbarians constantly inciting the mindless bigwigs of America to adopt the politics of destruction and mayhem, you'll shed your doubt when you see what two of those barbarians have done lately.

One barbarian is Lee Smith who wrote: “Bibi Takes his Case Against a Palestinian State To the Internet,” published on September 21, 2016 in the Weekly Standard. The other is Benny Avni who wrote: “When global villains write 'international law,'” published on September 22, 2016 in the New York Post.

On the surface, the writers seem to have written about two different subjects, but in reality, the articles were fed by one and the same idea. To understand this part, we need to recall a little of the relevant historical background. Because the Jewish religion is based on the belief that everything is preordained, the Jews reject the principle of personal responsibility, and attribute what they do to the will of God. The same does not always apply to gentiles, however, because – if not influenced by God – they would be influenced by the devil.

This is but one precept in the Jewish system of beliefs. An accompanying precept is none other than the stories of the Old Testament which are considered to be an authentic history of the Jewish people. The Jews see in them not a mythology, but a God that became their military general; one that led them interminably to attack and conquer enemy after enemy. This held true even when those they attacked were never their enemies.

Armed with those ideas, and having paid a heavy price at the hand of the Europeans precisely because of the way they behaved, the Jews fled to Palestine and put into effect the precepts of their system. They considered all their neighbors to be enemies, and attacked them in the belief that they were obeying God's commands … that they were doing his work.

The Jews of Israel made initial gains that convinced them they were on the right track. In turn, they convinced the Jews of America they should all join hands and work together to accomplish great things. The latter accepted the idea and started sending their surplus money to Israel. They also lobbied the American government to hand the purse of America's taxpayers to the Israelis, and open the superpower's armory to Israel's earth-bound generals. Alas, that time proved to be the euphoric years that eventually became Israel's worst enemy.

What happened was that the Arab neighbors of Israel woke up to the idea that the Jews will keep attacking them and looting them as long as they remain weak, and can be taken by surprise. Thus, they prepared themselves in such a way as never to be surprised again. They even counter-attacked Israel, took back most of what the Jews had stolen from them, and served notice that never again means never will the Jews get away with murder again in the Middle East.

The Jews of Israel who must live with that reality got the message and began to doubt the validity of their biblical precepts. Unfortunately this was not the case with the Jews of America. A new crop of Jewish leaders rose in Israel and saw that the entity they created can survive only if they forge an accommodation with their neighbors instead of fighting them. Concurrently, a new crop of Jewish leaders rose in America, and warned of financial retaliation if Israel became a normal nation and stopped looting its neighbors.

The result of the ensuing tug of war was that one Israeli leader was assassinated. This served notice that the new crop of settlers from America will not tolerate the old guard's drive for peace. The settlers also anointed the American raised and American educated Netanyahu to take the helm and govern Israel according to their edicts. Netanyahu played their game as long as they maintained America's purse open to Israel. When he sensed that this arrangement was coming to an end, he started to play a different game.

This is what prompted Smith and Avni to write the articles they did. Smith tackled the subject matter from an angle considered by the barbarians of America to be the heart of the Zionist movement. He did not like what he heard President Obama say, but tried to temper its meaning so as not to jolt the Jewish rank-and-file. He put it this way: “It could have been worse for Israel with Obama [uttering] Israel cannot permanently occupy and settle Palestinian land. It was a relatively anodyne phrase.” The rest of the article is nothing but a serenade lauding the accomplishments of Israel and Netanyahu while damning America and Obama.

As to Benny Avni, he repeated the satanic narrative of the Jews which goes this way: The people of Palestine lost the right to their properties because when the Jewish squatters came from Europe to share the premises, the other Arab nations – such as Morocco, Sudan, Yemen and so on – did not welcome the Jews or hug them or kiss them. This gives the Jews the right to punish the Palestinians by confiscating their properties. Thus, the Palestinians who are not happy should take their concerns to the Arab nations which are, after all, responsible for what happened to them.

Here is how Avni reformulated that narrative: “Abbas urged diplomats to study Israeli violations of 'the preamble of Resolution 181, Paragraph C.' That's the 1947 UN 'partition plan' that proposed Arab and Jewish states in Palestine. Never mind that the resolution was opposed by the Arabs, and accepted by the Zionists”.

Conclusion: the occupation should continue; Palestinian properties should be looted piece by piece whether or not America continues to pay for this ongoing crime against humanity.

