Veterans' Plight, a Reason to end eternal War

As predicted, another momentous event has caused the likes of Clifford D. May to advocate the opposite of what logic says ought to be America's response.

The head of ISIS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, was killed, and instead of advocating the end of America's involvement in places where it should never have gone, Clifford May has seized the opportunity to advocate the maintenance of what he calls the “endless war.” He did so in an article he wrote under the title: “The end of al-Baghdadi but the Islamic State marches on,” published on October 29, 2019 in The Washington Times.

This comes as no surprise to the people who are familiar with the Jewish trick of accusing the others of their own desires, and building a delusional case on that false premise. For example, the Jews have been accusing the Palestinians of rejecting the two-state solution when, in fact, they were the ones rejecting it because they always wanted to swallow all of Palestine. But now that they believe America will support whatever they do, whichever way they do it in Palestine, the Jews are speaking confidently about their rejection of a two-state solution on the premise that it would deny them the acquisition of all of Palestine.

Animated by that same upside-down mentality, Clifford May accuses all Muslims in the world of the desire to fight an endless war against Judeo-Christianity. And based on this falsehood, he advocates an endless war led by America against Islam. He does that by admitting at the start of his discussion that the death of Baghdadi “is a battle won,” which suggests that America should pack its war gear and go home, but he then says of Muslims that, “all are prepared to wage an endless war to achieve their objectives,” which is his way of inciting America to keep fighting the Muslims.

But how does Clifford May advance such argument in a piece of work that seems on the surface to hold together? He does it by talking about war as if it were an activity that America is able to conduct at no cost to its people in terms of lives lost or squandered wealth, most of which is borrowed from potential adversaries who are sitting pretty, improving their economies and keeping their young alive and in school.

In fact, nowhere in his article does Clifford May write about the cost of conducting an endless war. Instead, he dedicates the bulk of his talk to participate in a haggling match of utter triviality. Here is how that went:

“It surprises me how many remain confused about Islamists. That was illustrated by the headlines that appeared on Sunday in The Washington Post obituary of Baghdadi. One read: Baghdadi, Islamic State's terrorist-in-chief, dies at 48. A second read: Baghdadi, austere religious scholar at helm of Islamic State, dies at 48. A third read: Baghdadi, extremist leader of Islamic State, dies at 48. Worth considering: How odd it is to think of Baghdadi as austere? As for his Islamic scholarship, he had degrees from the University of Baghdad and the Saddam University for Islamic Studies. Which brings me to a final point: The ideology which Baghdadi espoused is not different from those of al Qaeda, Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood. The latter prefer a tie and jacket to a turban and dishdasha. Iranians are well-educated, cultured, fluent in the language of diplomacy, and comfortable in the company of unbelievers”.

To find out what Clifford May should have done that he didn't do, we turn to an article that was published on the same day in the same publication. It came under the title: “The growing veteran suicide epidemic,” and the subtitle: “Why Congress must support research that addresses veteran suicides.” It was written by Robert Graham, and published on October 29, 2019 in The Washington Times. Here is what Robert Graham has said that Clifford May should have mentioned, if only in passing, but did not:

“Sixty-thousand veterans have committed suicide over the past decade. Our nation lost more service members at home than in active war zones. Sadly, a majority of those veterans who took their own lives died in the same way their brothers and sisters did on the battlefield –– by a firearm. Firearm-related veteran suicides is an epidemic that lies beneath the surface of the national discourse, but it affects us all. As communities across the nation feel the pain of this issue, they are asking their elected officials to find and address its root causes. However, in order to get to the source of this problem, we need more information. And sadly, as it currently stands, we do not have the required data and facts”.

And here is one reason––if it's not the only reason––why the veterans of American intervention in Arab and Muslim affairs, feel that their lives were reduced to an absurdity not worth maintaining: They were lied to when told they were defending America. They feel that killing unarmed or lightly armed Arab men, women and children in their homes, serves the interests of Jews such as Clifford May while costing America instead of serving it.

The sense of shame, guilt and regret is what pushes these veterans over the edge. Many in American politico-journalistic circles, know of this reality but nobody talks about it.

Meanwhile, a handful of veterans who did well after returning home, are not helping tell the story of their less fortunate brothers and sisters.

They are not helping because they came back to kiss Jewish asses and get a job at Fox News or get elected to Congress where they continue selling out America and the other veterans to promote the causes of Jews, especially Israel, always Israel and no one but Israel.

A Guerrilla Army out to disrupt the Campuses

The Jewish Defense League (JDL) was visibly active in America, disrupting the lives of law-abiding citizens till it was recognized as being a terrorist organization and so labeled. This move forced members of the JDL to cease operating under the old name but not cease disrupting the lives of citizens.

What the members did is that, instead of operating in open defiance of the law, they devised all sorts of ways by which to trick the security apparatus of the country as well as its legal system to do the dirty work for them, as they were now operating under different names.

One of the new names under which members of the former JDL have been operating, is Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America or (CAMERA). This one began as an organization dedicated to harass the media, forcing the print and electronic outlets to see world-events and report on them from the extremely fanatic Jewish point of view. When the Jewish Machine for the Control of America saw itself diminished, it called on CAMERA to help it restore its tight grip on the country. Based on the idea that the best way to control a vibrant society, is to do it by taking control of its system of education, this is where CAMERA has turned its attention.

To fulfill its new mandate, thousands of young and not so young Jews were trained by CAMERA as well as other Jewish organizations, in the guerrilla tactics of disrupting the functions of normal human gatherings doing normal things. The guerrillas would descend on a gathering, do their dastardly deed, and come out of there wailing that they were discriminated against for no reason except that they are Jews. You can see how one such event has played out, in an article that was written by Ben Stone, a member of CAMERA.

The Stone article came under the title: “Upholding the Values of Duke University in the Face of Antisemitism,” published on October 29, 2019 in the Jewish online publication Algemeiner. After wasting several paragraphs on a preamble during which time he spewed useless polemics aimed at giving the readers the impression that the Jews had managed to convince the US department of Human Health and Services that Duke University was violating some law or some regulation, Ben Stone got around to explaining how guerrilla tactics are conducted in a classroom setting. Here is a condensed version of his account:

“I signed up for a class about the Middle East, taught by Dr. Rebecca Stein. Her first course of action was to show us selfies of IDF soldiers. She explained that they were taken while the IDF occupying forces were waging a war in Gaza and killing innocent people. I reasoned that this would be a good class to practice my debating skills. I wanted to make the case for the other side, and argue that her opinions were delegitimizing and demonizing Israel. It quickly became clear that I would not be able to practice my debating skills, because she told us that we would only discuss the documents she brought into class. These would obviously only reflect her very biased and skewed views, and would not give the class an objective view on the topic. I am open to studying articles and documents from both sides of the conversation, but only if there is the possibility to discuss the nuances of both”.

It is obvious from this account that Ben Stone knew exactly what Dr. Rebecca Stein was teaching long before he registered for the course. The CAMERA group targeted her and prepared him to disrupt the class by confronting her under the guise that he was practicing his debating skills, something that is never done with a professor while he or she is lecturing. It is done at the end of the lesson among the students ... at times under the guidance and moderation of a tutorial leader.

