Two articles have appeared in the same week telling how the
Jewish fantasy–and–exploitation machine creates the fantasies it then exploits.
Ben Cohen wrote: “Our Friends in the Gulf,” an article that
shows how Jewish fantasies are created. It was published on June 9, 2017 on the
website of Algemeiner. Four days before that, on June 5, 2017, Benny Avni had
written: “Gulf states '
feud is a big test for Team Trump,” an article that shows how the fantasies are
exploited by that same machine. His article was published in the New York Post.
To create a fantasy, you start with something you believe no
one can verify, and then build on it. This is how Ben Cohen started his
article, and went from there to build a case that doesn't hold. He says he
knows what used to linger in the heart and mind of the late President Gamal
Abdel Nasser of Egypt
more than half a century ago, and in the heart and mind of al-Qaeda's leader
Bin Laden more than a quarter century ago. He is so certain of that, says
Cohen, he can guaranty that the two leaders would have been outraged by “the
decision of [Arab countries] to sever links with Qatar over its deep ties to
terrorism funding”.
Someone should remind this guy, Ben Cohen, that no one
disciplines their own as do the Arabs. They did during the First Gulf War when
Saddam Hussein went too far. And they did it when they gave the green light for
NATO to rein in Libya 's
Gaddafi.
Cohen may believe there is no way to verify what went on in
the hearts and minds of dead people, therefore we must believe him. But that's
only because he ignores a number of pertinent facts, and because he remains too
intellectually lazy to verify the history he writes about. The fact is that Nasser was very much a secular leader interested only in
the economic progress of his country. In fact, this is what got him in trouble
with two groups. One group was World Jewry which disliked the 1954 decision to
build the Aswan Project; as did the Jews with every progress made in the neighborhood.
The other group to dislike the project was the Muslim Brotherhood whose
interest since 1928 had been to fully mobilize Egypt ,
and get it ready to fight the Jewish savagery that was being inflicted on the
people of Palestine .
The bad blood between Nasser and the Brotherhood reached its
highest point when the latter tried to blow up the platform on which Nasser was to stand and give a speech in open air. This
prompted him to view the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, and so he
banned it from public life. When Sadat took over, he relaxed that restriction,
which is why some people consider him to have been more religious than Nasser . In any case, Bin Laden who was tutored by a
lieutenant of the Brotherhood, Ayman al-Zawahiri,
could not have been more different than Nasser .
Thus, for Cohen to ascertain that the two leaders would have been inclined to
think and feel the same way, is to turn reality on its head.
But what does that reality look
like anyway? Well, all you need to do to find out, is to read the New York
Times and the Washington Post. These two publications – edited by Jews – have
such a love affair with the Muslim Brotherhood, you can only conclude they are
inclined to think and feel the same as Ayman Al-Zawahiri. It is not that those
editors are going to convert to Islam; it is that they seek to promote every
opposition that develops against an Arab or a Muslim regime. Their aim is to
establish a puppet government in those countries, the same way they turned the
US Congress into a puppet regime for the Jews to dally with.
Achieving those goals is the fantasy that keeps the Jewish
leaders ticking. But how do they exploit the fantasy and make it work to their
advantage? You get a sense of that when you read the Benny Avni article. In
fact, he expresses his sentiment clearly in the opening sentence. Here it is:
“Escalating hostility among Gulf countries can be an opportunity for America ”.
It must be noted, however, that when a Jew writes an
article, he does not think America .
He would have the word “Israel ”
strewn all over the page as if to say “this is what's good for Israel .” When
he is done writing the article, he goes over it and writes the word “America ” where there is “Israel ” to hide
his intention. Thus, what Avni really meant by that passage is this: Gulf
hostilities can be an opportunity for Israel .
He doesn't know how exactly things will unfold, but he knows
this: “Arabs have never been good at unity. For decades, enmities between the
region's potentates and strongmen were hidden behind a veneer of 'unity' over
opposition to Israel … Arab leaders have realized they had bigger problems than
the Jewish state … A unified Sunni Arab front could possibly lead to public
Arab-Israeli ties”.