Political correctness is more than having to say someone is
weight challenged instead of calling him or her obese. In fact, the practice of
political correctness is more wide ranging and more subtle than that.
For example, there happens to be one rail accident in Egypt for every one hundred or so in North America . And yet, such accidents are reported in America and the rest of the world as straight
news whereas those in Egypt
are twinned with the editorial note: 'Egypt 's rail system suffers from
chronic lack of maintenance.' That, my friend, is the effect of political
correctness.
There are examples of another sort. A notable one was the
day when so-called friendly fire killed a number of people on a desert safari
in Egypt .
The accident earned the country's military the “clumsy” epithet in such
publication as the New York Times. Even though such event happened only once in
the long history of the Egyptian military – as opposed to the American and
Israeli armed forces where it ranks as routine – the wretched editors of the
Times could not resist throwing an undeserved insult at Egypt's military. To
single out that country for vilification is the result of hateful political
correctness.
The list of examples is endless, and no one that has
knowledge in such matters will have difficulty seeing that this sort of
political correctness came to America
from a foreign source. It is that the American culture has been infected by the
Judeo-Yiddish haggling which selects a number of targets to slander each day.
And while all this appears benign on the surface, the same cannot be said when
looking seriously at the ways that political correctness is used to steer the
decision makers into directions that often hurt the interests of America .
One of the pillars to sustain political correctness
pertaining to Jewish and Israeli interests is the list of single-word
debate-stoppers that the Jews have developed over the past half century. The
two most used words in this regard are “democracy and “terror.” The first is
used in phrases like “Israel
is the only democracy…” The second is used in phrases like “a sponsor of terror...”
These are locutions used by Jews to tell others: shut up, and consider it that
you lost the argument. And this too, my friend, is an offshoot of political
correctness.
Those tools in hand, the Jewish leaders were able to put out
a double narrative that no one was left standing to oppose. One narrative
constantly painted Israel
as heaven on earth endowed with virtues surpassing those of angels. The other
narrative painted Israel 's
enemies of the day as hell on earth afflicted with sins that surpass those of
demons. This is how the Jews managed to shape opinion makers such as the New
York Times. It is how they also managed to steer policy deciders such as
members of the Congress into directions that shredded into confetti America 's
standing in the world.
How all this works in real life can be seen in the editorial
that came under the title: “Israel 's
Alarming Settlement Bill,” published on November 17, 2016 in the New York
Times. This work paints the image of a hypocritical mass afflicted with
political correctness and the intellectual dishonesty that goes with it.
Look what it is that the Jews call democracy: “Israeli
lawmakers gave approval to a bill that would retroactively legalize settlements
built on Palestinian land. The bill is intended to prevent the court-ordered
demolition of an illegal outpost.”
Had something like that happened elsewhere in the world, the
Times editors would have cried out: this is fascism disguised as democracy. Had
it happened in Egypt ,
they would have blown their entrails out of the belly yelling: stop sending
them those 38 billion dollars … err … or is it 1.3 billion? Yeah baby, it's 1.3
billion to Egypt and 38
billion to Israel ... Yeah
man, punish Egypt but kiss
and make up with Israel ,
and then send them more dollars. And that, my friend, is political correctness
of the whorish kind.
But never mind all that because it will prove to be neither
here nor there in the long run. Also, never mind the rest of the editorial
except for its ending. So then, what are the nincompoops of the Times saying in
the end? Here is what they say: “He [Donald Trump] should signal to the
Israelis that he will need time and consultation to develop a coherent policy
on the region”.