In telling the readers that he wanted to make the case for the other side of the conversation by challenging the professor, accusing her of taking a stand that's damaging to Israel, the guerrilla has demonstrated that he was there, not to learn, but to impose his views on a class of students who paid to hear the professor's lecture not his views. In addition, when he added that the professor's views would not give the class an objective view on the topic, he made it clear that his intent from the beginning was not to learn but to lecture. Worse, he went as far as to assume the role of overseer in charge of monitoring the faculty’s decisions when he specified what kind of articles and documents he was open to seeing assigned for study.

Now think about it, my friend. Many people have questioned the wisdom of students asking for safe places on campus where they can learn without being disrupted, and debate among themselves without guerrillas raiding them and telling them to drop everything they do because the guerrillas are Jews who are here bearing Holocaust stories to tell them about. And the guerrillas threaten that the audience better listen because if it doesn't, there will be stories written about this incident in newspapers, and there will be complaints lodged with people in the administration and in politics that have the power to punish.

Finally, it must be recognized that the Jews have done America a great disservice when the rabbis embarked on a scheme to “educate” the American public half a century ago. We now see the effect of that education on a system of governance that has turned as dead as a skunk run over by a truck, when it comes to working for America. But when it comes to working for Israel or any of the Jewish causes, the system comes alive and buzzes like a beehive.

If you allow these characters to take control of the system of education, you'll turn America into a nation of lemmings who will be walking to the cliff where the leader has already arrived and has jumped to his doom.

Let it not be the same old Track to nowhere

Things will undoubtedly change, at least a little on the surface, now that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is dead.

But fundamentally, nothing will change until there will be a corresponding change in the root causes that give rise to movements such as ISIS, Al-Qaeda, al-Shabab, Boko Haram and others. These are movements that sprung up in places that stretch on the Globe from the Far East to Western Africa. They are led by young men who are so savvy in the use of cyberspace, they propagate their ideology and recruit other youngsters from North America down to South Africa.

The worldview of the leaders that preside over these movements, boils down to the simplistic belief that America was assigned the task of leading a military campaign to destroy Islam and all Muslims. Those leaders are convinced that Judeo-Christianity's ultimate goal is to replace Islam in the places that the latter conquered long ago and keeps under its control to this day.

And so, in the same way that al-Qaeda did not die when Usama Bin Laden was killed, ISIS will not die just because al-Baghdadi was killed. Youngsters who are given good or false reasons to believe that Judeo-Christianity has mandated America to kill them and take their possessions the way that the Jews of Israel are killing Palestinians and taking their possessions –– will continue to fight, prepared to die for the cause. And they will do so the only way they know how, which is to rely on the weapons they will gather from anywhere they can procure them, to the weapons they will improvise on the battlefield.

What then should America and the West do, or refrain from doing to convince potential future recruits who may be lured by those movements, that they are not targeted for annihilation, and neither is their religion? Well, if you go by the literature that has been produced so far, you'll find that very little was put forward in this regard. An example will be discussed in a moment, showing how the subject is dealt with at this time.

Meanwhile, those who keep an eye on this kind of matters know that sooner or later, the self-described hawks in America will jump into the fray and suggest all kinds of harsh measures aimed at continuing the war on what they will call terrorism when in reality, they mean war on Islam. If their measures are implemented, they will amount to the worst thing that America did. That's because such actions will tell the Muslim youngsters that it is true, America is coming after them and their possessions the way that the Jews are going after the Palestinians and their Palestine.

As to the example that concerns how the subject is handled at this time, an article doing just that, came under the title: “Baghdadi is dead,” and the subtitle: “Does that mean ISIS Dies with him?” It was written by Daniel R. DePetris, and was published on October 27, 2018 in The National Interest. Here is the pertinent passage that reveals the pundit's own opinion:

“ISIS's leadership was prepared for the time when their so-called caliphate was burned to the ground, and their fighters have responded by transforming into a classic insurgency. The Pentagon assesses that 14,000-18,000 ISIS militants are still operating in Iraq and Syria”.

This means that among the body of opinion makers in America, no serious strategy has taken shape yet concerning what to do next. This being the case, it would be a good idea for those who prefer to advance America's interests at home rather than seek false glory abroad, to start laying the groundwork for creating a paradigm that will inform the leaders of America the world will be safer if they discard the fantasy that evil lurks inside every soul that refuses to worship the deity they call Democracy.

Those that have America's interest at heart could begin by studying the relationship that brought together the form of governance known as Democracy, with the Industrial Revolution and Colonialism. This will help them see that Democracy is fast becoming anachronistic by the fact that the original Industrial Revolution has been so updated, it no longer influences our lives –– and by the fact that today, Colonialism is viewed as a reviled phenomenon. In fact, Democracy has lost the two legs on which it once stood.

These people will understand that what's happening in the world at this time, is a series of experiments with new forms of governance. Out of these experiments, one will most certainly triumph, and everyone in the world will want to emulate it. As to the forms of governance that did not make it, they will quietly fade away.

If America views this phenomenon with trepidation and decides to fight it, America will end up being the odd-man-out and a big loser. What America must do instead, is keep its current form of government and watch with interest what happens in the other places.

In the end, America will most likely find that it will only need to do minor adjustments to its form of governance to get in sync with the rest of the world.

If this happens, it will be the happy ending that everyone in the world will welcome and celebrate.

The same old Cycle entering its final Phase

Once again, a predictable tragedy that was predicted many times over, has unfolded a year ago.

On the anniversary of the event, the Jewish editors of the New York Daily News wrote a piece under the title: “Old hate in new bottle,” and the subtitle: “Anti-Semitism is resurgent in America.” The editorial was published on October 27, 2019 in the Daily News.

The essence of the piece reflects this message: “A man walked into a synagogue to kill Jews … It is incumbent on all Americans to face the depressing fact that anti-Semitism is resurgent … The man was among those who fancy themselves soldiers in a civil war”.

There was not even a hint in that piece as to why anti-Semitism is resurgent in America in the eyes of the editors, or how to start correcting the situation. For a discussion that attempts to do just that, we need to go to an article that was published three days earlier. It was on October 24, 2019 that Melissa Landa published her article under the title: “In Rochester and Elsewhere, Jewish Organizations Must Forcefully Fight Anti-Zionists,” a work that was printed in Algemeiner.

And this prompts the readers to puzzle about a number of questions, such as: “How do these people fight anti-Zionists forcefully? Whom do they consider to be anti-Zionists? How does anti-Zionism relate to anti-Semitism?” and a few other related questions. In trying to make sense of all this, the first thing that comes to mind is the reality that as long as the Jews were denying they planned to swallow all of Palestine, they maintained the claim that their only concern was to fight the spread of anti-Semitism.

What happened subsequently was that their confidence was boosted when Donald Trump moved the American embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. That's when the Jews abandoned the denial that they coveted all of Palestine, and started attacking those who would suggest that the Jews have no right to swallow all of Palestine. Since this principle is at the core of what the Zionists have been dreaming about all along, the Jews linked anti-Zionism to anti-Semitism, and started to go full-force defending Zionism while attacking anyone who would suggest that the Palestinians have any right at all to any part of Palestine.

Meanwhile, saddened by the unfairness which “Christians United For Israel (CUFI)” is heaping on the Palestinian people, a number of churches and ordinary citizens in the Rochester, New York area got together and founded an organization called “Christians Witnessing for Palestine (CW4P.)” It gave itself the mandate of working to alleviate CUFI's brutal and relentless work, which consists of stirring the hatred of American officials against the people of Palestine.