It remains to be seen what Netanyahu will do next. Will he transform the Israeli entity into a normal nation? Or will he laugh at the world and cry out: I conned you again; am I a real clown or what?

The most difficult Years of Adolescence

Not all children grow up and mature at the same pace, therefore it is impossible to put down an exact age at which adolescence will begin with this child or that one, and when it will end.

Even when a child starts to clearly behave as a typical adolescent in crisis, it is impossible to predict when he will reach his most difficult year, and when he will get past it.

It is not surprising therefore, to see that all forms of human development go through a similar sort of crisis as the years go by; often displaying the same kind of incomprehensible adolescent-like behavior. It is one that lasts till they get over it, only to look back and be amazed at “the way we were”.

This can happen to a family or a tribe; it can happen to nations, cultures and even full blown civilizations. In fact, it can be seen to happen at this time to the new Jewish culture that's developing in the English speaking world, more precisely in America. This is where the adolescent phase of the culture the Jews have been developing for half a century is going through twists and turns as incomprehensible as those of an adolescent in crisis.

If you think of Benny Avni not only as an individual but the embodiment of that Jewish culture, you'll recognize some of the behavioral traits he displays as being those of a child exiting childhood but one that’s not an adult yet. Study his latest column which came under the title: “Obama led the world downward into chaos,” and see for yourself. It was published on September 19, 2016 in the New York Post.

Like the adolescent who believes he is the only one in the world that knows everything there is to know, Benny Avni begins the conversation with this certainty: “Obama will surely put his best spin on his legacy. But even his fans [cannot] ignore the spread of mayhem on his watch, in the Mideast and beyond.” It is obvious that Avni has not read about two world wars, those in Korea and Vietnam, the upheavals of Eastern Europe and South America, Rhodesia, Rwanda and Cambodia. And of course, there is also George W. Bush's destruction of Iraq, not to forget his father's Black Hawk fiasco in Somalia. Avni knows none of that or chooses not to know.

It would be a bad thing if Avni did not know that history and worse if he did but chose to ignore it. That's because he goes on to display something that is truly shocking. Sit down my friend, prepare to be shocked and read these words: “How fitting that as Obama speaks in New York, Iranian President Rouhani will be completing a trip to Cuba and Venezuela, before giving his own UN speech.” You cannot escape the conclusion that Avni's brain is so screwed up, it is telling him that Rouhani visiting two countries and giving a speech at the UN is worse than the millions who died in the wars, genocides and upheavals of the Twentieth Century. It is simply incredible.

But what would a brain such as Avni's want from someone like Obama? He answers that question by telling what it is that upsets him: “The Obama-Hillary Clinton 'reset' with Russia has left that nation more aggressive than 2008 ... China, too, is pushing hard in the Pacific.” It is obvious from this answer that Avni would have wanted to see a more “muscular” American foreign policy. And he gives an example of a lost opportunity in this field: “Remember when Obama said Assad must go? That policy secretly became a dead letter two years ago”.

Now that the adolescent has listed his observations, he does what a self-assured delusional kid does. He speculates as to what it all means. It is this: “Pyongyang's ally, Iran, is on the road to joining the growing club of nuclear-armed countries.” Aside from this being a speculation that's contradicted by the nuclear deal signed by Iran and the world’s representatives, Avni is upset at yet another Iran initiative.

Here is how he complains about it: “Iran wages proxy wars with rival Saudi Arabia, consolidates its Syrian and Lebanese bases, and stretches its tentacles as far as Africa and Latin America.” It seems someone forgot to tell Benny Avni that Iran is a sovereign nation that makes its own decisions. This is why – left to himself – the kid has displayed his most revealing adolescent trait. Here it is: “America shies from confronting Iran for fear it might walk away from the nuke deal”.

And just as you were prepared to leave it at that, Avni does something that tells you he is the adolescent that stopped growing, and reverting back to early childhood. He put it this way: “America toiled to strengthen global institutions but its global leadership has waned. The world is worse off, and so are we.” Of course, he believes he has a mandate to speak in the name of all humanity.

They hide the Roots of political Correctness

Quoting novelist Lionel Shriver, Clifford D. May says in agreement that “'Political correctness' finds a new target” and that “Fiction writing is now in the crosshairs.” These are, in fact, the title and subtitle of May's latest article, published on September 20, 2016 in The Washington Times.

