The most glaring example of Jewish ambiguity is the pretense
that Israel has an arsenal
of nuclear weapons with which it can wipe all the Arabs and Muslims from the
face of the Earth but will not use it because America
is in the Middle East defending it. Why fight
your fight if a willing bodyguard is there protecting you?
That's the glaring example. But when you look at everything
else that Israel
and her supporters are doing, you'll find that ambiguity exists everywhere in
the Judeo-Yiddish culture. This is reality because the Jews are incapable of
producing as much as they like to consume. Thus, it is imperative for them to
deal with others on the basis of having it both ways each time they can pull it
off. They succeed most of the time because they adopted a policy of
ambiguities.
And while the glaring example is there for all to see, it is
not the most consequential one. In fact, the important example is not a visible
one because it stands for something that should have happened but did not.
It has been 68 years since the United Nations recognized Israel as a
state and yet, the Israelis never even contemplated having a constitution. Why?
Because a constitution defines a people as to whom they are and where they are
– an identity and a place that the Jews are ambiguous about because they want
to have it both ways. They established in their own mind the rule that what
they grab from others is theirs and theirs alone, and what belongs to others
may not so remain.
This is an ideology as depraved as anything you'll find in
the worst of the Nazi and Fascist doctrines. It has survived in Israel , however, because the big powers that
fought against the Nazis and the Fascists protected it in Israel not
knowing what they were doing. This happened because the Jews were adept at
playing the ambiguous game. They got what they wanted for decades without being
detected by the Europeans or the Americans. And then it happened that what was
not seen began to stink, and the smell spread throughout the planet.
The Europeans ended their support of what they came to
realize were Israeli crimes against humanity. Even though the Americans
realized the same thing at the same time, they were unable to extricate
themselves from the insanity because their political system had become the very
definition of insanity. And this is why a movement arose on the university
campuses to do what the political system was unable to do.
There remain two questions: How did the Jews pull it off for
such a long time in America ?
Will that change anytime soon? We can find the answer to the first question in
the article that came under the title: “Is Obama preparing a parting shot at Israel ?”
written by Charles Krauthammer, and published on October 27, 2016 in the
Washington Post. As to the second question, everyone that reads the article
will have to make their own guess.
You'll see how the Jews did it when you read the article
because Krauthammer is trying to pull it off one more time. He begins by
groveling and asking for pity: “The UN approved a resolution condemning Israel ,” using
language that denies the Jewish connection to the land. This done, he makes the
Jewish grievance a Christian one so as to widen the support he hopes to get:
“It makes a mockery of the Gospels … what happens to the very foundation of
Christianity?”
To show the depth of the threat that Israel faces, he ties that event to the
worldwide BDS movement which he says seeks to delegitimize Israel . That's
where Western Universities, Protestant churches, the American Democratic Party
and Hillary Clinton's campaign personnel have joined the movement, he explains.
These are big developments in his eyes, but they are “mere
pinpricks compared to the damage Israel faces in the final days of
the Obama presidency.” Indications are that “Obama might unveil his own final
status parameters of a two-state solution” that would lead to the recognition
of a Palestinian state, he goes on to say. To show how bad this will be for Israel ,
he creates scenarios, speculations and prophesies of the kind that has been
discredited many times before.
And then he admits his real reason to oppose such move: Israel will have to end the occupation of Palestine or face the
charge of “criminal occupation of another country.” To stop this from
happening, he implores Hillary Clinton and her supporters to commit Obama not
to tie her hands should she become president.
But why would she want to do that? Because Obama's reason to
do what he is about to, is not that it is good for the people of Palestine ; for the Middle East, the World, America and the
Jews who might finally write their own constitution. No. Obama's reason is that
he detests Netanyahu, and wants to deliver a devastating parting shot to him
and to Israel
before exiting the stage, says Krauthammer.