And this is where the Jewish response to the work of CW4P should fill impartial observers with plenty of insight as to how the Jews have become and continue to be the architects of their own misery. Reading about their work, you’ll see that instead of responding in a civilized manner to CW4P's holding a film festival that communicates the Palestinian point of view, Melissa Landa's “Alliance for Israel” has used a cowardly and brutal method to respond; a method that is familiar to me.

To tell my story briefly, the way that the Jews have been fighting me for half a century, was to go behind my back scaring anyone that might give me a break, telling them stories they dredged out of the Jewish sewer. They did so while threatening, cajoling, bribing, blackmailing and warning of serious consequences anyone who would dare to help me. And this is how I was forced to formulate in my mind the theory that these things cannot be human beings. I thought of them as cowardly and filthy animals––pure and simple. And here is what Melissa Landa says she did:

“My Alliance for Israel colleagues and I made several attempts to engage the festival's stakeholders. We spoke to the theater's management, who explained that they rented the space to the festival organizers and signed a contract, which they could not break. We contacted the Downtown Presbyterian Church, which CW4P lists as its fiscal sponsor, but the reverend stated that he was not aware of the content of the films and was in no position to influence the festival in any way. We used an online form to send messages to the festival organizers. Our messages included suggestions of other films that offered a [different] viewpoint. We received no response. Christians Witnessing for Palestine articulates its alignment with the pro-BDS group Jewish Voice for Peace”.

That is, instead of choosing the civilized method of refuting the Palestinian message while articulating their own so that it may stand beside that of the Palestinians, thus give the public the opportunity to judge the merit of each and decide what to do next, the Jews dipped their arm into the sewer once more, and tried to dredge the kind of filth that has been sending them to the gas chamber and the incinerator time after time.

These characters went behind the Palestinians, and have attempted to stir the hatred of the people they work with, to scuttle the work that the Palestinians do as they try to tell their story in their own words.

These characters who call themselves Jews and pretend to speak in the name of all Jews, never learn. Or maybe like someone put it, they find it lucrative to send Jews to those places.

Law Student in need of basic civic Education

Erielle Davidson says she is a law student. She also writes a column for the Federalist. Fortunately or unfortunately––depending on your perspective––this combination is providing us with a case study on how the Judeo-Yiddish culture has contaminated the original American culture, and sent it down into the sewer.

Davidson writes from the extreme fanatic angle of the Judeo-Israeli perspective. The BDS movement being her current preoccupation, she often writes about it to attack those who advocate it, and defend those who argue abolishing it. That's what she did on October 25, 2019 when she published in the Federalist, a column that came under the title: “Ilhan Omar Is Against Sanctions, Except When The Target Is Israel,” and the subtitle: “Sanctions are very, very bad–unless they're slapped on Israel”.

This is a piece of haggling that is more than 1100 words long, in which the writer basically says that Ilhan Omar is pursuing the double standard of advocating sanctions on Israel but not on other nations such as Iran, for example, or Syria or even the Palestinian Authority or what have you.

But while accusing Omar of double standard for defending the BDS movement, and rejecting the use of the Global Magnitsky Act which is used to sanction other countries, Erielle Davidson pursues her own brand of double standard by advocating the use of the Global Magnitsky Act to sanction any country except Israel, while attacking supporters of the BDS movement. And Davidson justifies her stance by making the following argument:

“'Locally-led boycott or divestment campaigns' is the bucket in which Omar would likely argue her much-loved BDS movement fits. But she fails to describe how or why 'locally-led boycott or divestment campaigns' are any better than or superior to state-sponsored sanction campaigns”.

And this is precisely how and why Erielle Davidson has unwittingly cracked wide-open the case against her own much-loved Jewish brand of fits. She has, in effect, explicitly demonstrated that when the choice comes down to the American families deciding for themselves how to manage their lives, and the government making the decision for them, the Jews will always stand on the side of the (Jewish controlled) government making the decision for the families.

In fact, this is the culture that the rabbis brought to America half a century ago when they first embarked on “educating” the American public. They succeeded in what they set out to do, and we see the effect of that education now. Furthermore, we realize that what we see is only the tip of the iceberg, knowing how feverishly the Jews are trying to implement a plan whose ultimate goal is to take control of the system of education from kindergarten to graduate school where America's future generations will be taught to do nothing more than work for the Jews, and live for the glory of Israel, always Israel and no one but Israel.

Thus, we can surmise that the battle, which is taking shape at this moment between the Ilhan Omar group and that of Erielle Davidson, is one that will pit those who work to give the power of decision-making back to the people, and those who wish to concentrate still more power into the already powerful hands of the Jews. The Omar group will explain their thinking to the public, whereas the Davidson group will seek the political bimbos who feel more comfortable going behind closed doors and hearing Jewish whispers in their ears.

The good news is that we don't have to guess who will win this battle in the end because Davidson has revealed her hand, and it looks grim. Here it is: “The BDS movement is not about influencing Israel's policies but about ending Israel's existence. The patchwork of literature produced by BDS co-founder Omar Barghouti reveals that the BDS movement is focused on the destruction of the Jewish state”.

Even if we assume that most of what's in that piece of garbage is true –– which would be a miraculous event coming from a Jew –– those of us who were old enough to be around before the name Barghouti had popped onto the scene, remember that the boycott of Israel began before the man was born. It happened when the Arab League asked its friends in governments and businesses around the world to boycott Israel.

Many responded favorably to the Arab appeal whereas a couple of governments –– the United States and the Canadian Province of Ontario, for example –– responded with legislation designed to counter the Arab boycott. The net result has been a very small difference either way because government boycotts are easily circumvented, and because the Israeli economy is of a kind that the President of the United States, Donald Trump, would characterize as a shit-hole.

The lesson here is that aside from the propaganda value that may prove to be valuable in some circumstances, government interference in such matters does not help in any practical terms. But what a move of this kind usually succeeds in doing, is raise the level of anger among the people who do not like being told how to run their lives.

And this is why astute individuals such as the American legislator, Ilhan Omar, has embarked on a campaign to give the power of decision-making back to the people of America.

And so, my friend, if you want to guess who will win this battle, here is your winner. She, and those like her, have it within them to undo the damage that the Jews have inflicted on America during the half century that they were permitted to lark about without someone telling them off.

Watch Ilhan Omar and her colleagues perform, and be amazed at the will power to get into action, that the human spirit can generate when it finds itself in the right place at the right time, and when called upon to carry out its calling.

How the U.S. Politicos legitimized the Absurd

You probably never heard someone say the three words, “Lysergic Acid Diethylamide.” They are better known as LSD, which is a potent hallucinogenic drug. It was widely used by people of all ages during the decades of the 1960s and 1970s.

Those who used that drug became so stoned, it was no surprise when a regular user suggested that to make the world a better place, someone ought to fill a fleet of water-bomber airplanes with LSD and spray the whole country from the air so that everybody gets high and become a peace-loving dude.

Well, my friend, suppose that a mad scientist invented such a drug with the added feature that its effect does not wane with time. Once used, it keeps the user into a permanent psychedelic trance, and not just in a state of peaceful bliss. The scientist made it so that those who inhale the drug become wedded to the last message they heard before inhaling.

Having perfected the drug, the scientist then does two things. He authors a message and disguises it as a commercial. He has it distributed as a flier to all the households in the town where he was born and grew up. He has the message printed in the local newspaper, and broadcast on the local radio station. He also rents a water-bomber, and uses it to spray the town from one end to the other. The result is that everyone becomes permanently wedded to his message.

