America's economic Rope for self-hanging

The day that self-generated hot air will cause your head to swell with grand ideas about having become so invincible, you can do anything you want, and the world will bow to your wishes — is the day that the people around you will know you're holding the rope with which you're about to hang yourself.

This is where America stands today as it proudly waves the economic rope, threatening to throw sanctions at those who refuse to toe the Judeo-American line. In fact, America is already attempting to inflict such punishment on Russia, China, North Korea and Iran. It is also threatening to do it to India, the Europeans, and an assortment of Latin American, African and Middle Eastern countries.

This bizarre situation developed because the Jews managed to convince the Americans that their country was exceptional. Actually, they specified that America was almost at par with the special status that God had bestowed on the Jews, his chosen children.

Two articles that appeared on the website of the Washington Institute do not discuss that point directly, but tackle other related matters, and in so doing, highlight realities on the ground that will help us develop insights as to how the superpower is preparing the noose that will hug its neck so tightly, it will deliver the proverbial kiss of death.

One article came under the title: “The Most Important Speech of the Year in Iran,” and the subtitle: “Hostile to the West, No Concessions at Home.” It was written by Patrick Clawson and published on March 26, 2019. The other article came under the title: “Russian Moves in the Gulf and Africa Have a Common Goal,” written by Anna Borshchevskaya, and published on March 28, 2019.

The Clawson article reviews the speech that was given by Iran's supreme leader Ali Khamenei on New Year's Day of the Persian calendar. The theme this year was Foreign Policy and the need for Iran to rely on itself, says Clawson. Khamenei made it clear that Iran does not trust the West, especially the United States of America. For this reason, he wants his country to become self-sufficient in all the goods and services it consumes so that it can go it alone if it will come to that.

What Clawson did not say is that Iran is far from having to go it alone. It is already making a mockery of America's sanctions imposed on it in an ill-advised, futile and juvenile attempt to force it to accept Jewish-inspired changes to the nuclear deal it signed with the world. In addition, Iran has established a strong alliance with Qatar and Turkey, and working with its new partners as well as a number of newly forged friendships, to establish a political, economic and military presence throughout Africa and Asia.

This brings us to the Anna Borshchevskaya article. The writer begins by telling that Russia is establishing a strong presence in the strategic places that will give it enormous political, economic and military advantages, in fulfillment of its quest to regain the superpower status it once enjoyed. Borshchevskaya explains that Russia's presence in a country like Sudan means more than forging an ordinary alliance. It represents an insurance policy that protects Sudan and other weak nations against what they perceive as the designs of the United States and other evil regimes.

And that's not all, because in a repudiation of the Judeo-American mentality of dividing the world into those who are “with us” and those who are “against us,” the Russians are demonstrating how much they scoff at the saying: my enemy's enemy is my friend, and my enemy's friend is my enemy. Instead of being guided by this kind of high school mentality, the Russians have forged strong ties with both the Shiite dominated alliance of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, as well as the Sunni nemesis which is the alliance made of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirate and Egypt.

It is clear that at a time when America is groaning barks that sound as threatening as the meow of a pussycat, and delivering stings that bite as hard as the kiss of a panda, Russia is paving the world with a silk road of its own to run parallel to China's silk road. Thus, you would expect that if there was in America's politico-journalistic circles, at least one individual endowed with the IQ of a high-schooler, he or she would be advising the rest of the gang that America is going down the Jewish drain of irrelevance, and that a rescue plan put together by adults, is urgently needed. But that's not happening.

The history that's making its way to future historians, tells of the rapid transformation that our era has experienced. It is that from the adversarial bipolar world of the US and USSR military superpowers, we went into the competitive multi-polar world of the US, Europe, China and Japanese economic superpowers, in a matter of a few decades.

We are now moving toward a world of alliances which are founded for the specific purpose of defending against a disintegrating America that's brought down, not by foreign enemies attacking it from outside, but by so-called Jewish friends eroding its institutions from the inside.

It is a situation that will cause America's swollen head to transform into a throbbing head. And anything can happen as a result.

The concern the rest of the world has, is that when the pain will reach unbearable levels, America will lash out in every direction before hanging itself.

Hamas seeks Life, Israel delivers Death

Despite the headline that promises, “What Hamas really wants from its latest attacks on Israel,” there is very little in the article below that headline telling what Hamas wants, let alone what it REALLY wants.

In fact, there is little even about what the Israeli government wants. Instead, there is a whole lot about what Benny Avni, the author of the article wants. And what he wants just happens to coincide with what the opposition parties in Israel want. You can read all about this tangled web of deadly nonsense in the March 28, 2019 edition of the New York Post.

You go through the article hoping to be informed of something you didn't know before, or gain new insights you would want to incorporate into your perspective on the Middle East. But all you find is the standard accusation that's usually leveled at governments, which is that they act badly at times, because they have problems and wish to divert the public's attention to something else. Here is how Benny Avni put it: “[Hamas is] escalating attacks on Israel to divert attention from their unpopularity back home.” That's what the writer told us at the outset, is what Hamas really wants.

Having done this, Benny Avni went on to interpret the current events through the usual spin machine that paints the Hamas people as pure evil, and paints the Israelis as pure saints. This led him to the standard Jewish conclusion that goes like this: “The strategic goal, which Americans should support, should be an end to Hamas rule in Gaza — period.” In fact, this is what he, Benny Avni, wants and what some in Israel are asking for, according to him. Here is the passage that tells it: “Some of the top politicians [in Israel] are pushing various plans for regime change in Gaza”.

Even though Benny Avni does not seem to know what the Palestinian population or the government in Gaza want, his description of what they do on the ground, offers a hint as to what they want. Here is a revealing passage: “Things are likely to escalate; Hamas having scheduled a million-man march at Israel's border fence, a rerun of its weekly [ritual].” So, there you have it. Both the population of Gaza and the government want to send Israel a message.

In fact, this has been a ritual that was fully and repeatedly explained by the people of Gaza and their government. They want an end to the ongoing crime against humanity that is the air and sea blockade which Israel is maintaining against them. They want the blockade to end because it is preventing them from developing their economy, from giving their people the life they deserve and from flourishing as a society.

These are highly intelligent, highly motivated and extremely industrious people who can quickly develop the gas field that's in their territorial water, and use the revenue to create a Singapore-like economy on the Mediterranean. But Israel that called on the Americans to get in the way of Egypt developing its economy, and then called on its Fifth Columnists to rob America's military secrets, which it used to prevent Iraq from developing its economy — is the same Israel that is now asking America to help it prevent Gaza from developing its economy.

This is a repetition of the same old story of cowardly and savage beasts behaving like cowardly and savage beasts while relying on America to help them carry on at their highest level of beastly performance. They never relent, they never give up, and America never says no to them.

Set aside for a moment, the content of the article, and read it again while concentrating on the detection of the writer's mood-changes as you sense him develop the various passages. You'll find that his mood remains somber almost throughout the article, except during the moments when his words conjure up images of violence inflicted on the Palestinians by the Israeli military. That’s when you’ll sense he is cheering-up. Here is a compilation of such passages:

“Israeli Defense Forces hammering Gaza targets. IDF jets bombed to smithereens the offices of Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas political chief. Also hit were intelligence and military buildings and other symbols of the organization's power. The Hamas leadership will be buried in the tunnels of Gaza. Preferring pinpoint, daring air attacks like the one concluded Thursday morning”.