I do not know enough about Lionel Shriver to comment on her message, but I know enough about Clifford May to say he produced a piece that's so politically correct, it is vintage Clifford May and vintage his own creation, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. What is politically correct in what he did is that it is akin to what a space alien would do sending a message to his home planet in which he describes the body of a Marathon runner on Planet Earth without mentioning his legs.

To complete the analogy, it must be said that the roots of the politically correct movement were planted by the Jews who vowed half a century ago that they will “educate” the American public about Jewish sensitivities. They threatened to sue, and did in fact sue, many who deviated from the norms they put down for conversations that touch on topics considered of interest to Jews and to Israel.

And while the Jews of yesterday were at the roots of political correctness, the most striking manifestation of the movement as it is expressed today, lies in the fact that you can criticize the movement all you want, but you cannot mention its Jewish roots. The result is that today's “Jewish educated” public knows as much about the roots of the politically correct movement as the home planet of the space alien knows that marathon running exists because earthlings have legs.

Clifford May saw that the best way to develop his bogus presentation is to bury the legs of the runner at the start, and then proceed to describe the rest of the runner. To this end, he pulled off two tricks that helped him greatly. First, he spoke of Orwell's Newspeak, goodthink and crimethink. Second, he spoke of the vocabulary you may find “on university campuses and in the mainstream media.” He thus established a kinship between the two.

Without mentioning the Jewish roots of the phenomenon, Clifford May went on to tell what's on his mind. Being the Jew that he is, what's on his mind is what has always been there: the mutilation of history. To achieve it, he attributes political correctness not to the Jewish drive to educate the public, but to a generic state of mind called orthodoxy. He does that without specifying it was Jewish orthodoxy that did it. This deception has allowed him to complain that those who enforce orthodoxy “have become the new Establishment” without mentioning the word Jew even once … without asserting that the Jews have taken over the Establishment and have become it.

This done, May repeats a history that was described by another Jew, Richard Bernstein, to which he adds his own views. All this leads him to say that political correctness involves subjects like sexism, homophobia and racism; an approach that helps him hide the fact that the legs of the movement he buried, used to be denial of the Holocaust, antisemitism, suspicion about Israel's legitimacy, the reviling of Zionism, and so on.

With that reality hidden from view, May discusses Shriver's position about the kind of censoring that political correctness has brought to literature. He does so without mentioning that the Jews have done the same thing to many of the great classics such as Shakespeare's the Merchant of Venice, and have gone on to ruin the lives of thousands of people because of what they thought and what they wrote.

Clifford May also mentions Shriver's description of the Brouhaha that ensued following a “sombrero” party without mentioning the brouhaha that ensued in America when someone in Europe held a show that featured fashion based on the attire worn in Holocaust-like concentration camps.

And he brought into the open the subject of identity politics without mentioning that the Jews – including his own organization – are trying at this very moment to create a new identity that will make it possible for any convert to Judaism to claim genetic kinship with the ancient Hebrews, thus become instant heir to the land of Palestine regardless as to who has lived there since the beginning of time and never left.

I believe that political correctness is a modern problem that needs to be solved. I also believe that the solution must reach down to the roots of the problem. The best way to do this is to criminalize the accusation of antisemitism. A Jew that accuses someone or something of being antisemitic goes to jail for a year. Period.

Stunning Shallowness from a Man of 'Depth'

When you go back in history to the Dark Ages – sometimes referred to as the Middle Ages or Medieval Times – and you study what the “edified” people of the era were saying and doing, you can only be stunned by how superficial these people were, yet how serious the consequences of what they decided.

You wonder: How could this have happened? You ask the question not realizing that we are living similar moments right now, though the issues we face are somewhat different. If you want proof, take a look at the article which came under the title: “It's time We Faced the Facts about the Muslim World,” written by David French and published on September 19, 2016 in National Review Online.

David French is said to be a man of depth, a modern equivalent to the sages that used to gather at the “round tables” in the castles of the medieval bigwigs. They used to discuss topics as grave and important as the number of angels that can be made to dance on the head of a pin. David French has also chosen to play the numbers game but without citing actual numbers or how they break down … which renders the discussion on this topic moot. The thing, however, is that he asks the people on the Left a question that turns out to reveal the extent of his shallowness. It is this: “Why exclude America's worst terror attack [9/11] when calculating the terror threat?” The man just made an error of logic.