And what the message says, in essence, is that all those living in this ethnically diverse town should think of themselves, not as being originally from Asia or Africa or Europe or Latin America or whatever, but as descendants of a tribe that was chosen by God to inherit the Earth and all that's in it. For this reason, the whole country, indeed, “the world has certain moral responsibilities and obligations towards us. First and foremost ought to be the simple elemental recognition and respect –– the radical admission that we do exist”.

Far-fetched, you say? Well, let me ask you this: Did you think for a moment that the assertion made above and placed between quotation marks, was an invention of mine? Or did you think that someone uttered these words to make the point that was analogized by the story of the mad scientist? Whatever you may think, the truth is that a Jew actually authored these words and stuck them at the end of an article he wrote under the title: “Why Anti-Zionism is Worse Than Antisemitism,” written by Benjamin Kerstein and published on October 23, 2019 in Algemeiner.

Kerstein's point is that all Jews are one and the same people whether they are White, Black, Yellow, Brown or red skinned. They are one and the same people whether they just converted to Judaism, or they are children of the first generation converts to Judaism, or the second generation or the tenth or even before that. They are one and the same people, says Kerstein, if they are half Jews, or a quarter Jews or a smaller fraction than that. In fact, they are Jews if they have as little as one drop of Jewish blood in them … or not even that much, as long as they feel like Jews.

But what is it that prompted this guy, Benjamin Kerstein, to go into the trouble of arguing that a mixture is not a mixture but a homogeneous mass that happens to have different colors, different vibrations, different scents, different flavors, different customs and so on ... and so on ... and so on? The answer is that by the power of his twisted logic, Kerstein has determined that if it can be argued that a mishmash of Jews represents one and the same thing, all the Jews, wherever they happen to live, will have the right to do what no one else is allowed to do.

That is, it has been resolved in the twisted mind of Kerstein, that whereas all the Greeks in the world could not go to Greece, push away the people that never left the place, and take it for themselves, the Jews from anywhere in the world have the right to go to Palestine, push away the people that never left the place, and take it for themselves. In fact, the rule that applies to the Greeks but not the Jews, applies to everyone else on the planet, be they White, Black, Yellow, Brown or red skinned.

To make his point, Kerstein contrived an argument that –– if composed by a non-Jew –– would have sent its author to a mental institution. But because the argument was composed by a Jew, it was considered worthy of printing in a publication that is supported by taxpayer money. Here is the argument that Kerstein made:

“The Jews are not a people is a remarkable statement because it is quite unprecedented. Throughout the long history of philo- and antisemitism, non-Jews never claimed that the Jews were not a people. Christianity and Islam always acknowledged that they constituted a nation. An official of the French revolutionaries once said, 'For the Jews as a people, nothing; for the Jew as a citizen, everything,' something that could not have been said if the Jews had not been a people”.

Yes, my friend, this is all the evidence that Benjamin Kerstein had when he made the claim that Jews have the right to go to Palestine, push away the indigenous people who never left the place since the beginning of time, and despite their crying out, “Jews will not replace us,” saw the American government spend lives and treasure to make it possible for the Jews to replace the legitimate owners of the Palestinian soil. Who will be next?

It could not happen even in the Twilight Zone

Strange fictional stories were told in the Twilight Zone of the 1960s. Stranger actual stories are trying to make their way into the Twilight Zone of the twenty-first century.

Unhappy with the way that the universe is unfolding, the two Jewish characters, Michael Ledeen and David Wurmser, are telling the United States of America it is not doing enough to make “down” look like “up,” and make “up” look like “down.” They did so in an article they wrote under the title: “The US is losing the war against tyranny,” and had the piece published in the Washington Examiner on October 21, 2019.

At a time when the Jewish tyrannical rule of America is beginning to wane, Ledeen and Wurmser came up with the novel idea of reasserting their control over America by trying to deceive its opinion makers; nudging them into the belief that the world is run by tyranny, that America must return to the business of heeding Jewish commands, and must rush to go tilt the windmills of world liberation, thus free the planet from a tyranny that, in reality, exists nowhere except in Jewish ruled America.

Eager to get as quickly as possible into the core of their demands, the two Jewish writers made it clear at the outset that their ultimate aim was and still is, regime change in the countries that absolutely refuse to let themselves be penetrated by the politico-diplomatic rapists who were trained by the worldwide Jewish conspiracy to do to all countries what they did to America. And so, here is how Ledeen and Wurmser have formulated their thoughts on the subject––in the first sentence of their article's first paragraph:

“We are at war, under siege from a global alliance that runs from Pyongyang to Havana and Caracas. We are losing, having failed to bring down, Kim Jong Un, Nicolas Maduro and Ali Khamenei. We have failed to support the crowds in Hong Kong, even though Beijing has canceled the law enabling the transfer of Hong Kong dissidents to the mainland”.

Flying in the face of the logical concept that those who are winning are “up” and those who are losing are “down,” Ledeen and Wurmser, who began the discussion by admitting that “we are losing,” meaning we are “down,” went on to assert that those who are winning are not “up” but are “failing and continuously failing cultures.” Well then, if that's what they are, and yet come out winners when pitted against America's culture, it must be that America is in the pits. Yes indeed, America is in the pits culturally, but not because it never had a winning culture; because its original culture was contaminated –– as everyone knows –– by the inferior Judeo-Yiddish culture.

And what that inferior culture has brought to America, is the beastly view that the world is made of “our side,” which is the good side, and “their side,” which is the evil side. As well, the two writers are asserting that the war between the two sides is on. They also suggest that to win the war, we must shed our sensibility that America is too precious and too good to sacrifice lives and coin to save others.

Mind you, it is not that the world is only split into “us, the good” and “them, the bad”; additionally, the part that is “us” is itself split into the excellent Right-wing, and the less than excellent Left-wing. The difference between the two being that the crowd on the Right knows that our national interest lies in being aggressively engaged on the international scene, whereas the Left rejects this sort of ideas.

However, despite the split between the two camps, they seem to converge on the idea that the time has come for America to isolate itself from the rest of the world. This has led the superpower to adopt the bland policy of talking to other nations when they are willing to talk, or imposing economic sanctions on them when they are not –– say the two authors.

Will that approach produce good results? The two writers are skeptical. But having built a case that went on tangents in several directions, you look forward to a strong closing argument that will bring together the various points they raised. Well, they tried to do just that, but alas, they failed in their attempt. And here is a sample of the mediocrity they managed to cobble together:

“Our enemies will pursue us. The Sept.11 attacks taught us that the immense power of our nation proved an illusion. Our enemies came into our cities. The events since have shown that seeking to incentivize rather than defeat left us two decades later still facing them. The action required must threaten the leaders, just as it did the Soviets when Reagan was president. The situation in many regimes is similar. The campaign against Iran, Venezuela, and China can succeed if our enemies cannot embrace our experiment with freedom. Therefore, we need to support a revolutionary campaign in the name of freedom. Our campaign against Gorbachev succeeded because the Russians had enough of his muddled policies. The same strategy will work against our current enemies”.

To speak in one and the same breath of (1) a bunch of suicidal kids engaged in terror activities, and lump them with (2) the former Soviet Union (now Russia) which remains a military superpower, as well as (3) China that is a fast rising superpower, and (4) lesser powers such as North Korea, Iran and Venezuela, is nothing more than useless meandering, which the writers hope will encourage America to resubmit to Jewish control.