To create the chaos and bloody mayhem, like we see plaguing the Levant today, was the intent of the old colonial powers, Britain and France. They conspired to establish Israel at the time that they did for this very purpose. But several generations followed, and those who are in charge of Britain and France today have developed different views as to how the world should be managed.

Eager to see the work of their forefathers erased, the Brits and the French, in concert with their Europeans allies, are doing what's necessary to create a new paradigm that will prevent humanity from sliding back into the dark days of an earlier era.

Sadly, however, there is an obstacle standing in the way of the Europeans achieving their lofty goal. It is an America that has itself become a colony of the new imperial power, which is none other than the eternal villain known as the Syndicate of World Jewry.

That thing swallowed the American superpower and turned it into its terrorist arm. It is forcefully and relentlessly pushing America to attack someone; to bomb this one or that one, or do whatever it takes to achieve regime change in the places where the Jews cannot get in, but wish to be there playing their destructive games. And America is obeying every one of their commands.

Satan's Criteria for what's good and what's bad

Since antiquity, philosophers have had a hard time coming up with a conclusive definition of what is good and what is bad, but they never ceased trying. When you go over their arguments, however long and circuitous they may be, you'll see in them a kind of universal agreement that what's good can be determined by two measurements:

First, it is a good thing to try preserving life at all time. The rationale being that if we don't preserve life, we perish as a species, and this should be postulated as a bad thing. Second, we must try to practice equal treatment among people because if we don't, the aggrieved party will seek redress by fighting back, a move that will, in all likelihood, lead to misery and the loss of life.

These are the thoughts that come to mind the instant that you see a title like this: “Good Move on the Golan Heights,” which is an article that was written by Douglas J. Feith and published on March 27, 2019 in National Review Online.

Eager to find out how the writer defines 'good,' and how his definition might apply to the Golan Heights' move, you get surprised by what you see in the subtitle of the article where the writer summarizes his view. It goes like this: “Now that the U.S. has recognized that they belong to Israel, Syria's leadership after Assad would not be asked to humiliate itself by ceding the territory”.

You'll be surprised if you're an old-timer because you'll recognize this approach as harking back to the days when the Jews started implementing their plan to conquer America. In fact, if you've been interested in studying how the semi-sophisticates of the Old World used their blunt skills to confuse and conquer the cultural peasants of the New World, you'll exclaim: Here we go again!

Made of disparate pieces that have not yet fused into a melting pot, or jelled into a coherent culture that's based on solid principles or a unifying philosophy, the Americans were smitten by the Jewish ability to present things in a manner that was so novel, they saw it as “out of the box” and refreshing.

Well, Douglas Feith did it again by ignoring the principles of life preservation and equal treatment, choosing instead, to explain why it was a good thing for America to give the Jews the Golan, a property that belongs neither to the Jews nor the Americans. Feith did it by arguing that future leaders of Syria will have an excuse to accept the injustice imposed on them by an outside force. And this is the sort of screwed-up logic that used to impress the Americans so much, they came to believe that Jews were guided by a culture far superior to theirs. It is how, in the span of fifty years, America became a Jewish banana plantation.

Starting anew with a logic borrowed from an earlier era, Douglas Feith went on to build a case that led him to establish criteria by which he defined 'good' as being what favors the Jews and promotes the interests of Israel. He did it by making a list of all the negative arguments that apply to Israel, and falsely attributing them to Syria. For this reason, I prepared a condensed version of what he said, using the name Syria as he did, but adding [Israel] in brackets to indicate what should have been.

Here is what resulted:

“Syria [Israel] has been an unhappy political experiment. The regime won a war by imposing on other countries millions of refugees. There is no reason for world powers [America] to remain committed to Syria [Israel]. As a rule, preserving borders is a good thing; but not always. Syria's [Israel's] borders have spawned belligerence. Its leaders have continually used their military forces to violate the sovereignty of Lebanon and other neighbors. In light of the disastrous domestic and international history, it is reasonable to ask: What borders might better serve the interests of Syria's [Israel's] neighbors, and the world in general? Syria's [Israel's] borders do not have deep roots in religion, culture, or history. They reflect the old interests of France and Britain. Until 1920 [1948], there had never been a nation called Syria [Israel]”.

What is missing in the Douglas Feith presentation is an attempt to identify a value system that would be universally accepted as good, and build on it to reach the conclusion that he did. It is this: “President Trump announced his new Golan policy without finesse … but the policy has merit”.

However, in keeping with the Jewish tradition of laying out screwy logics, Douglas Feith speculated on what the implementation of the policy will lead to, and concluded that it had merit. Big deal!

This has been an intellectual effort not worth a basket of American bananas.

Street Gang Mentality in the editorial Room

Before Chicago — where gangs now rule the streets — there was Los Angeles where two of their Street gangs came to be known by their names. They were the Bloods and the Crips.

It happened that in 1992, an all-White jury in Los Angeles acquitted the police department of wrongdoing after watching a video that clearly showed several policemen beat-up Rodney King, an African-American who was in such a bad shape, he remained motionless on the pavement, unable even to move an arm to block the kicks that were delivered to his body repeatedly and savagely. The Bloods and the Crips rioted, as they promised they would do if the jury acquitted the police department.

The riot was such a big event, it was covered extensively by the print and audio-visual media. There was also a good amount of background coverage on how street gangs form and how they operate. The one thing that stood out from all this, was that street gangs use methods similar to those we observe in some political quarters. For example, because members of gangs need to be motivated all the time lest they slacken and turn lethargic, the rhetoric they use to communicate with each other, is imbued with words and images that allude to fearlessness, manhood, courage and so on.

This was noteworthy because it employed a motivational approach that is prominent in the lexicon that's used by Jews when addressing the political honchos of the democracies. In fact, the approach had become so repetitive in Canada, people could not help but notice the gap that existed between what the Jews sounded like, and what they actually meant to communicate.

For example, the Jews were telling the political honchos to be so courageous as to stand with Israel against the Palestinians. But ordinary Canadians saw Israel as a rapist, and the Palestinians as the victims of rape. Thus, in the eyes of the public, the Jews were asking the Canadian honchos to condone the rapists and condemn their victims for resisting the act of rape.

The sad part is that the same method can now be seen deployed by Jews on the political honchos of the United states. In fact, you can see a current example in the piece that came under the title: Steny Hoyer again shows top Dems don't dare stand up to anti-Semites in the ranks,” an editorial of the New York Post that was published on March 26, 2019.

The editors are lamenting that one day, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer stuck his neck out to defend those who were offended by the remark that some supporters of Israel have dual loyalty, and the next day, Hoyer seemed to backtrack on his stand. Which is why the editors accused him of lacking courage.

Let's for now, set aside the reality that the editors of the New York Post have a knack for speaking like the Los Angeles street gangs, the Bloods and the Crips. And let's instead, concentrate on what Steny Hoyer has said both times to merit being accused — let's call it by its name — cowardice.

Referring to a freshman that supposedly made that accusation, and the two freshman that supported her, here is what Hoyer has said the first time, and then the second time:

First, he said this: “When someone accuses American supporters of Israel of dual loyalty, I say: Accuse me. I am part of a large, bipartisan coalition in Congress supporting Israel. I tell Israel's detractors: Accuse us”.

Second, speaking to an AIPAC gathering of Jews, Steny Hoyer said this: “There are 62 freshman Democrats. You hear me? Sixty-two — not three”.

Given that there is not one iota of contradiction in those two sayings, what could have so upset the Jewish editors of the New York Post, they called Hoyer a coward? There can only be one explanation. It is that they would have liked to see him go to AIPAC with a surprise gift under his arm. But what kind of gift would have satisfied a bunch of bloodthirsty beasts?

