Saturday, April 22, 2017

The Mob at the Helm of the American Titanic

Whereas the Congress of the United States of America is a glaring symbol that all is not well on the American ship of state, the study of three other markers more readily explains how and why America has descended so quickly into its present state of disrepair. They are the media, the general discourse and foreign policy.

Three articles published on April 21, 2017 discuss these markers. Studying them clarifies many points and offers a great deal of insight as to what happened in the recent past that got America to where it is today. These are: (1) “How James Murdoch could turn Fox News into something to be proud of,” written by Jennifer Rubin and published in The Washington Post. (2) “If US campuses can't protect free speech, they need new management,” a NY Post editorial. (3) “Iran on Notice,” written by Lee Smith and published in the Weekly Standard.

Jennifer Rubin describes Fox News as a network that pretends to be a news organization but is, in reality, anything except a news organization. Look at the following passage:

“Under new leaders the pretense that the prime-time shows are 'news' should be dropped. Their hosts complain that they should not be held to journalistic standards because they are not true journalists. Fine. Remove the 'Fox News' logo and the news-desk set. Would that shatter the pretense that the worldview is not factual? The news division should not be staffing evening hosts who help along their favorites in a sort of post-debate political [diplomatic] ad”.

It is obvious that Rubin is only interested in America's political life at the national level. But the fact remains that Fox News stands out among the networks because it is, at its core, a foreign organization. Its founder is a foreigner that studied the weaknesses of the American scene, and exploited them to the hilt. He thus created a money-making caricature of what a news organization ought to be. Fox is entertaining without being funny because it is a mighty dick-teaser for the nostalgic sexagenarian window shoppers. And while this is unfolding with regard to the National scene, the real message that's drummed into the subconscious mind of the viewers is one that comes from overseas. More about this later.

As to the editors of the New York Post, they have engaged in the American pastime of blaming their cultural shortcomings on the wrong people. Even as Jennifer Rubin's article clearly shows that the media are playing a big role in polarizing society, the Post editors explain the deterioration of the general discourse in America like this: “The kids are plainly learning this nonsense at college –– which means professors and administrators are failing at their most fundamental duties.” Someone should tell these editors it is more likely that Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly were the ones to inspire those kids than the other way around.

As to Lee Smith, having admitted at the outset that, “the Trump administration certif(ied) that Iran is in compliance with the nuclear deal,” he went on to say that “the administration is split into rival camps––one that wants to go hard on the Iranians and another that wants to take it easy.” He then explained that: “Numerous agencies are carrying out the review––including law enforcement and the intelligence community, the State Department and various embassies around the world, the Treasury Department, Justice, and the Pentagon. The process is being managed by National Security Council staff”.

That settles it, does it not? I mean you have all these professionals spending all that time putting together a policy that will be coherent; that will be understood and respected by the world, and that will be effective and designed to work in the best interest of America. Right? Well then, should the editors and pundits of America not wait till that group has pronounced itself before saying anything more on this subject? Well yes. In fact that's what has happened generally in America. Make that––happened generally but with an exception.

The exception is due to the fact that when it comes to Jewish concerns, the message that's drummed into the subconscious mind of the viewers, is one that comes from Israel. Iran is a Jewish concern, and Lee Smith is showing us how the matter is handled: “Critics of the Iran deal, eager for stronger action taken more quickly, should probably see certification not as a disappointment, but as a delay”.

Thus, Smith and the rest of the Jewish mob of pundits will start doing what Netanyahu of Israel said they do well. It is to keep echoing the Jewish agenda till they drown everything else, thus force their point of view on the feeble minds inside the Congress and the Administration.

As to the public at large, Smith seeks to convince it that the Jewish point of view does not come from Israel but is an official White House leak. He does that by claiming that a Trump official whispered the information in his ear. He elaborates by saying that the certification was meant to “buy time for the administration to muster its resources”.

This is where the reader should wonder if that claim is real because it sounds more like an advice from him to the Administration rather than a leak from the Administration to him. In fact, Smith does not stop here. He goes on to betray himself by doing a very Jewish thing. Having advised Trump on what to do, he now advises the Iranians on what to do. Here it is: “The Iranians might also see it as an opportunity to get their act together”.

With the Jews at the helm of the American ship of state, you'll know who is responsible if it hits an iceberg and gets swallowed by an ocean of Jewish nonsense.