The fact is that 9/11 was al-Qaeda's declaration of war on America, not just an act of terror. It was one in the string of wars that began with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, followed by Reagan's recruitment of al-Qaeda to fight the Soviets, followed by America's abandonment of its ally after the victory, followed by America's unprovoked attack on Iraq, followed by America's “occupation” of Saudi Arabia, followed by Al-Qaeda's 9/11 response to America's double-crossing and its hard-to-hide war on Islam.

Without realizing what he is saying, David French goes on to admit that this string of wars has been won by America because “of the fact that it is now ISIS and al-Qaeda strategy to inspire lone wolves.” He just called the two organizations junior varsity that can no longer mount a war against America, the reason why they opted for a version of the Tokyo Rose style incitement from a distance. This does not rise to the level of guerrilla skirmishes against the American homeland, and certainly not the level of a 9/11 act of war.

Faced with that reality on the ground, but eager to paint a picture that fits the current political narrative, David French relies on something else to make his points. He says that the Pew Foundation has discovered the following: “More than 100 million Muslims have expressed sympathy for terrorists such as Osama bin Laden or for barbaric groups such as ISIS. Hundreds of millions more express support for the most intolerant forms of Sharia law. Jihadis have been able to recruit hundreds of thousands of fighters to deploy against Americans, Israelis, and our Muslim allies”.

The response to that situation, he says, is to let the internal Muslim debate take its course. A good idea. But he goes on to make a second error in logic. It is this: “[It's] important that we double down on our support for proven Muslim allies. The Kurds, for example, are perhaps our most stalwart allies. The current Egyptian regime is a declared enemy of the Muslim Brotherhood, and its president, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, has called for a 'religious revolution' within Islam”.

If only the man knew what he was talking about. The truth is that surveys taken by the likes of the Pew Foundation are good for the trash can and nothing else. David French should have realized this much because he had all the relevant information that says so. For example, he mentions the situation in Egypt where the people voted for the Muslim Brotherhood. By the time a year had passed, they had seen where the party was taking the country. They did not like what they were seeing, especially in the economy, and wanted an end to the Brotherhood's administration. Refusing to wait for the end of the mandate before throwing the rascals out, they asked the army to do the job now, and the army obliged.

This means that surveys taken of the people before the election and a year after it, would have shown different results. A pollster such as the Pew would have falsely interpreted the result before the election to mean that the people were in favor of the things they actually rejected a year later. What's important to remember also is that the people vehemently opposed the tolerance that the Brotherhood exhibited toward the foreign interference in Egyptian affairs. And this is a reality that escaped David French.

No, Islam does not have a serious problem; it has a normal problem such as that which all nations experience once in a while. America too has a normal problem, but it is one that is compounded by too many pundits advising it too many things that make no sense.

Make us your Loophole, they say

Here is a smart aleck way to turn yourself into a loophole, invite the use of you by those who wish to get to the other side, and charge them for the privilege. Unbelievable you say? Maybe so. But not if you're a Jew.

The first thing you do – if you are a Jew – is haggle into existence an immunity device. You do this by asserting that you cannot blame the Jews for what Israel does because the Jews are one thing, and Israel is another. But when Israel does something bad, and someone criticizes it without criticizing the Jews, you still accuse him of antisemitism. You explain that Israel is a place of refuge set-up to protect the Jews from annihilation. When someone criticizes Israel for whatever reason, he expresses the wish to annihilate the Jews. This is why no one must ever be allowed to criticize Israel. And this is how the accusation of antisemitism is turned into an immunity device you can use to get contradictory things done for yourself and for those who will pay your price.

The trouble is that human logic rejects that premise because you can only establish one reality or the other but not both, given that they are mutually exclusive. Either Israel and the Jews are one and the same thing, or they are two different things. This is not the case of lone wolves or members of a terror group – such as the Jewish Defense League, for example – doing bad things and claiming they do them in the name of Judaism. No, it's not that. Rather, it is the case of a Jewish establishment that brings together Israel and the Jews into a group that draws no demarcation line between Jewish, Israeli and Zionist. They all claim to be one and the same, and they all refuse to be split into religion, citizenship or ideology.