Well then, recall the saying that never fails to prove its validity. It is this: Give the Jews a finger and they’ll want the whole arm. They saw the freshman rebuked for saying what she said. Now the bloodthirsty Jews expected Steny Hoyer to double-down on the punishment of the freshman by announcing her expulsion from the Foreign Relations Committee where she has a seat. Hoyer failed to deliver on this one, so they called him coward.

Now, my friend, you know why Jews are considered so repugnant that people everywhere on the planet and throughout time, have considered them unfit to mingle with.

The Poison that wants to be its own Antidote

An old saying goes like this: “It takes a thief to catch a thief.” Based on this idea, some law enforcement agencies hired former thieves to help them catch currently active thieves. The practice spread to other types of crimes, most prominent being computer hackers who get caught, get prosecuted and then get employed by law enforcement agencies to work on catching currently active computer hackers.

There is nothing wrong with that, as long as the criminals first pay their debt to society by paying a fine or serving time as stipulated by law. But when this is completed, there is no better way for a former criminal to work on his own rehabilitation than to use the skills he acquired doing evil, and put them in the service of the society he used to abuse. This can only be viewed as poetic justice.

We must, however, throw in a word of caution at this point. Given the nature of this undertaking, we must not go overboard and become so Pollyannaish as to believe that a rehabilitated former criminal will remain clean to the end of his days. It may well happen that the opportunities to which he is exposed on the job, will pull him back to the life of crime he thought he left behind. For this reason, he should be allowed to do his work, but only under supervision, albeit one that will be discreet and respectful.

Now, imagine the extreme case of a criminal that's not a one-time recidivist, but a habitual recidivist that never expressed remorse for what he did, nor does he promise he'll never do it again. Yet, here he is challenging the authorities to take his advice on how to conduct a war against all the criminals and potential criminals out there, while guaranteeing a decisive victory and lasting success.

If you were the authority, would you take this guy's advice?

In case you wonder, I am not giving you a hypothetical case. This is really what the Jews are doing while at the same time running two contradictory discourses. One discourse says: give unlimited freedom to everyone that wants to say anything. The other discourse says: give us laws by which to prosecute the people who will display anti-Semitic tendencies by hinting they are less than 100 percent supportive of all the Jewish and Israeli causes.

One such request came in the form of an article under the title: “Why states must protect free speech on campus,” written by Kim Coleman and published on March 25, 2019 in The Washington Times. To make his point, the writer complains about the micro-suppression to free speech that happens on college campuses. He asserts that, “free speech is lost in the papers not written, the questions not asked, and the comments withheld because of fear of retribution … numerous instances where free speech has been denied or suppressed to demoralized students, desperate professors and frightened parents”.

Coleman spoke in the first person, telling the readers what his experience has been. Well then, allow me to tell of my own experience, and that of hundreds of others like me. We not only saw the suppression of our speech; we saw a coalition made of Jewish organizations, the security apparatus of the central government, and the most influential newspaper in the country join forces to do one thing: Turn us into non-persons whose existence was never to be acknowledged in public. We were banned for life from working in a profession that had the potential to give us access to the public where we could take our case.

My alma mater, York University here in Ontario, was nicknamed “Jewish bastion” at the time. It was the place that did the most to stand with Nathan Sharansky when he was in a Soviet Jail. It was the place to which Sharansky's wife turned to publicize her husband's plight. And yet, I and the other Arab students were repeatedly told that “for our own good,” we should not engage in any discussion involving Middle Eastern matters no matter what the Jews were doing to support Israel by denigrating the Arab countries.

Only a few years ago, the president of a famous University in the city of Hamilton, not far from where I live, threatened to punish all those who would say that Israel was practicing apartheid. Similar horror stories came out of universities in the Canadian Western provinces.

As well, published stories about what happens on American campuses, tell of groups of students having a collegial kind of gathering being noisily invaded by Jewish students who tell them what amounts to the following: We are here, we are Jews and we have a Holocaust story to tell you. Stop doing what you're doing and listen to us or you'll be accused of anti-Semitic tendency.

Students, faculty and administrators got so fed up in America, they started to experiment with ways to protect themselves from disruption, and protect their most precious possession: free speech. That’s because they see their right to it being attacked on two fronts. They see the expression of personal opinion being suppressed, and they see pre-packaged Jewish opinions being shoved down their throats whether or not they like it.

Like all experiments in the realm of social change, a solution will eventually be reached on this continent, and free speech will be preserved on college campuses. It might take some time for this to happen, but such is the nature of social change.

What should worry us, however, is that the whole thing could take a bad turn because of what Kim Coleman, and people like him are doing. In observance of the destructive Jewish habit, they ran to the authorities and asked them to make laws that will serve the Jewish causes … which is a sure way to screw up everything.

It was the Jews that created the current situation in the first place. Because things ceased to work for them, they now say: let us tell you how fix it. This is like the poison that wants to be its own antidote; it never works. Keep the state and these people out of it, and let events take their natural course. We’ll get there eventually.

Look how Innocence has unmasked an evil Face

Did you ever think there will come a day when you'll discover that those who run the Tel-Aviv/New-York crime Syndicate are operating on the premise that the elders of any village in the West Bank of the Jordan and the government of the United States of America are so equal, they can be exploited in the same manner for Israel to achieve its cherished goals?

If you believe this is as hard to accomplish as moving a truck through the eye of a needle, prepare yourself psychologically to be shocked at what you'll discover. And then read the article that came under the title: “Rashida Tlaib Lies About Her Grandmother So She Can Blame Israel,” written by Stephen M. Flatow, and published on March 22, 2019 in Algemeiner.

Recall that at this stage of the game, the Judeo-Zionist plan is to work on implementing the slow-motion ethnic cleansing of the West Bank — of its Palestinian population. This is accomplished by gradually diminishing the supply of food, water and the other necessities of life going to the population. In fact, a number of tricks were utilized by Israel to make it look like the responsibility for this ongoing crime against humanity, will fall on the shoulders of the United States of America and those of the Palestinians themselves. 

The role that America was meant to play became clear when the Jews revealed details of the scheme called “Situation,” they started to implement. It was for America to cut off American aid to the Palestinians and the international agencies that look after the humanitarian needs of the refugees. In addition, America continues to pressure other states and organizations to refrain from helping the Palestinians.

As to Israel, it continues to have the military government that's running the West Bank, collect taxes from the Palestinians. But instead of handing the money to the Palestinian Authority (PA), Israel keeps the money. It is to make sure that the Palestinians will not have the means to buy things from abroad. As to the ability of the Palestinians to grow their own food and make things for themselves, the Israeli military is again called upon to impede the Palestinian efforts. In addition, Israel initiated a number of projects by which the Jewish settlers steal Palestinian water and encroach on Palestinian farmlands to render them unproductive.

This being the reality of what's happening in occupied Palestine, Stephen Flatow has demonstrated that the effort the Jews are exerting, is meant to blame the misery which results from those crimes, on the Palestinians themselves. The way that Flatow is doing it, is to say that Rashida Tlaib has lied when she said that her grandmother — who lives in the West bank — was suffering as a result of the occupation. But how does he profess to know that Tlaib was lying? Well, see for yourself; here are his words:

“Grandma Tlaib is a resident of the Palestinian Arab village of Beit Ur al-Fauqa. The Israeli occupation of that village ended in 1995. It has been governed by the Palestinian Authority (PA), not Israel, for the past 24 years. For the congresswoman to claim that her grandmother is 'occupied' by the Israelis is simply a lie”.