No. This cannot happen, not even in the Twilight Zone of the twenty-first century.

A Friend that milks you is no Friend at all

Operators of the Jewish propaganda machine have been exploiting America by hypnotizing its ruling class with the assurance that Israel was a good friend of America.

However, the problem has always been that those operators never gave a practical definition for the label “friend,” any more than they did for any label they slapped on whom they praised and whom they maligned. And so, no sane person outside of America's ruling class, paid much attention to the idea of Israel being a friend of America. It is just that nobody cared ... but this may be about to change.

What happened is that Clifford D. May, who is more than an average cog in the Jewish propaganda machine, has written a column about the Kurds, calling them the best friends that America had in the Muslim World. In so doing, what he wrote will stand as the definition of the term “friend.” This being the case, it will be taken that the definition which applies to the Kurds must also apply to Israel. Good or bad, whatever the definition will turn out to be, it will come to the attention of the American public as well as that of the ruling class … the group that needs to know about it more than anyone else.

Clifford May's column came under the title: “The Kurds are not angels,” and the subtitle: “Among Muslim nations, America has had no better friend,” published on October 22, 2019 in The Washington Times. That title does not reflect what May thinks of the Kurds. It is how President Donald Trump described the Kurds, to which Clifford May responded with what amounts to: Yes but...

May went on to explain that angels don't make great soldiers. But the important thing is that the Kurds were trained by the Americans to be effective soldiers. To that end, they were given assistance, advice and combat air support, and were let loose to go after the soldiers of the alarming Islamic State, known as ISIS. Because this alone does not make it sound like the Kurds were friends of America, you go over the article once more, looking for something that deserves being labeled: Good friend. But you find none.

Puzzled and curious about the kind of relationship that the Kurds had with America –– that which prompted Clifford May to characterize with the phrase: “America has had no better friend” –– you analyze every word that May wrote in his column, and what you come up with is the following:

“Many of the Kurds were members of a group designated as a terrorist organization by the United States. That's what Trump had in mind when he said the Kurds are not angels. But the Kurds are diverse. When the Ottoman Empire collapsed after World War I, the lands on which the Kurds lived, were divided among Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria. Today, the Kurds comprise a 'nation' without a state of its own. I'm convinced that most of them have no higher priority than to preserve their culture and speak their own language”.

From this, you deduce that to be a best friend of America, all you need to do is develop a “high priority” for grabbing properties that belong to someone else, turn to terrorism to get them, and call on the Americans to give you assistance, advice and combat air support. When this is done, you will have attracted the attention of the Jews who will joyfully whisper in your ear: “We are so much alike, we'll get the politico-journalistic suckers of America to work on getting you what else you want”.

This absurd masquerade so closely resembles Israel's relationship with America, it explains why the Jews insist on calling Israel America's friend. Upon reflection, this saga makes you wonder what the Jews were thinking when the Arabs formed a military coalition with America during the First Iraq War, and fought together, not to grab what belongs to someone else, but to chase away an invader that was trying to grab someone's property. Were the Arabs the best friends of America in the eyes of the Jews at the time? Whether the answer is yes or no, how do they characterize that relationship now?

The other burning question is this: Will the ruling class of America come out of its hypnotic trance, see what the Jews are doing to America, and respond to their demands with a terse: take a hike, kid?

Like a victim that was hypnotized and programmed by a religious cult to worship false gods, and in desperate need to be deprogrammed as well as reeducated to get acquainted with everything that used to be his life, the ruling class of America needs to be deprogrammed and reeducated. If this is done, it will not be the first time that the country will have gone through an experience at this level of trauma.

The worrying part, of course, is that when something like this takes place to a nation, the deprogramming brings with it unsettled times that can last for a while.

Even though the Americans pride themselves on their ability to peacefully transform from one state to another, it remains to be seen if they will get rid of the Jewish tyranny without going through a disruptive convulsion.

Who begs to have their Intelligence insulted?

Three days were long enough to give the world a taste of what it's like to bask in the tightening darkness of an insulted intelligence, and contrast it with an intelligence that's basking in the blooming glory of a completely unrestricted intellectual inquiry.

It was on October 18, 2019 that Mitch McConnell gave the world a microscopic view on a field of brain cells that were rendered inert by the relentless bombardment of insulting projectiles ejected by the Jewish propaganda machine-gun. And it was three days later, on October 21, 2019 that Elizabeth Warren gave the world a panoramic view of a field that's blossoming with the joys of a free intellectual inquiry.

It was on that fateful day that Mitch McConnell chose to publish an article under the title: “Withdrawing from Syria is a grave mistake,” and had it printed in the Washington Post. As to Elizabeth Warren's day of joy, it was Philip Klein who unwittingly chose to demonstrate how impotent the Jewish propaganda machine-gun can be rendered. He did so when he wrote: “Elizabeth Warren threatens Israel with aid cutoff but slammed Trump for cutting off aid to Palestinians,” and had the article published in The Washington Examiner.

When it comes to understanding how the brain cells of America's legislators and other governing elites are rendered inert, it may be tempting to consider Mitch McConnell's contribution as being a valuable lesson because of who he is. After all, he is both the symbol of senatorial paralysis in America, and now teacher of the method by which a superpower can be put to sleep, thus allowing someone else to freeload on what used to make the superpower super in the first place.

That method has a name. It is called eternal demagoguery. It consists of constantly scaring people by telling them that someone who is evil by nature, is after them. That someone is evil –– it is further explained –– not because of something that can be addressed and remedied, but because it is that evil is naturally motivated to cause mayhem ... pure and simple. In turn, such an idea leads to the notion that the only way to end the threat, is to defeat evil by engaging him in a war that may prove to be endless unless it is won by one party; which means lost by the other party.

And so, you are told that if you want to be the winner and not the loser, you must mobilize all of your resources and put them in the service of the fight. In fact, this is how all the brain cells, which are not geared to participate in the war, are rendered inert and made to look like a field of dead cells. What follows is the condensed version of Mitch McConnell's philosophy, reflected in the way that he absorbed it during years of Judeo-Israeli indoctrination:

“Withdrawing US forces from Syria will leave the American people and homeland less safe. I have worked with three presidential administrations to fight terrorism. The threat is real and cannot be wished away. There is no substitute for American leadership. No other nation can match our capabilities. We must recognize that we are an indispensable nation. We must also work closely with allies such as Israel. As neo-isolationism rears its head on both the left and the right, we can expect to hear more talk of endless wars. But rhetoric cannot change the fact that wars do not just end; wars are won or lost. America's wars will be endless only if America refuses to win them”.

With that, Mitch McConnell made it sound like he and three presidential administrations were pussyfooting rather than engaging in the serious business of fighting terrorism. But true or false, why would someone in his position say something like this? He would say it because his brain cells were rendered inert by the relentless bombardment of insulting projectiles ejected out of the Jewish propaganda machine-gun.

McConnell wasn't speaking for himself in that passage; the Jews were speaking for him and for the Senate, which he represents. And so, we must surmise that they were all pussyfooting and doing nothing else, or they were fighting to win an unwinnable war. In either case, and unknown to them, the war was unwinnable because there never is such a thing as an enemy who engages in a fight for no reason at all. In fact, this entire philosophy is nothing more than a hoax created by the Jews for the purpose of keeping America under their hypnotic spell and their command.