Now that you have the accusation of antisemitism to use as an immunity device, you can turn it into a loophole to pass through it those who wish to get to the other side. They will pay for the privilege by promoting Israel and the other Jewish causes. You can see how all this will work when you study the article that came under the title: “Anti-Semitism Flourishes At 'Safe Space' Social Justice Conference,” written by Jenna Lifhits and published on September 18, 2016 in the Weekly Standard.

Look into the article and see how the Jewish establishment used two Jewish students to create an incident so that they and the establishment may cry antisemitism where none exists. Their ultimate goal being the creation of a loophole through which the idea of colonialism will pass from the dead water where it is stuck now to a safe harbor where it will look chic and desirable again.

The Jewish establishment sent the pair of Jewish students to a 'Students of Color Conference' (SOCC) having instructed them to behave contrary to what the conference has been about for 27 years. The Jewish students did as instructed, and when rebuffed by the other attendees, came out of the conference crying antisemitism. They ran to the Jewish controlled media where they hollered the imagined aching they said they had in the belly, and the Weekly Standard published the story they related.

Here is what Lifhits says the SOCC has been about during all those years: “Being a 'safe space' where students of color, as well as white progressive allies, can address and discuss issues of structural and cultural inequality on college campuses.” And here is what the two Jewish students complain was missing at the conference they attended: “Progressive activists devoted to fighting discrimination 'whitewashed' the history of the Jewish people with 'no mention of the Holocaust'”.

That is, the Jews wanted to reverse 27 years of tradition, and turn the conference into a space where kids in their late teens and early twenties would cease to discuss the problems they encounter as they try to make it through the day, and devote their time to wailing and moaning about an incident that happened not on campus, but thousands of miles away before their grandparents were even born. Do you see why the Jews were rebuffed?

But what was the Jewish establishment trying to achieve? Here is a clue: “At a session called 'Existence is Resistance,' students discussed the boycott of Israel.” This is what the Jews have described as “the session [going] way beyond the boundaries of what was appropriate at the SOCC.” That is, the Jews yet again, wanted to change the mandate of the SOCC by compelling the students of color to stop discussing current issues that may touch them personally, and engage in discussions about the Holocaust, a topic that's worth less than a dog's fart in their eyes.

What worries the Jews is that if the Holocaust is relegated to its proper place, which is somewhere between the footnote and being an example of the human condition, the occupation of Palestine will move from being the necessary evil that could not be avoided where it sits now to the evil that should never have happened.

That occupation being an example of how modern colonialism can be made to work – however tenuously that is – letting go of it will vanquish the loophole that a future colonial power might use to take the world back to the dark days of the Nineteenth Century where some Jews and gentiles on the Right wish to take the world.

A bedtime Story for little Draculas

What if you were hired by Count Dracula to babysit his children? Suppose the little ones gave you a hard time, refusing to go to sleep on the bed or in the coffin, till you tell them a story that will enchant them. What kind of story would you put together that will satisfy blood-sucking human vampires?

If you cannot come up with a story that will fulfill those criteria, you'll be glad to know there is one that's offered free of charge to those who want it. It came under the title: “The Flow of Islamist Fighters From Egypt to Syria, and the Sisi Government's Crackdown,” written by Eric Trager and published on September 17, 2016 in the “think tank” section of the Wall Street Journal.

Even though the story is full of subtleties, the Dracula kids will catch your drift and recognize that its subliminal message is to incite the mentally retarded in the American Congress of zombies; also incite those who labor in the associated institutions to do one thing. It will be to engineer a regime change in Egypt, thus turn the country into another Iraq, Darfur, Yemen, occupied Palestine, South Sudan, Libya or Syria. These are places where blood flows as abundantly as it does in the stories of the Jewish Old Testament – places where a Dracula can eat his soup and dive in it too.

It must be said that Eric Trager himself might be the innocent party in this saga, being the messenger that's only reporting on a situation which the editors of the Wall Street Journal saw fit to publish. He brought nothing of his own to the story except three caveats by which he distances himself from the storyline; also a final editorial by which he offers what sounds like wise words of caution.

Here are the three caveats:  (1) “The Brotherhood's relative quiet 'might' reflect some decision to turn their attention elsewhere.” (2) “The report relies heavily on anonymous sources.” (3) “The report cannot be independently verified.” And here is the writer's final editorial by which he ends the presentation: “It is why the Sisi government tends to regard Washington's call for political reform as undermining its domestic security.” Put together, these points mean that the reader must not take anything Trager says here at face value. But if you want to come out with something, it is that the locals should be left alone to govern themselves as they see fit.