Do you see it now, my friend? Instead of showing that Rashida Tlaib has lied, Stephen Flatow has shown how the “Situation” scheme is made to work. Here is how: The Jews get the Americans to implement a policy that prevents external aid from reaching the West Bank. This is blared for the whole world to hear. Meanwhile, the Israeli army in the West bank, steals what it can from the Palestinians, also prevents them from helping themselves. This is hushed up as much as possible. Knowing that sooner or later the humanitarian condition will have deteriorated badly, the Jews developed the argument that says: yes, they occupy the entire West Bank, but they do not occupy grandmothers because each village is run by elders affiliated with the PA. Thus, if people in those villages die of hunger and disease, don't blame it on Israel; blame it on America and the Palestinians themselves.

Ordinary and well-adjusted human beings that realize what the Jews are doing, dislike them because they see the unfairness in the Jews forcing the Palestinians to flee, taking their properties and blaming what happened on America and the Palestinians.

As if this were not enough, the Jews do something else that turns humanity's dislike for them into intense hatred. Here is an example of what the Jews say to earn this much hatred: “Maintaining the myth of 'the Israeli occupation' provides a convenient punching bag for those who are hostile to the Jewish state”.

It is a standard Jewish complaint that no matter what the Jews do to someone, they view a rejection of what they did, not as a normal response to what they did, but view it as the expression of a preconceived idea that Jews must be hated and treated like a punching bag.

Normal and well-adjusted human beings interpret this to mean that to avoid being accused of anti-Semitism, one must accept, even pretend to love the Jew who pisses on my shoes … and while he is at it, why not stand on my dinner table and pee in my bowl of soup as well.

No, the Jews will never be loved for engaging in this kind of behavior; they'll always be pogrommed and holocausted as they have been since the beginning of time, everywhere they went.

If they hate being wiped off the face of the Earth as much as I hate their peeing on my shoes, they better stop peeing on the world because America will not protect them forever.

You are guilty of I don't know what, he says

You got to hand it to Ms. Ilhan Omar. After half a century of futile attempts to get the Jews to engage in a fruitful debate about their cowardly habit of throwing the anti-Semitic accusation at everyone that refuses to bow to them, Ilhan Omar has forced the primitive savages to admit they had been talking bull. And believe me, half a century of that stuff was beginning to stink like hell. The world owes Ilhan Omar a big thank you for moving the immovable object.

Now, dear reader, if you’ll decide to spend time observing and studying what promises to be the gradual dissolution of a lie that took half a century to construct — doing so at the expense of thousands of ruined lives that did nothing to deserve it — you’ll have to begin by reading: “The Anti-Semitism Virus,” an article that also came under the subtitle: “On the Left, it is spreading once again.” It was written by Douglas Murray, and published on March 21, 2019 in National Review Online.

You'll go through 2400 words of nothingness, crowned by one revealing sentence; this one: “Anti-Semitism can never be fully explained for the same reason it cannot ever be fully defeated.” In other words, Douglas Murray is admitting that a Jewish hoax was responsible for the ruin of thousands of innocent lives. It was the accusation of anti-Semitism, which is a “trope” as empty as telling someone to drop dead. But the trope was given the gravity of a murder charge, and used both as a tool to advance the goals of a hidden Jewish agenda; and a weapon to vanquish any opposition to that agenda. In fact, trying to make sense of the hoax is what the Douglas Murray article is about.

Now that the writer has admitted he is dealing with nothingness, what else was there for him to say in 2400 words? Good question. What Murray has done, in fact, is pile up a whole bunch of nothingnesses, devoting space to each, and explaining them in concordance with the talking points usually put out by the Jewish propaganda machine. You get a sense of what all of that sounds like from this passage:

“Anti-Semitism is a shape-shifter. It is a virus that endlessly mutates, taking advantage of environment, locale, host, events, and more. To survey the number of its ostensible causes is to survey accusations that themselves encompass everything … At times, Jews were hated for their religion or their race. In our time they are attacked for their state [Israel]”.

Even if you didn't know that the Jewish habit was to look in the mirror and accuse others of what they see in themselves, you will instinctively want to ask these questions: Who is the shape-shifting virus? Is it anti-Semitism, like says Murray? Or is it the Jewish character that begets repugnance, a normal human response the Jews call anti-Semitism? Searching for answers, we take a quick look at the relevant history.

It was near the end of the nineteenth century that the Jewish council of elders realized it had become difficult for Jews to live with Europeans that were beginning to view the Jews as repugnant characters. And so, the Jewish elders decided they must have a place of their own. The Nineteenth century being imbued with the sense of colonialism, the Jews and their supporters — mostly in Britain — thought of creating a homeland for the Jews in Uganda, a country situated in the part of Africa where colonization was in full swing.

But then, it happened that the Ottoman Empire began to disintegrate, and the Levant was fast becoming a new prospect for colonization. This is when the talk of creating a homeland for the Jews shifted from Uganda to Palestine. With that, came something else: the religious argument that was cheering the idea of Jews going back to their ancestral home. It was a principle that gave impetus to the nascent Zionist project.

When the illegal migration of Jews into Palestine began in earnest in the early years of the twentieth century, the goal was for the Jews to acquire as much land as possible. By 1948, they had acquired a small piece of Palestine that the United Nations recognized as Israeli. To this day, this is all that the Jews are legally entitled to. But the Jews continued to steal more land, aided by the colonial powers that were not happy seeing their empires shrink. And so, the idea of the Jews being motivated to settle in Palestine by religious fervor shifted back to that of Jews being motivated by colonial greed.

Two things happened in 1967 that saw the Jewish rhetoric go all over the map. First, having captured the West Bank of the Jordan, the Jewish appetite to expand, shifted to that of ethnic cleansing the land of its indigenous Palestinian population, and the Jews started to talk about a project they called the 'situation.' It involved having America play a major role in starving the Palestinians to force them to flee the land and leave behind everything they own for the Jews to make their own. This made America not only an accomplice in the ongoing crime against humanity, but the main culprit.

Second, having scored a military victory billed as amazing by the spin doctors of the time, it became easy for the Fifth Columnists in America to convince the ruling class to take Israel under its wing. It is how the financial and military establishments of the superpower were put at the disposal of Israel's Jews. The move gave the latter the confidence to think in terms of conducting operations beyond Israel's immediate neighbors, which is how Iran got sucked into the vortex of what used to be a strictly Levant concern.

All in all, the world has progressed normally as it did since the beginning of time. Concurrent with that, however, the Jews have wandered all over the moral landscape, a performance that matches their wandering habit all over the geographical landscape of the planet. Like shape-shifting viruses, they went after the opportunities where they saw them. When done with one place, they shifted their attention to other places in search of new opportunities to exploit.

Being the one common element in all these shifts, the Jewish character proved to be the virus that mutates to adapt to local conditions.

Now that they are forced to conduct a normal debate or shut up, you'll see the Jews chip away at their anti-Semitism hoax with every word they utter. It will be a joy seeing the thing melt like an ice cube on a hot stove.

A perpetual idiot Machine stuck on full Throttle

Another article by David French is triggering memories that go back more than half a century. He wrote: “The Real Reasons American Evangelicals Support Israel,” an article that also came under the subtitle: “Faith in ancient promises, wonder at modern miracles, and a deep conviction that evil forces must not prevail against the Middle East's most vibrant democracy.” It was published on March 22, 2019 in National Review Online.