As to Elizabeth Warren, she told the Jews something about them that everybody knows except them. Using different words, she made it clear that they lose credibility when they do things like celebrate the “death” of the two-state solution while insulting those who promote it ... and yet pretend that they were always in favor of that solution but that the Palestinians were the ones who kept rejecting it.

Apparently, Philip Klein did not understand Warren's message, thus continued to produce a number of such absurd statements throughout his article. To discuss them is to give them a level of respectability they do not deserve. For this reason, it is better to view them as unworthy trash, and leave it at that.

He wants to marry the wealthy Victim he raped

Imagine a situation in which a Jewish high executive completely dominating a young and attractive female aid that grew up shunned by her peers because they were intimidated by her stunning beauty and her opulent elegance. But she didn't know that, so she turned introvert, believing there was something repulsive about her she can do nothing to fix.

The Jewish executive for whom she works, initiated a sexual relationship with her by first raping her and then having irregular encounters that would be consensual at times, and considered statutory rape at other times. She tells no one of these encounters because, as repugnant as she feels they are, they remain the only thing that's going for her socially. And she doesn't want to lose her boss's interest in her because of the greater fear that if she does, she'll be alone gain.

As it happens, however, this young woman isn't the only one that the Jewish executive has been abusing. He's been doing it to several other women, one of whom decided to speak publicly about what she had to endure. Her bravery encouraged the other women to come forward and tell their stories. The exception was the young aid that did not think it will do her any good to join the other women in telling her story.

With lawsuits hitting the Jewish rapist from every direction, he realized he'll soon go bankrupt as well as reviled by everyone, including his wife who already filed for divorce. And so, he reckoned that his only salvation hinged on marrying the young aid that kept her mouth shut. She is after all, the daughter of a rich family, and slated to inherit a fortune very soon. The information he has is that the fortune is a respectable sum; one that's large enough to allow him carrying on with a lifestyle he cannot part with.

Well, my friend, this is not an exact analogy of what's going on in the world today, but it gives a sense of the chutzpah that would motivate someone like Michael Makovsky to write an article such as the one he wrote under the title: “The right way ahead after Trump's Syria mistake,” published on October 20, 2018 in the New York Post.

Makovsky is the guy that founded a joint he called “Jewish Institute for National Security of America.” Puzzled by the mentality that has combined the three words “Jewish, national and America” in one phrase, you wonder: What does this Jew want America to do for its own security? You go over his entire article looking for clues, and by the time you reach the end, you find that he has been barking a load of insolence like a scared dog. He did so –– not because he worried what might happen to America but –– because he worried what might happen to Israel.

Here is Makovsky's insolent barking as he expressed it in the first paragraph of his presentation: “What should Washington do now is the question following Trump's error of green-lighting Turkey's invasion of Syria? The decision dealt a blow to US interests and credibility. Trump MUST reverse course.”  And here is what he says America MUST do:

“Targeted military action is effective. The United States MUST kill the ISIS fighters who escape. It MUST use diplomacy and coercion to end Turkey's invasion, and begin removing assets from Turkish bases. It MUST respond to Iranian aggression. Retaliation is necessary to demonstrate that Trump doesn't shy away from confrontation. Expand the US presence at al-Tanf. Forces there should engage Iranian-backed militias. Bolster Israel's security whose position is perilous. The Jewish state faces Hezbollah missiles, Iranian attempts to gain new footholds in Syria and Iran's nuclear program. Israel is alone. That means America needs Israel even more. The US should augment Israel's military capacity by accelerating delivery of weapons and sharing military technology. A US-Israel defense treaty could demonstrate that America isn't retreating from the region”.

That is, Makovsky wants America to continue fighting against every enemy that Israel has made for itself. More than that, he wants America to fight –– not as a friend that wants to protect Israel but –– as if America was attacked by a foe determined to annihilate it.

And while America is engaged in a do-or-die fight against Iran and its proxies, Makovsky wants the superpower to give Israel the weapons it will use against the neighbors who would have been weakened by America's campaign.

Even then, such giving would only represent the finger that Makovsky envisages America transferring to Israel. But these are Jews who –– when given a finger –– ask for the arm.

This is why, Makovsky is urging America to also give Israel the military technology it wouldn't know what to do with, except sell to the Chinese and get rich while America becomes more vulnerable.

To get back to the sexual analogy, having screwed and raped America for decades, the Jews are now asking for a US-Israel defense treaty that will marry the two entities, thus allow Israel to continue living high on the hog … courtesy of the Beltway pigs.

Boris and Boris are only a Part of the Story

For a time now, the world has been visibly struggling to reorganize itself. Big countries made big moves in this regard, and small countries made small moves. Two of the big countries are Russia, which used to be a part of the Soviet Union; and Britain, which is a part of the European Union, but may soon no longer be.

Russia's move came under Boris Yeltsin who wanted to get rid of the Soviet Republics that made up the Union, thus turn Russia into a totally independent state. But he discovered that it was nearly impossible to make this move given the constitution that was binding the Republics together. So, Yeltsin took Russia out of the Soviet Union, a move that caused the complete dissolution of the Union.

As to Britain, the situation, known as Brexit, is handled by Boris Johnson who apparently dreams of forging a closer relationship with the United States and the other English-speaking countries. And so, unlike Boris Yeltsin, Boris Johnson wants to pull Britain out of one union to make it a part of another union.

The desire to realign the nation's relationships is natural to the human species. It is an extension of what happens regularly among individuals, as well as families and clans. We all change friends and partners as we go on with life. What is not natural, however, is the attempt to force a relationship on those who do not want it. In fact, a move of this kind would look like a forced marriage, and the consequence of it happening, is that it ends just as badly.

There have been attempts in the past to organize former colonies into “pacts” meant to stand up to the enemies of the organizers that happened to be the former colonial powers, now joined by the United States of America. But none of these pacts lasted long enough to make an impact, causing the organizers to give up on the idea. So, guess what happened next. Yes, the Jews came along and tried to organize the former organizers into exclusive clubs that would be presided over by the Jews.

Even before Brexit had become a widely used term, the Jews were working on organizing an exclusive club for what they called the democracies. When they discovered that this was too big a morsel to swallow in one gulp, they worked on making the club exclusive to the English-speaking democracies. What encouraged them to make this decision was the idea of a Brexit that was beginning to occupy a larger space in the public discourse. And so, the Jews called on John Bolton, their most trusted lackey, and asked him to head the group that worked on helping the Brexit forces in Britain win the referendum.

Aside from that effort, the Jews are working on organizing two other exclusives: one micro and one macro. On the micro level, they want to split the American society into a group that loves the Jews and a group that either hates the Jews or remains indifferent to them. And they want to turn the first group into an exclusive club. On the macro level, they want to split the world into those that love Israel and those that either hate Israel or remain indifferent to it. And they want to turn the first group into an exclusive cub.

You can see how the Jews are working on that last idea by reading the article which came under the title: “Venezuela is not the only egregious addition to the UN Human Rights Council,” written by Madeline Fry, and published on October 18, 2019 in The Washington Examiner.

Madeline Fry began her discussion by assigning a false mandate to the Human Rights Council of the United Nations. She said this: “The Council is meant to criticize human rights abuses around the world.” No, this has never been the mandate of the UN or any of its agencies. The UN was created in recognition of the fact that nobody is perfect, and that everybody should get together to review what they are doing that's wrong, and what they are failing to do … and then decide on a better way to doing things.

