If you ever wondered what it would feel like to submit to the
scalpel of a witch doctor doing brain surgery on you, there is a kind of
simulation to which you can submit, and generate the same sensation.
What you can do is read the editorials of The Washington Times, an
act whose effect is to cause an unpleasant feeling inside the brain. And once
in a while, the editors of that publication come up with a piece that changes
the sensation from unpleasant to revolting. This is the case with the editorial
they wrote under the title: “A lesson in free speech,” which they published on
April 15, 2019.
The subject matter that these characters have used as vehicle to
carry their views, was the reaction that followed words uttered by a
congresswoman. Because this discussion is about the competence of the editors
at The Washington Times to discuss freedom of speech –– or heaven forbid be its
guardians –– it makes no sense to give details about the congresswoman or what
she said. For this reason, our discussion of the subject shall remain limited
to what the editors have said, as well as evaluate the question whether or not
those editors should do humanity a big favor and find something else to do for
a living.
A good way to understand how the brain of these characters
operate, is to go over what they said on the subject, and sort out what they
seem to consider legitimate speech that should be protected, and what they seem
to consider illegitimate speech that must be banned. So, here is how they chose
to put in context what they view as legitimate speech:
“Trump's video was within the bounds of political discourse.
Politics ain't bean bag, politicians revel in attacking one another. That's the
point of a democratic republic. The American system of government is predicated
on uncivil disagreement at times. Politics is a game any number can play, but
nobody gets immunity from criticism, sharp or extra-sharp”.
And here is how the editors of The Washington Times chose to put
in context what they view as illegitimate speech:
“The congresswoman has made several vicious remarks about Israel,
including a tweet suggesting that Israel buys the loyalty of American
politicians. In a speech to the Republican Jewish coalition, Trump drew attention
to the congresswoman's remarks in a perfectly fair exercise of political
speech. He said she doesn't like Israel”.
We conclude from what these characters are saying that their
“lesson in free speech” consists of advocating a no-holds-barred approach to
speech as long as you do not criticize Israel. But the moment that you do such
a thing, the scalpel of the witch doctor will drift down your neck to the
jugular artery, and will cut-off the blood supply to your brain. And you'll die
career-wise almost instantly.
Before this happens to you if it will, and while your brain is
still alive, you may be so curious that you want to know what Donald Trump thinks
is most importance to the Jews who live in America and pretend to be Americans
when in truth, their hearts reside in Israel, and they remain Zionists through
and through. Here, in the editors' own words, is what Donald Trump believes:
“He drew the attention of those Jews that the congresswoman did not like
Israel.” Did you get Trump’s drift, my friend? He means to say that the Jews to
whom he was speaking, loved Israel more than they did America, and that everyone
in American politics should learn to be like them.
So, you wish to know what is crucial to these Jews in view of the
fact that they are asking America to permanently remain in the service of
Israel, all this at a time when people such as the congresswoman, are working
to change the status quo. And you’ll find the answer to your query in what the
editors of The Washington Times have said. It is this: “The congresswoman has
made several vicious remarks about Israel, including a tweet suggesting that
Israel buys the loyalty of American politicians”.
That remark is the most illegitimate thing for someone to have
said in the opinion of the editors at The Washington Times. It's because the
relationship between America and Israel is the jugular artery through which the
blood of the American people –– produced by the hard work they do day in and
day out –– is siphoned off and moved to Israel.
When you or anyone draws attention to that reality, you contribute
to the act of pulling America's politicians out of their state of hypnosis. You
make it possible for them to wake up and realize what’s going on; and you hear
them say: no more of this nonsense. From now on, we dump Israel and work to
improve life for our American compatriots.
And so, the politicians will tend to cut-off the artificial
jugular artery that's taking America's blood to the Jews of Israel. This will
cause the Zionist entity –– that was never meant to be born in the first place ––
to die instantly. And the entire human race will, at long last, put out a
joyful sigh of relief.