As to the real culprit behind that undertaking, it is an Arab news site according to Trager. I do not visit this site, and I do not intend to because it sounds like a modern version of the pirate radio stations that sprung up in the 1950s to attack then President Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt, but made asses of themselves instead.

Another difference between then and now is that the perpetrators of the earlier era aimed to see the people of Egypt revolt against the Nasser regime and force it to change course. By contrast, the evildoers of today seek to spark a civil war that will break up the country of Egypt the way they managed to do it with some nations in the region, and the way they intend to do with the rest of the nations.

From what Eric Trager is saying, it looks like the modern evildoers are implementing a two-pronged strategy. One, there is this reminder: “Egyptian security forces captured Brotherhood-aligned youths responsible for attacks on infrastructure.” That is, the evildoers recruited youngsters in Egypt, and instructed them to commit serious acts of vandalism in the country.

Two, there is this observation: “The report cites three factors related to the crackdown on Islamists. First, the brutality of the post-Morsi period convinced many that violence was their only option. Second, the disruption of the chain of command undermined the old guard leaders. Third, many spent time in prison where jihadists indoctrinated them.” That is, the evildoers are asking the Washington retards to interfere with Cairo's policies.

This is how the evildoers create the local conditions that attract the attention of Washington. When this happens, they call on Washington to interfere. This aggravates the local situation further, which convinces Washington to escalate its interference. Things go from bad to worse, and the sea of blood gets deeper and deeper. This is the spiral that Eric Trager is wisely cautioning against.

We now get back to the Dracula kids that refuse to go to sleep. You can see that this story will enchant them and help them do just that. But if you choose not to tell them about the Trager cautionary note at the end of the story, don't forget to tell it to the Washington retards.

Consider everyone to be exceptionally chosen

The Americans who used to be revered everywhere they went because their country was worshiped around the globe, are scratching their heads now that they are pushed around everywhere they find themselves. And so they ask: What happened to us?

Those who are serious about that question will find the answer in an editorial that came under the title: “Manila Turns Anti-American” and the subtitle: “Duterte seems ready to trade sovereignty for Chinese cash.” It was published on September 14, 2016 in the Wall Street Journal.

What makes this piece noteworthy is that it was written around the time when a similar editorial could have been written a few days earlier but never was. The occasion then was the trip that Benjamin Netanyahu took – first to china and then to Russia – looking to forge with those nations the same kind of relationship that Philippine's Duterte has been forging with his neighbors.

When Netanyahu was running to nations that are on the rise to lean on when America will have its blood fully sucked out by the likes of the Israelis, the Wall Street Journal said nothing about those events. It is not that the trips happened quietly, no they weren't. In fact most pro-Israel pundits wrote about them, and they were unanimous in absolving both Israel and Netanyahu for what were in essence, Jewish acts of ingratitude toward America. This was the country whose effort saved the Jews from being final-solutioned, and made Israel possible. This being the case, the Journal preferred to ignore those events because the choice would have been to absolve Israel or to severely criticize it – neither being acceptable to the Journal editors.

Why then did those editors write the kind of piece they wrote about the Philippine when they could have treated that country the way they did Israel? Even more puzzling is the fact that Israel was negotiating to suck new American blood to the tune of 40 or 50 billion dollars whereas the Philippine was quietly turning away American aid. We look for an answer to that question in the editorial.

This is what the Journal editors say Mr. Duterte has said recently: “We're not cutting our alliances, but we will follow an independent foreign policy.” And that was enough for the editors to paint a picture of Duterte they would never paint of Netanyahu or any Jew for that matter.

Here is what they say about the Filipino President: “It's possible Mr. Duterte is posturing for tough-guy points at home and brownie points from Beijing, which may extend soft loans for railway construction.” In the paragraph that follows, they go on to say: “But there is a risk Mr. Duterte is fashioning himself as an Asian Hugo Chavez, who tells the Yanks to go home and sells China acquiescence to its takeover of the South China Sea.” That is, the editors can only see the man as engaging in buffoonery or in treachery. They could not bring themselves to seeing him engaged in the kind of policies he believes are good for his country – whether or not such policies will eventually rise to the level of his expectations.