But having herself decided on what the Council ought to be doing, Fry went on to speak as if the world was made of two groups. She believes that one group is made of bad actors, and one group––she considers to be an exclusive club––brings together virtuous actors. The occasion that prompted her to write, is that in its rotation of the members that sit on the Council, Libya, Sudan and Venezuela, were called upon to serve.

Clinging to the idea that no one outside the club of virtuous actors should sit at the table of the Council, Madeline Fry attacked the UN General Assembly for voting to admit those three actors in defiance of the Jewish delusion that only members of the virtuous club should sit on the Council. They should be there, she believes, not to review the state of human rights around the world and decide on making things better, but there to criticize those like Libya, Sudan and Venezuela.

This being the case, who does she believe has the right to be in the club of virtuous actors? Well, the club is there now, and it brings together Israel and the United States of America. In the eyes of Madeline Fry and her kind of Jews, Israel and the US are the only virtuous actors fit to sit on a human rights council. They are not on the Council that’s affiliated with the UN because that one is not fit to have them.

It must be that in their delusional state, those Jews believe that their cause is proven to be a superior endeavor by the genocidal war which Israel is conducting against the Palestinians to ethnic cleanse the Holy Land of impurities. As well, the fact that America chose to go from beloved superpower to hated icon of moral prostitution, proves that the US is standing firm for the moral principle of helping the chosen children of God.

In fact, relying on their power to hypnotize the brain-dead zombies, the Jews made the ruling-class of America believe that the more their country borrows from foreigners to support Israel, and the more that American boys and girls are sent to die defending Israel, the more that America gets closer to being divine.

Don't blame the Jews for creating this madness, my friend. They are only taking advantage of the situation. Blame the Americans for allowing themselves to become the horror chamber of Jewish social experiment.

What do they say America's Duties are?

Danny Gold, who is Jewish, wrote a long article in which he accused America of deliberately neglecting its duties. He spelled out some of the things that America should have done but did not. Quin Hillyer is also a Jew, and he wrote two articles in which he spelled out some of the duties that America neglected to do.

Danny Gold's article came under the title: “Dereliction of duty,” and the subtitle: “Why the abandonment of the Kurds is such a huge failure for America.” It was published on October 13, 2019 in the New York Daily News. As to Quin Hillyer, he wrote: “Anti-Semitism rises with bizarre perversity,” published on October 14, 2019 in the Washington Examiner. He also wrote: “Incompetence and impotence marked US retreat in Syria,” an article that was published on October 18, 2019, also in the Washington Examiner.

Telling a long story about who did what to whom going back to the 1970s when America conspired with the Iranians to arm the Kurds and incite them to fight the government of Iraq, Danny Gold skipped the most important aspect of the region's history––extending from that time, if not before––to these days. What he skipped is the role that the Jews have played and continue to play in all the events where the flag that's displayed is American but the hand that's controlling the levers of power and decision-making is Jewish.

In fact, the reason why America was conspiring with the Iranians at the time, is because the Jews were friendly with the two non-Arab Muslim countries in the region––Iran and Turkey––as Israel was trying to organize an anti-Arab alliance with them. The intent was to work on breaking up the Arab countries, thus make it possible for Israel, Turkey and Iran to control the pieces like it used to be in the old colonial days.

The way that the Jews impress the others is to tell them: “we're so much alike, and the others are so different, we should get together and oppose them.” It is what they have been telling the Turks while kissing their boots, and promising never to let the Americans lift the designation of “terrorist” on the Kurds. Well, that was then. Look now what Danny Gold is saying about the Turks and the Kurds, speaking in the name of the Jews in Israel, America and everywhere else. Who will be so insane as to believe a word these people say?

As to Quin Hillyer, he has two messages concerning America's duties. One message pertains to America's duty toward the Jews living in America; the other message pertains to America's duty toward the Jews living in Israel. In his article about the rise of anti-Semitism in America, Hillyer says this: “The truth is that if here is any one collective people whose culture promotes good citizenship and intentional contributions to the civic weal, it is the Jewish people who are models”.

You go through the article to see what kind of civic “weal,” the Jews work to alleviate, and find none. The reason is simple. There is awareness that societies throughout the world and through history, have lived peaceful lives till the Jews settled among them. That's when civic trauma of various kinds began to manifest themselves. It happened when the Jews demanded that they be given something at the exclusion of others. This raised resentment among the masses, yet the will of the Jews was almost always imposed on them.

At that point, opposition to the Jews burst into the open, and the latter rushed to call it anti-Semitism. This is the point in the cycle at which we find ourselves today. And so, what the Jews want now to remedy the situation, is that the mind-bending Holocaust stories be hammered into the tender psyches of America's schoolchildren so as to raise a generation of docile American adulators who will live to kiss Jewish boots, and do nothing more useful in their lives than profess their undying love for the Jews.

But if you believe that Jewish tampering alone cannot create that kind of situation, look what Quin Hilliyer says happened during the “disastrous” withdrawal of America's troops out of Syria. From there, you'll be able to determine what influence might have caused much of what ails America today. In fact, in the 42 words that make up the opening paragraph of Hillyer's article, he managed to compress these explosive notions: “The utter foolishness of President Trump”, “decision to betray”, “risk reinvigorating”, “a boost to Islamist Turkish thug Erdogan”, “sheer incompetence”, “mind-boggling” and “disastrous”.

Why all this? Because there was a better way to doing that thing, says Hillyer, but America failed to pursue it. And so, he spelled out the better way. And this is what he said:

“There is no reason for a bad decision to be carried out in a way this embarrassing and deadly. If the withdrawal was to occur, it should have been planned, organized, and done with protection. It should have included clearly delineated and enforceable understandings applicable to all parties”.

So, why was this not done? It was not done because the Americans have learned through repeated experiences––most of them bitter ones––that because the Jews have their hands on the levers of power as well as having an iron-fist monopoly on the media, no rational discussion can be held without it deteriorating into everyone expressing their undying love for Israel. Failing this, the discussion is blown like a hand grenade in the faces of the attendees.

Also, if by some miracle, a workable decision is reached and implemented, not even a fraction of a second after that, does the Jewish mob go into the beehive mode of working to reverse the decision. Sometimes, when the decision is not yet finalized but appears inevitable, the mob begins to plot reversing it.

This gets everyone back to square one where they are retrained on how to love Israel, and do nothing more useful with their lives.

For these reasons, the non-Jewish executives that have business experience, do things as quickly as they can, and do them in a way that comes as close as possible to being “Jewish resistant” irreversible.

For the Jews to come now and complain about the way that decisions are made in America by result-oriented executives, is for the tea to call the pot black.

Seeing their System crumble, they smear others

What do you do if you're someone like The Washington Post, The New York Times, NPR or Voice of America, and you see the system you've been trumpeting as the best thing that happened to this planet––crumble before your eyes and the eyes of a world that's wondering how much further down you will go?

Well, what you do is tell your people and those of the world: It's not as bad as it looks and besides, others are not doing much better than “us.” And then, you smear the others –– not by explaining what they are doing that's wrong but –– by inviting their fugitive opposition to dump on your readers the same kind of stuff that the mob of Jewish pundits has been dumping on America for half a century.

The latest example of that came under the title: “Egypt's dictatorship is sitting on a powder keg,” an article that was written by Ezzedine C. Fishere, and published on October 17, 2019 in The Washington Post.