The time frame was between 1965 and 1967 when I was new in the country and had mastered enough of the English language to get by comfortably. There came a war in the Middle East that fundamentally altered the course of my life. I was in my early to mid-twenties at the time, working as estimator in a company that made upscale signs for mega corporations. Some parts were made for us by subcontractors, one of whom I dealt with extensively, and remained friends with even after I left the company. Thus, I knew the man before and after the 1967 war. Being older than me, and not a hyphenated Canadian, he treated me like a junior that needed to be educated about life in North America.

Before 1967, the obsession he never ceased to talk about, was the Allen Expressway (later renamed Allen Road.) It is a highway that was being constructed to facilitate travel between downtown and uptown Toronto. His objections to going ahead with the project were numerous. But the reason why it was undertaken anyway, according to him, was that the Jews wanted it. He explained that it will be a convenient way for them to travel between their offices in downtown Toronto, and their residences in the Bathurst Street area.

I was surprised to hear such extreme views before 1967, which was a time when I corresponded with two Jewish friends, I had spent many good years with in Egypt, going to a private school and spending time together outside of school. By the time I came to Canada, one friend was already in New York where I visited him, and he returned the visit. The other was still in Egypt, asking me to send him evidence that will convince his parents life will be good for them if they came to Canada. In short, I had no idea that Jews could be hated by someone like I saw that contractor hate them. In fact, I had never before witnessed the expression of this kind of visceral hatred for anyone, be that in Egypt or any other place where I lived.

And then, the war happened in 1967, and it was like walking into an empty field surrounded by buildings in which thousands of sharpshooters were hiding. They relentlessly emptied, reloaded and emptied again and again their high-powered magazines into me and my kind. They seemed to have consumed an unlimited quantity of the Kool-Aid that speaks of a messiah who will soon come and reward them for exhibiting deep, visceral hatred for the Arabs, especially the Egyptians. But while this was happening among the media and political types, it was the talk about Israel being an exemplary democracy practicing the rule of law that amplified the hatred which ordinary people had for the Jews despite all of what the media was blaring.

In fact, the subcontractor that used to complain about the Expressway, now expressed his disgust like this: “I don't care what shit democracy they practice in Israel, I care about the democracy they robbed me of here in Canada.” At times he used another 4-letter word instead of shit.

Now, more than half a century later, I read David French's words that tell of “a deep conviction that evil forces must not prevail against the Middle East's most vibrant democracy.” By that, he means the evil Arabs who wish to harm Israel, a democracy that practices the rule of law … the one protected by America, that other democracy which also practices the rule of law. And so, I hear my old acquaintance, the subcontractor that's no longer with us, scream in his grave: Jewish democracy my ass. American rule of law, my ass.

There is also the following in the David French article: “There is basic morality. From the very moment of its founding, Israel has been subject to repeated, genocidal threats to its existence.” For this to make sense, you have to think of a vast piece of land where nothing exists. Then God or the devil or whatever snaps his fingers, and two entities come into existence at the same moment. One is evil and called Arabs. The other is good and called Jews. And the Arabs immediately pounce on the Jews trying to wipe them out.

But that's garbage. The truth is that when our story began to take shape, Planet Earth had been around for nearly five billion years. Semi-intelligent beings had been around for almost six million years, and intelligent homo sapiens for at least a hundred thousand years. Many of the latter lived in a place called Palestine, and they are now called Arabs. No God or devil snapped their fingers, or maybe it was that guy they call Hitler who did. And all of a sudden, Jews appeared in Palestine armed with the same weapons that Hitler used to conquer large pieces of Europe and North Africa.

Like him whose army murdered everyone on sight, the Jews murdered the indigenous Arab population that was totally unarmed, living as it did at a minimum subsistence level under occupation for several generations before that.

Thus, for David French to suggest that if you sit quietly in your home minding your own business, and out of the blue, an armed invader attacks you, it means that you are evil, making genocidal threats to the invader's existence. Well, my friend, there is only one thing that can be said about that passage: It exposes the extent of David French's criminal insanity for the whole world to see and beware. The man is a danger to himself and to society.

As to the religious arguments that he and those like him are peddling, I don't have a better way to explain what I think and feel, than to tell of an incident which forced me to express myself spontaneously, perhaps even by a Freudian slip of the tongue.

It happened when a man and a woman knocked at my door one day, coming to tell me how I can save my soul when the ancient promises will be fulfilled, which will happen soon as they put it. I made the foolish mistake of letting them in. The truth is that at the time, I was beginning to question the religious precepts with which I grew up, and thought that maybe the two strangers might answer some of my questions.

What the strangers did not know, however, was that to my surprise, every word they uttered sounded so nonsensical to me, they came out like puffs of compressed air being pumped into a balloon.

I regretted letting them in. It then happened, after a short while, that the words exploded out of my mouth: “You know what, you two! Let me tell you something. I cannot have any respect for a God that needs you to tell me about him or his promises … You better get out of here before I start swearing religious profanities”.

And that's what I'll say to anyone that pretends to be privy to the meaning of God's ancient promises, whatever they are … and has a license to run around and explain them. Don't come knocking at my door.

Staying outside, looking inside and fantasizing

There was a time when America was the politico-diplomatic diva of the world. And when you're a diva, the only thing you look at is yourself in the mirror. You do that to make sure you're looking your best because you know that everyone is looking at you and fantasizing about one aspect or another of your life.

Then came the Jewish magician of altered perceptions, and caused the diva to see — not reality as it is — but an altered reality that was made of false images, which he planted inside her head by the sheer force of his hypnotic suggestion. And the diva was bewitched. “You can be this,” said the magician to her. And he added, “instead of a candle shining bright in the middle of the night to enchant a mere gathering, you can be a star lighting up the firmament to ravish an entire world.” And the diva threw herself into the embrace of the Jew as she cried out: “I'm all yours, master Jew, do with me as you wish”.

The Jewish magician wrapped the diva in a cocoon of false pretenses to prevent her from seeing what's outside the wrap. He then took her into the underworld of his existence, hoping that her being there will bring light to the cesspool of his eternal misery. But his misery was so deeply entrenched, the diva's presence in his natural element did nothing to change it.

Meanwhile, unknown to the magician was the reality that while his impairment of the diva's vision prevented her from seeing where he had taken her, the one thing he was not able to diminish, was her sense of smell. And the odor of the cesspool so overwhelmed her, she realized she was conned by the Jew that had taken her to a place where she ought not be in. She decided she must shred the cocoon he weaved around her, and get out of the cesspool as fast as she can. She managed to do that, despite his attempts to keep her there a while longer.

Alone and aimless, the once powerful magician is now spending his time roaming the streets of the world like a wandering Jew. But true to his nature, he keeps thinking up new schemes to hypnotize someone and feed on them the way that parasites subsist. He still has the power to change his appearance into anything he wants, which he does occasionally to con new victims. This time, he changed himself into a woman and took on the name Shoshana Bryen.

Bryen wrote an article under the title: “Dividing up the Syrian corpse,” and had it published on March 21, 2019 in The Washington Times. The article is about a walk she took around a neighborhood called the Levant. She stopped at the window of a place called Syria; a prize she always coveted but was never able to fully acquire. She stood outside the window, looked inside, and whined to herself these bitter words:

“It is amazing how little Bashar Assad and the Syrian government have to do with the disposition of Syrian assets and territory. Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah are taking what they want, cutting in Turkey as desired and cutting out the United States and Israel”.

