Sunday, February 11, 2018

A Daydream of Quacks that may turn real

NOTE: Before I get into today's discussion, I would like to respond to queries I received with regard to the article I published two days ago under the title: “Orin Hatch flunks Test for SCOTUS Appointment”.

One query dealt with what appears to be a contradiction. I said that “groups never took their case to court,” and later said they wanted a level playing field when “challenging opponents in the courts of law or the court of public opinion.” What I meant is that––unlike the Jews who constantly ask the State and Federal Governments in America, to pass laws that favor them––the groups in Canada only wanted financial aid to argue specific cases such as someone trying to put up an English only sign on his store in Quebec; or a native community that wanted financial aid to deal with a police detachment treating its members with brutality.

The other inquirer wanted to know what I meant by: “If the students made full use of the twitters, going against each other, they will be left with nothing to tweet home about.” What I meant is that rather than the government trying to regulate freedom (an oxymoron), the students should settle their disputes among themselves, which they will via the tweeter, and most likely keep their parents abreast of what’s happening. But at some point, one group will get tired and raise the white flag. That's when they will all stop tweeting home about this matter.


NOW, TODAY'S DISCUSSION:

Do you know why it is a good idea to examine, re-examine and cross-examine a witness when you seek to administer justice? Because the story you get at first is a beautiful facade of lies hiding the ugly truth behind it. When you do discovery and cross-examination, you pierce the facade and get to the truth inside.

Even more rewarding than that is what you get in a written testimony if you're lucky enough to get one. What you get is not only a facade with the truth between the lines begging to be unveiled; you get a glimpse of the mentality that ties all the elements of the lie. And when you have that, you have certainty that the truth you have established will not be impeached because you failed to show motivation behind what's happening.

A written testimony that's good to probe is that of a pundit named Benny Avni. His latest article is a testimony that contains the elements of the story he is telling as well as the mentality that ties those elements together. Think of the written story as something that is more elaborate than a simple facade. Think of it as a beautifully decorated Easter egg. Whereas the outer shell looks attractive, you don't know what's inside it till you conduct the examinations. When done, you'll find that you either have an edible egg, or one that wasn't boiled. It has gone bad, and now that the shell was pierced, it is discharging an odor to make those in the room faint.

Here is the outer shell of Avni's Easter egg. It comes at the start of the article: “It turns out trying to stay on the sidelines of the Syrian civil war may be the very thing that drags us into it.” The false message here is that America is not involved in the Syrian war. Because of this, we (Americans) will be dragged into that war.

And here is what's inside the shell. It comes at the end of the article: “Unless America flexes diplomatic muscle, Russia, Turkey and Iran will settle Syria's future according to their interests. The division of Syria is all but inevitable. Those with a stake in the future of the country must assure their interests are maintained. For years, America sat out the Syrian war. We're playing catch-up now”.

The message here is a lamentation to the effect that we (Americans) are involved in the Syrian war, after all, but not enough to settle the future of Syria according to our interests – chief among them the division of Syria. What was that again? Did he say “our” interests? Who is that supposed to be? America? What's America's interest in seeing that Syria is divided? Well, maybe Avni meant someone else. So we cross-examine the witness – which in this case means probing his written testimony – and discover the following:

“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu popped up in Moscow to deliver a warning to President Vladimir Putin: Israel, he made clear, will prevent Iran from establishing a beachhead near its border –– by force, if necessary. But UN Syria's envoy told me Israel's concerns aren't being considered in the peace process established by the UN Security Council”.

So that's the rotten truth. When Benny Avni says “we,” he means: “We, the Jews whose spiritual country is not America but Israel.” And yet, it is clear that Avni desperately wants America to get involved in the Syrian war. Why is that? Well, according to his testimony, Israel is treated by those involved in the peace process as no more than a little nothing that commands zero consideration.

And because nobody treats American power with that level of contempt, Avni has summoned America's elites to get involved on the side of Israel. Lucky for him, the American Congress structured the governance of the ship of state in a way that turned America into an Israeli colony. Thus, in the way that there was a “New England” which used to be a British colony; and the way that there was a “Nouvelle France” which used to be a French colony, there is now a “New Israel” which is America, the current Jewish colony.

This is why, Benny Avni who is Israeli at heart, speaks of America the way that the Brits of a bygone era used to speak of the American colonies; and the way that the French of a bygone era used to speak of Algeria.

Thus, unless the American political, literary and artistic elites stage a sustained revolt, the common law whose premise is to codify the common practice into a binding law, America risks turning from a de facto Judeo-Israeli colony into a de jure Israeli colony.