Monday, December 18, 2017

When Predators choose to talk Peace

Study the declarations that were made by representatives of the Israeli government in the past two decades or so, and you'll find that they all rejected every peace effort, peace initiative and peace process for the middle East, whether they were initiated by someone friendly to Israel or unfriendly to it.

As well, study the sayings that were uttered by the talking heads and the articles that were written by the mob of Jewish pundits in America, and you'll find that all these characters spent time echoing Israel's rejection of peace. They did so pursuant to the eternal policy of the Judeo-Israeli syndicate. The policy is eternal, they point out, because it's a principle that was codified in modern time, and more importantly, it is the foundation upon which the Jewish religion was founded three and a half millenniums ago.

The DNA of that religion and the culture that arose around it spell “predation.” In fact, the single idea out of which flows the entire philosophical construct upon which stands the Jewish existence is that the Jew establishes his ownership of something simply by desiring it. If that something belongs to someone already, the Jew does not ask for or negotiates to have it; he simply grabs it and runs. And that's the only time he'll talk peace. He'll talk because he doesn't want to be pursued by those he robs. Thus, the ideal situation for the Jewish predator happens when he snatches the piece he covets, and he's given the peace that allows him to keep it without having to fight.

This is the Jewish reality that has not changed in thousands of years. It is the reason why the Jews were never able to establish the empire they craved since the beginning of time. But they are not giving up on that ultimate desire, and as long as there are suckers populating the planet, the Jews will tell them false stories in an effort to recruit them for the battles they cannot win alone.

The battle that the Jews are currently fighting centers on their robbery of Palestine. They snatched a piece of real estate, and what they want is the peace that will allow them to keep it and not be pursued. As to the suckers who will stand with them and fight their battles; these would be the part of the American set-up that's known as the politico-journalistic establishment.

The Jews have already spent two decades convincing the Americans that the part of Palestine they robbed belongs to them, and there should be no revision of that. As to the part they occupy but have not yet annexed, they want the Americans to help them keep it without having to fight for it. For this reason, the Jews are talking peace to the Americans. They hope that in the end, they'll get the piece they want, and the peace that will free them to go on preying elsewhere.

Fortunately however after two decades of groping in the darkness that's gushing out the Jewish misinformation and disinformation machine, a member of the American politico-journalistic establishment has seen the light and said that the Jews do not really want peace as defined by the civilized world. That someone happens to be – surprise, surprise – the New York Times. Its editors composed an editorial in which they said that Israel has “shown no serious interest in peace”.

That observation, coming from what used to be staunch supporters of Jewish thievery, prompted a response from Danny Dayan who is Israel's consul general in New York. His missive was printed under the title: “An Israeli View on Peace” on December 15, 2017 in the New York Times. Dayan is telling the Times editors they were wrong in saying that Israel does not want peace. And so, he set out to prove his point. But guess what, my friend; Dayan did the very Jewish thing of emasculating himself in public.

Accused of not wanting peace, you would expect the representative of Israel to start his argument by demonstrating that Israel does want peace, and that it has been working relentlessly to secure it. But that's not what he did. Instead, he badmouthed the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas; an act that reflects the Jewish disease responsible – at least in part – for the Jews being thrown into the proverbial gas chamber everywhere they went on this planet.

After the attack on Abbas, Dayan simply declared: “It is Israel that has stated continuously that it is open for negotiations.” Aside from that, Dayan again chided Abbas for working to put the Palestinian House in order by negotiating with the opposition.

But Dayan said nothing about the differences that exist in Israel's House; a sad place where the prime minister is probed by the police for thievery and corruption, and where the prime minister is complaining that the police was recruited by the opposition to destroy him and his coalition government.

When it comes to dealing with internal differences, does Dayan not wish the Jews were as civilized as the Palestinians?