If this sounds like a hungry pauper that used to be the guest of honor at every banquet, but was pushed out due to his bad behavior, look how else Shoshana Bryen laments the lot of Israel's Jews:

“Recent reports have Russia turning Latakia over to Iranian management, solidifying the western end of Iran's Shiite Crescent. It established with Turkey a jointly-patrolled zone, largely overseen by Turks, thus leaving the last rebel stronghold in Turkish hands. Moscow will be content with political influence. Iran's largely-non-Iranian Shiite militiamen will remain in Syria”.

Whether all of those predictions … whether some of them or none of them will materialize, Syria will eventually go back to being independent and will look after its own defense. This has been the history of the region as long as the evil forces of occupation were kept at bay. And the examples are many.

For one thing, when the Egyptians decided to kick the Israelis out of the Sinai, they asked the Russian advisers to leave Egypt lest someone believe they were doing the fight on behalf of Egypt. And despite the numerous predictions that the Russians will never leave Egypt, they did like true gentlemen.

As well, the Syrians got out of Lebanon when they were told to leave. They had been invited in by the Lebanese government and the Arab League that mandated the Syrians to impose calm on the warring factions and keep the peace, in the wake of a civil war that was ravaging Lebanon.

Contrast the behavior of America's allies against that, and you'll realize that evil feels at home, not with the people of the region, but those who come to them from the outside, bearing gifts of lies, deception and treachery. The most notorious example in that regard is Israel, which never ceded an inch of occupied land unless it was kicked out of it the way it was from the Sinai, Gaza, South Lebanon and the Eastern Golan.

You also have the surprising example of an Arab country that was so corrupted by its close alliance with America, it behaved as badly as the Jews. This was Saddam Hussein's Iraq whose behavior in Kuwait was so out of character, the Arab League intervened to help put an end to what is a no-no in Arab eyes.

Shoshana Bryen should not worry about Syria. If she wants to join the civilized world, she should put her energies to work on liberating Palestine. One good way to do that, is to become an ardent advocate of the BDS movement.

The demonic Power of uncontrolled Fanaticism

David French who participated in the Iraq War of 2003 has written an article in which he argues that despite all the negative analyses that were done on that war, he believes it was a good war. In fact, the title of the article he wrote is: “In defense of the Iraq War,” published on March 20, 2019 in National Review Online.

You might forgive the man for refusing to live with the guilt of having participated in an immoral war, thus seeks to embellish the record. So, you read the article to see how he goes about justifying the unjustifiable. But that's when you get surprised with a slap in the face that seems to say: I am David French, and if you're an American reading these words, I consider you a sucker. I see you as someone whose life is worthless to the same degree of a suicide bomber that dies to promote the causes of his masters. You being American, you must be ready to die and promote the Jewish causes.

When someone writes the history of a situation in which he participated, you expect him to describe the events as accurately as possible while allowing him some leeway to justify his role in it. But you see none of that in the David French discussion. What you encounter instead, are the talking points that were created by the Jewish propaganda machine, and were given to the warmongering mob of Jews and Gentiles who would have American soldiers continually die so that Jews may get what they want, and live a prosperous life.

The Iraq story of interest to us at this time, began when the people of that country realized that their oil wealth was a depleting resource, thus decided to use some of the wealth they have now, to build the economy that will sustain itself when they will have run out of oil.

Power generation being the most fundamental infrastructure you must have when building a modern economy, it was incumbent on the Iraqis to look at the alternatives to hydrocarbon. Wind and solar being in the realm of fantasy and science fiction at the time, and Iraq having no major waterfall it could use to generate enough hydro power, the country had no alternative but to think in terms of building civilian nuclear power stations.

The Iraqis began to build one such station, oblivious of the history of a region in which an entity of human-looking beasts had installed itself, motivated by an agenda that was based on the destruction of every progress the neighbors will make. The intent was to keep the region backward forever to allow for the invading Jewish hordes, expelled from everywhere on the planet, to come and dominate the region.

Those beasts call themselves Israelis. They cultivated an army of Jewish Fifth Columnists, and had them work for Israel inside America. Years earlier, the Jews of the Column were able to convince the American government to stand in the way of Egypt building a hydroelectric power station at Aswan. When it came to Iraq, they found themselves, once again, in need of American intervention to impede the progress that was made by that country.

Since they could not get the help they needed directly, they instructed one of their Fifth Columnists to steal satellite photographs showing how to reach Iraq's project and bomb it from the air. The Israeli beasts did just that, thus committed an act of war that gave Iraq unlimited rights to respond.

Things had been turbulent in the Middle East since shortly after the end of the Second World War. It is that the old colonial powers kept meddling in the Levant, and America kept meddling in Iran. Much was happening that worried the Arabs as a result, but the event that went too far and caused them to call on America to intervene, was the invasion of Kuwait by America's closest ally in the region, Iraq's Saddam Hussein, archenemy of Iran that was itself America's boogeyman. When Saddam refused to get out of Kuwait, the Arab/American coalition went into action and forced him to retreat. What it was careful not to do was invade Iraq or cause damage to its installations. This action came to be known as Iraq’s first war.

The Jews who wanted Israel to participate in the coalition, saw their request rejected. This is when they started planning to take command of the American military, and have it “send Iraq back to the Stone Age.” It took the Jews a decade to implement their scheme, which ended with an invasion of Iraq by America's military. It came to be known as Iraq’s second war, the action that saw American soldiers, such as David French, participate in the occupation of Iraq.

As it happened, the Jews were doing more than scheme to take over the American military. They had already positioned themselves in high places in the nation’s media, and used their newly found powers to start a new religion in America. They called it Evangelical, and made it sound like it was a new and improved version of Christianity; one that was based on Judeo-Christian principles.

The Jews gathered dirt on every sexually perverted and money-grubbing televangelist they heard of, and convinced them, under blackmail, to go out and convert their flocks into fanatic soldiers who would sellout their country and promote the glory of Israel.

David French was one of the victims that converted, thus became a proverbial suicide bomber, willing to sell his country, and die to promote the causes of Israel.

It is why his description of the history through which he lived, does not even look like an attempt to embellish his role in it.

In fact, his fanaticism is so advanced, all he can do is engage in crude attempts to convert new souls to the Jewish causes. And that's what his article is all about.

Remember all that when you read his article.

A Tale of two Wars and two governing Systems

Two war stories will help us understand the performance of two governing systems that have nothing to do with the war stories. The wars being Vietnam and Korea, the governing systems being the organically evolved and the artificially constructed.

Fed up being colonized by foreigners, the people of Vietnam rose-up to expel the colonial power out of their land. America got sucked into the fight, established bases in the south of the country, and fought to prevent the nationalists of the North from liberating the South. America lost the war, and Vietnam was united under the regime of the North. The gentle people of Vietnam held no grudge against America that caused millions of dead, and enormous destructions to the country's infrastructure ... described as apocalyptic in scale.

Something close to that, but with a different outcome, happened less than a generation earlier in Korea. The difference being that America was comparatively more powerful at the time, and the nations of China and the Soviet Union that were helping North Korea, were weaker than when they helped Vietnam. For these reasons, America was not defeated in Korea but was not victorious either, and Korea remains a divided country to this day. American troops are stationed in the South, claiming to protect other nations in the region, said to be allied with America.

The lesson we draw from this history is that the American propaganda that was unleashed to explain the country's involvement in Vietnam turned out to be false. The truth is that the people of Vietnam who fought to liberate their country, were not evil and were not out to invade the world, or subjugate anyone in it. But had the North Vietnamese not won the war, the situation there would have resembled that of Korea where the North was forced to improve its defenses to the point that six and a half decades later, tiny North Korea is making superpower America tremble with fear for being vulnerable to a nuclear attack.