The editors of the Journal formulated that vision of the Filipino President despite the fact they know a great deal about what he desires. Here is a passage in which they describe what he thinks and what he wants: “His priorities are a domestic drug war and peace talks with rebels in the south, missions for which he prefers Chinese assistance. 'Only China will help us,' he said after Beijing offered to build drug-rehab centers for Filipinos last month, 'America just gave you principles of law and nothing else,'” he went on to say.

Having constructed that false reality about the man in their heads, what do they recommend America must do now? Here is what they say in that regard: “The priority is to keep ties productive with all levels of the Duterte government. Public opinion may constrain his worst impulses, and Beijing's bullying could alienate him as it did [his predecessor.] U.S. access to bases near the South China Sea is significant. The Philippines remains an important ally. Its erratic President may eventually come to understand the stakes”.

In other words, they do not see America doing something like extending soft loans to build roads or airports or any kind of infrastructure in the Philippine; projects that would compete with China's railway construction and drug-rehabilitation centers. No, that's no longer what America does. Even though access to bases near the South China Sea is significant, America can only sit back and hope that the man at the helm will be constrained by public opinion and that Beijing will bully him enough to alienate him. What an ingenious strategy!

But really, what is wrong with America today?

Let me put it this way: If the Filipinos were chosen by God to be His favorite children, they would have earned the label “chosen” or “exceptional” and the right to be treated like American Jews.

Since this cannot happen to Filipinos or to any other race, the Americans can only do one thing to be revered again everywhere they go, and their country worshiped again around the globe the way things used to be. They will have to consider everyone they meet to have been exceptionally chosen … and treat them accordingly.

Did not get it coming, now wants it going

The Jews are known to try and have it both ways all the time. That is, they want it coming and going. One guy that has been extremely active at playing the gimme game on behalf of Israel is Elliott Abrams who believes that the entity is owed everything under the sun, yet has no obligation toward anyone.

In the matter that has just unfolded whereby Israel demanded 50 billion dollars worth of charity from America but got only 38 billion, Abrams was so provoked by the attitude of the Obama administration responsible for what he regards as an infamy, he fumed. And while the smoke was still rushing out his ears, he wrote an article that reflects the scrambled state of his mind and the twisted state of his emotions.

The article came under the title: “'Historic' in the Worst Way” and was published on September 26, 2016 in the Weekly Standard. Abrams opens his presentation like this: “In Israel many observers are saying that Obama did no favors for the Jewish state. That's the conclusion Israeli journalists have all reached. They are right.” With this, the writer lets the readers know that what counts is not what the American Administration wants for America but what Israeli journalists want for Israel from America.

He neglected to say what the Israeli government wants because President Obama made it clear that from now on, Americans will be masters of their own house, and that the Israelis under Netanyahu or anyone else, will have to behave like the supplicants they are. What Abrams did not neglect to perpetuate, however, is the lie that used to be criminally perpetrated on the American people by both the American and Israeli spokesmen.

Here is the true story: Israel used to receive 3.1 billion dollars in charity every year, some of that was delivered as weapons, and the rest was given in cash. In addition, the American congress of idiots use to send it hundreds of millions more to pay for the debt that it owes to foreign banks, to expand the criminal settlements in the occupied territories, and to buy food. But that's not what the American people were told. They were lied to, and made to believe that Israel had a missile program with a black hole for mouth in constant need to be fed with American dollars. That's where the money went, the people were told, and nobody dared to verify the claims.

And so, because President Obama had put an end to that criminal practice, Elliot Abrams tried to revive it and perpetuate it. He explained the following: “The current aid is $3.1 billion; the new one is $3.8 billion but the increase is illusory [because] congress already appropriates hundreds of millions more for Israel's missile defense, raising the base line to $3.5 billion. That means the increase is only $300 million but given inflation, the net result is continuation of the current level”.

As if this was not enough, that awful man, Barack Obama “imposed two additional conditions. First, Israel must spend every dime in the United States, meaning it cannot use the funds to purchase equipment made in Israel. Second, Israel will not go to Congress to seek additional funding under any circumstances,” says Abrams.

The reader can see why the American Administration has wanted to do this. The fact is that taxpayer dollars were pouring into Israel under the guise of keeping it secure, but the money was used to kill Palestinians, confiscate their lands and build settlements for new converts to Judaism that decided to settle in the West Bank upon receiving a cash gift of $25,000. In legal terms, this made America the number one sponsor of terrorism in the world, enabling the most depraved regime on the planet to commit the most hideous crimes since the Hebrew savages of biblical times.