Obviously unaware that agents of the American States, called police, do the following –– (1) shoot people in the back as they run away because they have a different color of the skin; (2) shoot people in their homes because they (the police) get scared stiff when someone calls to report an incident and (3) shoot themselves to death (that would be the police) when they discover that the Jewish dictatorship ruling America, is not worth being served anymore –– Ezzedine Fishere listed incidents in Egypt that make you wonder: Is that all he has to say? Who's kidding me, an ordinary reader that only seeks the simple truth?

If you've been following this sort of thing, you may remember the little twerp, speaking in the name of some Jewish run so-called human rights outfit, telling the Christians of Egypt, they don't know what's good for them, and they should listen to the voices in exile, telling them to rise up against the government and participate in the effort to topple it.

That was years ago. Today, you have Ezzedine Fishere going beyond that, and telling not only the Christians of Egypt but all 100 million Egyptians the following: “Nobody likes Sissi, not even his supporters. Those who do not oppose his rule, reluctantly tolerate it because they believe it will help Egypt maintain stability and reform the dysfunctional state … the problem is that it is failing both … on politics and economics”.

When Ezzedine Fishere says that Sissi is failing on economics, he does more than tell the people of Egypt he knows better than they do, he tells it to the whole world. He tells it to the World Bank, the IMF, the rating agencies, the multi-trillion-dollar investment outfits, which are falling over each other to invest in Egypt and many more. He tells them they don't know what they are doing, and they should listen to him, to his Jewish backers as well as The Washington Post, The New York Times, NPR and Voice of America.

As to politics, Fishere says that Sissi is failing in this category too because he is not building partnerships. So, that's what it's all about. Those backing Ezzedine Fishere want Sissi to take them as partners. Well, let me tell you, this is like the Weinsteins and the Epsteins insulting the administrators of a seminary preparing gifted girls to become nuns –– for not taking them (the Weinsteins and the Epsteins) as partners in the ownership and governance of the school. Now imagine the Weinsteins and the Epsteins paying a little twerp to write an article that will be approved by The Washington Post, The New York Times, NPR and Voice of America, and have the Post print the thing on behave of America's print-rags and e-rags. What do you get?

You get what follows:

“The regime has been taking on enemies. There are millions of angry Islamists waiting for an opportunity. There is an armed militia in Sinai. A disgruntled Egyptian contractor detailed his corrupt deals with the military and called for a new revolution. People took to the street and protested. These were sporadic protests, quickly dispersed. Sissi had a chat with ordinary citizens. The ministry of supplies requalified one million people to subsidized commodities. Fuel prices were brought down. Only a national reconciliation can achieve the elusive stability –– and the deep reforms Egyptians need and deserve”.

So, here it is, the entire real story is told with these words and what's between the lines. If you missed it, here it is in plain English:

A contractor that was carrying on with the old corrupt ways of doing business, did not get the message when the Sissi administration began to clean up house, sending to trial and punishing those who were caught taking kickback for doing the government's business. When caught carrying on with his corrupt ways, the contractor fled the country and blamed Sissi for his own sins. Islamists who were “waiting for an opportunity” got the opportunity they wanted and tried to organize an insurrection among the poorest of the poor, but failed.

Realizing that there are still forces trying to interfere in the country's system of governance by playing on the grievances of the poor, “the ministry of supplies requalified one million people to subsidized commodities and brought down the fuel prices”.

Seeing the rug pulled from under them, The Washington Post, The New York Times, NPR and Voice of America continue to play up incidents that no longer exist in Egypt. They hope this will cause Egypt to succumb to their tricks and experience the fate that other Arab countries have experienced.

Evil never takes a rest.

Ending is not-ending, but not-ending is ending

Note: This article was meant for tomorrow's publication. See more details at the end.

Got the gist of that title? It is the latest manifestation of the upside-down logic of Clifford D. May. You can read all about it in his latest column, which came under the title: “President Trump not ending the endless war in Syria,” and the subtitle: “Retreating and abandoning allies may not be the optimum strategy.” It was published on October 15, 2019 in The Washington Times.

To get a feel of how historians at the end of the twenty-first century –– some of whom may be toddlers today, and some of whom may yet to be born –– will view our era, picture them reading accounts of how America got involved in Middle Eastern adventures that did to it what the Suez Canal adventure of 1956 did to the once mighty British Empire. 1956 took the British Empire down in the blink of an eye; the Middle East adventures of America in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, withered the aspiring Pax Americana before it became a Pax of any kind. How did this happen? Read on:

According to Clifford May, Donald Trump shares in the responsibility of America's demise because he listened to one, Recep Tayyip Erdogan early on in the Twenty-first century. Here is how May put it in writing: “Donald Trump could smell a con a mile away. But he succumbed to the charms of Recep Tayyip Erdogan.” As to the decades previous to that, it is well established by now that America began its descent when Israel's Yitzhak Shamir incited the Americans, and got them to attack the Arabs and the Muslims by warning the Americans that the Arabs and the Muslims: Zey know nossing about za damacracy.

So then, if we are to listen to members of the Jewish mob of pundits –– one of whom is Clifford May –– what might the historians of the future believe Erdogan and Shamir did to America? Well, to no one's surprise, those historians will discover that Clifford May is telling them to disregard what they might discover in the documents buried in the archives; they can get a better story from two people. Here is how May put it:

First story: Fox News' Jennifer Griffith spoke to an American warrior after he was ordered to abandon his comrades-in-arms. I am ashamed for the first time in my career, he told her. She added: This US Special Forces soldier wanted me to know that the Kurds are sticking by us. No other partner would stand by us.

Second story: Dan Crenshaw, a former Navy SEAL officer now serving in Congress, noted that the great irony of the endless wars argument is that removing our small and cost-effective force from northern Syria is causing more wars, not less.

But what does all that mean at the end of the day? It means that a handful of individuals –– all affiliated with the Jewish Establishment in a direct or indirect way –– and responding to the commands of the AIPAC organized Tel-Aviv/New-York worldwide crime syndicate, have been pulling the strings during more than half a century. They have manipulated the American politico-Journalistic puppets into sacrificing America's interests to serve those of the Jews and Israel.

To make their unbelievable narrative believed by the once human Americans, the Jewish syndicate hypnotized the latter into zombie-like puppets, and proceeded to indoctrinate them with two contradictory arguments about a thousand-year war that promises never to end between the Judeo-Christians and the Muslims. On the one hand, the Jews are saying that the Muslims were defeated everywhere, and are trying to avenge their defeats. On the other hand, the Jews are saying the following, according to Clifford May:

“The enemies regard themselves as men of faith, divinely ordained to defeat infidels everywhere, heirs to Caliph Umar who conquered Jerusalem in 637, to Saladin who defeated the Crusaders in 1187, to Sultan Mehmed who occupied the Christian capital of Constantinople in 1453. The endless war we're fighting is already more than a thousand years old; that's not an opinion. It's the conviction of our enemies. Refuse to process that reality and progress in unlikely”.

Nowhere in his dissertation has Clifford May admitted to the reality that the war, if a real one exists at all, is a war between the Jewish establishment and the Muslim kids who were deliberately provoked by the Jews, and in some cases, trained and armed by Israel to fight the Muslim establishment. But what happened was that the kids turned against their Jewish sponsors while also fighting the Muslim establishment … in fact they kill more Muslims each year than they do Christians or Jews.

Postscript: Nearly 15 years after my bypass operation, I must undergo a heart procedure that will keep me away from my work for a few days. I'll see you back here again upon my return.