When you put at one side of the table the reality of an Asian people who forgave those that came from thousands of miles away to bomb and defoliate their country, and kill their people — and when you put at the other side of the table the fake American propaganda that used to paint the Asians as evil characters deserving to have apocalypse inflicted on them, you realize that something about America's governing system, and not the Asian, represents a great danger to civilization if not to life on Earth.

In reality, America would have learned this lesson and changed for the better, except that the Jews who now control its culture and many of its institutions, are not allowing it to happen. This is glaringly evidenced by the incessant Jewish demand that America arm itself and go inflict apocalypse everywhere across the planet. One such voice is that of Clifford May the Jew, whose latest demand for America to do just that, came under the title: “Why Kim Jong-un must feel 'maximum pressure,'” a column that was published on March 19, 2019 in The Washington Times.

May began his presentation by telling that the leaders of the United States and North Korea met to discuss a possible deal that would normalize the relations between them, and permanently remove the threat of a confrontation that has the potential to escalate to a nuclear exchange. He went on to say that this round of talks did not go as well as expected between the two sides, and then suggested the following:

“I'm rooting for those within the U.S. government who will argue that it's time to apply sticks, rather than dangle carrots, time to begin a maximum pressure campaign. Could maximum pressure lead Mr. Kim to the conclusion that nuclear weapons imperil rather than protect his dynasty? We'll never know unless we try”.

To the warmongers of the world, this was just the appetizer. In fact, it did not take Clifford May long before he went on to unveil a long list of ways by which America should use the economic sticks at its disposal to ratchet up the pressure on North Korea. He then said this:

“What else should keep Mr. Kim awake at night? Mr. Trump showed him a video promoting the benefits if he gives up his nukes. However, at one point the video cuts to shots of missiles launching and fighter jets scrambling. The film then seems to burn, and there is an explosion … Mr. Kim needs to be convinced that such a scenario is credible. Joint US/South Korea military exercises is one way to send that message”.

This kind of talk is how the mob of Jewish pundits spent decades inciting America to turn itself into an agent of death and destruction hated by a world that used to love it. But how did the Jews manage to do that? It was easy for them. The following is an example, taken from Clifford May's column, showing the approach that the Jews often take in such matters:

“If we do not prevent Mr. Kim from acquiring nuclear weapons that he can deliver to American cities, efforts to prevent Iran from following suit are sure to fail as well. The list of rogue and adversarial nuclear-armed powers will grow thereafter”.

That is, the Jews spread fear among the population. Their message has always been that if the people do not heed their warnings, bad things will happen. And the Jews always conclude that because the best defense is the offense, the good people must preemptively attack someone lest they be attacked first.

But given that the Jews were in the Soviet Union and in other countries throughout time, why did they not scare these people the way they now scare Americans? Actually, the Jews scored partial successes with Stalin's Soviet Union and colonialist France and Britain, but then failed. That's because, democratic or authoritarian, those countries were governed by systems different from America's.

Those systems evolved naturally over time, going through different episodes. This has allowed for the bonds that hold the parts together to grow strong. It is why the Jews could not rupture them.

By contrast, the American system was conceived artificially in a convention of the Founding Fathers that was held not long ago. Thus, the bonds holding the parts together remain fragile, which is why the Jews could break them, and apply the divide-and-rule maxim.

The net result is a genuinely polarized America that nevertheless professes a fake bipartisan love for Israel. Try to make sense of that, my friend.

You are what you eat, so is John Bolton

An old saying goes like this: You are what you eat. If you have any doubt that this is a valid metaphor, standing for at least one aspect of what goes on in real life, look at John Bolton.

Recall what it is that this man has been feeding on, and you'll see a perfect match between what he is today and what he used to eat. And that will compel you to admit: John Bolton — proven to be a walking Jewish sewer — is indeed what he has been eating.

For a long time, Bolton has been feeding from the Jewish brand of schizo-paranoia which says that human beings are bad dudes that must be controlled with an iron fist to prevent them from controlling you with an iron fist. To Bolton, it means that America — which is now the top dog — must use its power to crush everyone that has the potential to rise and challenge it. America must do so because if it fails, it will become the underdog that may never be given the chance to rise again.

Driven by that philosophy of life, John Bolton has developed a destructive approach to dealing with the national security issues he had the opportunity to influence. As both a fanatic that's opposed to international agreements, and adviser to several American presidents, John Bolton consistently advised the undoing of existing agreements aimed at limiting or reducing the arsenals of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) in the hands of America and those of its potential adversaries.

You will become familiar with the details of Bolton's litany of destructive advice he gave, when you read the article that came under the title: “John Bolton's Great Game of Nuclear Chicken,” and the subtitle: “The United States must avoid the trap of seeking the perfect deal with North Korea at the expense of an effective peace regime—and end up with neither.” It was written by Daniel L. Davis and was published on March 18, 2019 in the National Interest.

You'll discover that John Bolton convinced George Bush to quash the 1994 Agreed Framework. He engineered the effort to convince Bush to withdraw from the 1972 ABM Treaty. He influenced Trump to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal. And he convinced the latter to withdraw from the INF treaty.

As to what John Bolton is doing at this time, you need to probe into the nuclear question that's evolving on the Korean Peninsula. What follows is a condensed account of what Daniel Davis wrote with regard to what happened during the last summit meeting between the leaders of the US and North Korean, and what followed shortly thereafter:

“John Bolton is terrible. Trump must resist his advice and stay with his own instincts. At the summit between Trump and Kim Jong-un, Bolton was seen at the table with the president. It came as no surprise that the summit ended badly. The intent of negotiations was to increase the chance of peace on the peninsula. A deal had been hammered on the path to ultimate success. It would have paved the way for a fourth summit between Moon Jae-in and Kim. On February 28, the summit ended without an agreement. Bolton appeared to have moved the goalposts. He emphasized that North Korea needed to give up its entire nuclear program or the sanctions would remain in place. North Korea's response was as expected. Vice Foreign Minister said that Bolton had created an atmosphere of hostility and mistrust, thus obstructed the effort for negotiations between North Korea and the United States”.

This is a firsthand account describing how the destructive instinct of John Bolton drives him to sabotage every attempt at creating a system of coexistence where peace will not depend on one group of human beings subjugating another; one group playing the hunting predator, and the other playing the hunted prey. In fact, anywhere Bolton sees someone — including his own president — try to fashion a world where peaceful coexistence might reign, he feels driven to turn on his destructive habit and act on it.

What must be happening is that the Jewish sewage, which fuels John Bolton's brain cells, has created the image of a world community modeled after the West Bank of the Jordan. In that mythical place of Bolton's imagination, the different factions that make up the human race, are reduced to living like Palestinians in their own countries. And they are ruled by right-wing supremacists from America and elsewhere in the English speaking world, be they Jews or wannabe Jews.

The latter are anointed and considered to be owners of everything that exists, most especially the weapons which are forbidden from being touched or even seen by the lesser others.

And anyone of these, who will be caught with a weapon, will not be sanctioned like North Koreans; they will be bombed into kingdom come like Iraqis and Gazans.

Once again, they say give us what's not yours

More than anyone, the Jews know that nothing they do in Israel is worth a dog's poop until it is officially and publicly given the seal of approval by the United States of America.