Now, with those two provisions, Israel will get the weapons it needs to defend itself but no cash with which to commit crimes of the kind that the Jewish leaders used to pin on America. The Jews have been playing this game by letting the world know it was America that gave the green light for the operations and financed every one of them; therefore should be held responsible for Israel's actions.

Making the world believe that Israeli crimes were American crimes was not the only game the Jews have been playing. Whereas this one was played on the international scene, another one was played on the local scene. Look how Abrams plays it still: “Obama forced Israel to agree that if Congress appropriates additional funds, Israel will return the money. This constitutes a deliberate undermining of the constitutional power of Congress”.

He says that when the Administration protects America from the rapacity of Jews, it violates the Constitution. It is a dirty game that the Jews played incessantly, and the congressional dummies used to believe them.

Wall Street Journal, Wall of Lamentation

There were those of us long ago who saw and spoke about the demeaning element in a foreign entity such as Israel forcing under blackmail a handful of American legislators to attach riders to important legislation binding future Presidents and Congresses to commit diplomatic acts of self-castration in full view of the world.

Many of those acts are played out almost unnoticed on a daily basis, but two were played out recently with the sort of fanfare that caught the attention of everyone on the planet. One act had to do with America letting its hostages be executed by terrorists rather than pay a ransom because America was commanded to do so by the Jews of Israel who thought it too humiliating for Israel to impose a similar set of restrictions on itself, thus continued to pay ransom to free its own hostages.

This scenario kept on repeating itself while the American hostages were executed, and their families were warned not to interfere because it was the wish of the Jews that they do not, even if their loved ones were agonizing as they waited for death to come and relieve them of a criminally insane situation created by a congress of Jewish-trained monkeys. How can something like this happen? How much more can a superpower be humiliated by a cockroach that would not command the respect of even a Third World failed state?

Another such act happened when America was forced to convert nearly two billion dollars into foreign currency and pay it in cash to a foreign government, thus comply with the self-castrating laws that were passed by legislators who shredded the flesh on each others' backs to have the honor of being the first to kiss the rear end of their Jewish blackmailers, their trainers and their God-like masters.

Some of us who saw all that in the past, have now lived long enough to see one man, a single American named Barack Obama rise – by a head and a shoulder above the level of the male and female wussies who are in charge of the hapless superpower – and refuse to be humiliated by Israel's rug-pissing dog named Netanyahu, or by the congress of monkeys he trained to stand 29 times and applaud him every time he decides to go crap on a joint session of their house of ill repute and their chamber of intoxicated second thought.

Obama turned the table on Netanyahu, and had him agree on restrictions that will bind him and bind future prime ministers of Israel to conditions that will restore to America the sovereignty that the congressional monkeys so shamelessly relinquished to Israel.

As expected, the brain dead zombie-like monkeys of wussy-land came to life and started howling their anger at what just happened. One of them, Senator Lindsey Graham, put it this way: “We can't have the executive branch dictating what the legislative branch will do for a decade based on an agreement we are not a party to.” Hey, Lindsey, that's what some of us have been saying for years as you were giving the store away to the Jews, and to the one who came crapping all over your chamber. Where is my share of royalty for this act of plagiarism?

But that's not the whole story because there was another part to what we were saying. It is that we recognized circumstances do change all the time, thus you cannot bind America by a law that's dictated by a foreign entity for the benefit of that entity not knowing what will happen in the future. The disheartening part is that Graham disregarded our observation then, but is angry now because it happened to Israel for only ten years when it was okay to happen to America for an indefinite period.

You also have this guy Marco Rubio who said the following: “I'm not going to criticize the Israeli government. They probably think it's the best deal they can get out of this administration. But I don't feel future congresses are bound by it especially as circumstances change.” Oh yes, circumstances do change except that the brain dead monkeys remain brain dead, and capable of being trained and retrained only by their Jewish trainers.

As to the editors of the Wall Street Journal, they have been wailing not at the Wall that's in occupied Palestine, but the wall that's their dedication to turn America into a colony of Israel. They wrote a piece under the title: “Obama's Israel Sequester” and the subtitle: “He arm-twists an ally to do an end-run around Congress.” It was published on September 16, 2016.

And this is how they start their presentation: “Twisting the arm of an ally is a new low.” The trouble is, they say nothing about wrenching “their” country in support of the only terrorist entity that's occupying another people.