You engineer a fake incident with the view of exploiting it
but the events take a life of their own and develop differently from what you
had in mind. You quickly rearrange the chips to exploit the new moment.
Instead of the quid pro quo you were aiming for, you now
have a situation in which you can play the victim and gain as much as you
originally wanted or maybe even more. What a lucky Jew you are!
This kind of scenario can only play itself in America , and
the actors can only be the usual suspects. They would be Israel playing the role of the bloodsucker, America playing
the role of the pushover, and the four stooges being played by The Washington
Post, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and the Weekly Standard.
Scene One opens on May 17, 2017 with each of the last three
publications relaying one aspect of the story. Writing an op-ed in the New York
Times, Yossi Alpher lays out the background like this: “[2 days ago] The
Washington Post reported that President Trump had disclosed highly classified
intelligence to senior Russian officials.” He says this much in an article he
wrote under the title: “What Israel Makes of Trump's Intel Gaffe,” published in
the New York Times, of course.
As to Jenna Lifhits, she reassures the diehard rank-and-file
that has not yet defected to the ranks of the BDS movement, that “Trump
Disclosure Unlikely to Harm Intel Cooperation with U.S.,” an article that was
published in the Weekly Standard. And last but not least, you have none other
than the editors of the Wall Street Journal who instruct President Donald Trump
and warn him that “Loose Lips Sink Presidencies.” It is an editorial that also
came under the subtitle: “The Russian intel story shows the price of Trump's
lost credibility,” published in the Wall Street Journal, of course.
Since Yossi Alpher served in Israel 's
Mossad, and since he directed a center for strategic studies, what he reveals
about this matter tells more about Israel ; about what it wants and how
it goes about getting it – than what the Wall Street Journal or the Weekly
Standard or the New York Times can ever reveal. After all, these publications
as well as the Washington Post were the stooges that Israel
used like umbilical cords to suck America 's blood and treasure.
But considering that Yossi Alpher intended all along to
derive maximum benefit for Israel
from what happened, how did he spin the argument? Well, the first thing he did
was to cast a wide net of ambiguity over the event. Look how he did that: “Islamic
State plots to blow up airliners with bombs planted in laptops … The specific
accuracy of these press reports is a secondary issue. The primary issue is the
affront to protocol...”
In other words, he first asserted that this was an important
event because lives could be affected by what happens next. He then added: But
you know what; nothing of what was said may turn out to be accurate.
Having produced a confusion he can exploit, he now seeks to
create a fake moment he can dance around. To this end, he tells what else came
with the affront to protocol. It is this: “...as well as concern for the safety
of the intelligence source, which was compounded by the impression that the
leak came from a witless leader oblivious to the gravitas of his office.” Wow!
There is enough here to turn even a paraplegic into a Fred Astaire.
Not only did Alpher engender sympathy for the intelligence
source that may or may not exist in a dangerous zone, he also denigrated the
President of the United States whose light weight intellect is no match to the
weight of his obligations, says Alpher.
But having admitted to “Israel 's
considerable dependency on American support,” why did he take a chance
insulting the President of the United
States so viciously? He did it because there
is nothing more powerful than to moan: “I have been victimized by one of your
own, America ;
one that's so demonstrably stupid, you should have kept on a leash”.