Even when the criminally minded Congress of an earlier era had approved the acceptance of Israel's annexation of Jerusalem after decades of occupation, but allowed for the deferral of its ratification by the President, the move was viewed as nothing more than just another poop left on the porch of the home where civilized humanity lives. And then things started to diffuse their stink, when Donald Trump grabbed the poop and threw it into humanity's living room.

Being who they are and given a finger, the Jews now want the arm. They are calling for a repeat of the Jerusalem performance, this time with the Syrian Golan Heights that were occupied by Israel for some time, and then annexed by it. You can see one such request made of America under the title: “US Should Recognize Israel's Sovereignty Over the Golan Heights,” an article that was written by Mitchell Bard and published on March 15, 2019 in Algemeiner.

Bard's argument rests on two pillars. One is the predicted angry reaction by the Arabs that did not pan out, he says. The other is Security Council Resolution 242, which he views as more useless than a dead rat. But then, on second thoughts, he found the Resolution to be not useless but useful. In fact, he now sees it as more useful to Israel's future plans than anything America could say at this time. Well, that's not to invalidate or replace the earlier request for America to maintain a military presence in Syria, in order to protect Israel when the Syrian Government will decide, as it surely will, to start the process of retaking the Golan.

To explain the part of his argument concerning the angry Arab reaction that did not pan out, Mitchell Bard created a fiction that is as real as the La La Land of Shangri-la. It is a version of the standard Jewish staple that unfolds on a daily basis according to this formula: One Jew dickers with another Jew about Arab thinking. One Jew is wrong, the other is correct. This is why we need never consult the Arabs about their thinking. Well, that was the formula. What follows is the actual story as told by Mitchell Bard.

Martin Indyk representing the “Arabists” but not the Arabs, was wrong about predicting what the Arabs will do in response to America's support for Israel's position, says Mitchell Bard. Most other Jews, including Bard himself, were correct, he goes on to say. Indeed, Indyk and the Arabists were wrong because they made predictions similar to the ones they had made about the Jerusalem move, which went as follows:

“American embassies and citizens will be targeted by angry demonstrators. Confrontations between Palestinians and Israelis will erupt in the West Bank. Hamas might resume rocket attacks from Gaza. They will stoke the fires of violent resistance in the West Bank and Jerusalem. Arab and Muslim states will demand that Trump rescind the decision”.

None of that happened, and similarly nothing will happen when America will recognize Israel's sovereignty over the Golan, says Bard. But he later discovered that Indyk had said something different with regard to the Golan. And so, he quoted Indyk's words, hoping that the readers will look at two different things and believe they were one and the same thing just because he says they ought to be the same. Here is what Indyk had said about the Golan: “Like it or not, the Golan Heights are Syrian territory. Israel's annexation of territory that is not its own is to play with fire for partisan political purposes. No Arab state will accept it”.

How different but said to be the same! This happens only in La La Land, you say? Pity.

As to Security Council Resolution 242, Bard made a mess of it that is no less disorderly than the mess he created with regard to the predictions concerning the Arab reaction. Here is a condensed version of what he said about the UN Resolution:

“Indyk argued that Israel would violate UN Resolution 242. But that resolution long ago lost its relevance. Let's recall what it says: It calls for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the occupied territories. Note that the authors did not require the evacuation of all the territories because they recognized the borders could be modified somewhat. The resolution also called for the recognition that every State has the right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries. Translated, this means that Israel has no obligation to return the Golan Heights”.

What a conveniently bad translation to better serve the Jews! This happens only in La La Land, you say? Pity.

She tells of the Effect but not the Cause

Suzanne Fields wrote a column that describes the effect of a phenomenon, but says precious little that makes sense about the cause that brought about that effect in the first place.

The writer used a series of subtle and circuitous arguments to blame the effect of anti-Semitism on Ilhan Omar and also Shakespeare who may never have met a Jew, she says. This made it possible for her to also blame the phenomenon on the people who started the stereotype that influenced Shakespeare to write The Merchant of Venice, a stage play she hints is driven by strong anti-Semitic undertones.

You'll find all of this and more in the column that Suzanne Fields wrote under the title: “When anti-Semitism is reduced to bitter farce,” published on March 13, 2019 in The Washington Times.

Fields paid particular attention to Omar's recalling of the “Benjamins,” which is a rap song that offends the Jews because, as she says, it is “clearly a Jew-bating slur suggesting that American support for Israel is about big-money donors and lobbyists rather than grass-roots support.” Well, I have news for Suzanne Fields, and it isn't something that will cheer her. Despite the multi-decade disinformation tsunami that has been flooding America, the donors and lobbyists who give, as well as the politicians who take, know that American grass-roots support for Israel does not exceed 2 percent of the population. Period.

This is why no business that concerns Israeli matters is conducted in a public debate in any of the American legislatures. Under the table agreements between the givers and the takers are reached by the typical method of Jewish whisper, behind closed doors and in the middle of the night. When the sun rises, the treasonous conspirators go into the well of the House of Representatives and the well of the Senate, and vote “unanimously” without a debate, to give the American store to the Jews of Israel. And the takers go home and wait for the rewarding kickback to come to them.

After pumping her obligatory contribution of hot air into the bubble that says the American public loves Israel, Suzanne Fields turned herself into a demolition squad. She did so, driven by the misguided reverie that she was constructing a solid case for helping the Jewish organizations withstand the winds of political change now blowing in America. Her aim was to reestablish the Jewish control over what happens in that country. But she blew it big time. What follows is a condensed version of how she did that:

“Unless Ilhan Omar miscalculated, she will keep her seat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The Democratic leadership is terrified of angering her and her followers. The Democrats should revisit the regrets of the Sulzbergers, owners of the New York Times, who were shamed after the war for downplaying stories of atrocities against Jews in the run-up to World War II, lest their paper be identified as Jewish. The Democrats may come to regret their cowardice in treating anti-Semitism the same as a long list of other maligned groups, ranging from African-Americans to Pacific Islanders”.

You can see in that passage how and where the writer fired three bullets that missed their targets, and went on to demolish her case. First, she made clear she wishes Ilhan Omar will be removed from the House Foreign Affairs Committee, an affirmation of the Jewish penchant for autocratic rule. Second, she revealed her foolish belief that Jews own the Democratic Party the way that the Sulzbergers own the New York Times. Third, she expressed the Jewish annoyance that America still refuses to consider the Jews as being apart, separate and above everyone else in America and the world.

If you, dear reader, still wonder why the Jews do not get into a public debate with others, here is the answer for you. They make fools of themselves with every word that comes out their mouths, and every word they type on their computer keyboards. This article demonstrates such reality, and there are nearly three thousand other articles on this website that reveal this truth about the Jews.

But why is it that after being unmasked as intellectual frauds, the Jews continue to make desperate attempts at convincing the world they have a case that should be considered seriously, and responded to favorably? The answer to this question is simple, and known to the American public better than anything. It is that money makes the world go round, and nothing likes to go round more than the world of politics.

But knowing that they do nothing to produce wealth, the Jews realize that any money they accumulate is not really their money. Thus, when they give some of it to America's politicians in exchange for say, a Jerusalem that does not belong to the Americans either, the Jews feel they have created a diplomatic farce that will forever associate America with a Medieval mentality.

And given the Jewish propensity for attributing to others what they see in themselves, you'll understand why Suzanne Fields chose the title that she did for her column: Antisemitism reduced to a bitter farce.

Yes, farce is the word. Nevertheless, you should give the woman credit because she was the first to see the farcical nature of democracy … the part that says: Give me what does not belong to you, and I'll give you what does not belong to me, and we'll both feel like winners.