If
you've been disgusted by the story of the guy who used to rape and murder
women, and when caught, claimed to be God's gift to women, wait till you hear
what the dean of Jewish propaganda is saying.
Here
is what he is saying: “How the Soleimani assassination could pave the way for a
new deal with Iran,” which is the title of an article that also came under the
subtitle: “It could persuade the Islamic republic to negotiate with Trump.” The
writer is Robert Satloff who is the executive director of the Washington
Institute for Near East Policy. His article was published on January 3, 2020 in
The Washington Post.
Like
the title and subtitle of the article show, the way that the Jews operate, is
to commit the rape and then tell the victim: If you liked what you were given,
there is more of it where it came from. But how does someone who would say
something as beastly as this, convince the politico-journalistic crowd of the
Washington Beltway––which is supposed to be level-headed––of what he is saying?
Well,
the Jews have developed a trick that's so versatile, they use it in a multitude
of situations. What they do is reduce the absurd to one small pill, and slip it
in the drink of the audience, which downs it unaware of what the pill can and
will do. For example, the Jew will say that the intent of the Palestinians is
not to regain their lost homes as they say. Rather, it is to kill Jews because
they hate them and love to kill them.
Unfortunately,
the audience that's eager to hear the rest of the story, does not stop the Jew
at this point and tell him what it ought to tell him, which is the following:
“You just insulted our intelligence. Go screw yourself away from here because
you have already thrown more filth at us than we can take. And so, for the good
of everyone, get out of here before something serious happens.” Instead of
saying this, the audience lets the Jew go on unabated.
In
another setting, the Jew will interpret a historical event in such a way as to
throw filth at the audience. But again, instead of the latter telling the Jew
to go play his game somewhere else, and despite having its intelligence
insulted, the audience stays quiet. But why is that? Because the audience is
again too eager to hear the rest of the story, thus tolerates the absurd which
it absorbs along with the rest of the Jewish verbiage. In fact, the following
is the story that Satloff is asking the politico-journalistic crowd of the
Washington Beltway to take in and appreciate:
“An
episode from an earlier chapter of the US-Iran contest may be instructive: the
downing of an Iranian civilian airliner in 1988, killing 290. Though it was an
accident, the tragedy convinced Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, that America was
about to throw its weight fully in support of Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq
War. Fearful of facing the full might of the United States, Khomeini accepted a
UN-brokered ceasefire, an act so painful he likened it to drinking a chalice of
poison”.
What
happened in that incident is that the US downed an Iranian civilian airliner by
mistake. The Americans apologized profusely and compensated the families of the
victims handsomely. Since everyone that had a beef against America complained
about that country's obtuse attitude and demanded that America change before
they will deal with it, the expression of contrition as verbalized by the
American government, convinced the Iranians that America had indeed changed.
This is why, despite their misgivings, the Iranians agreed to sit and talk with
the Americans.
But
instead of telling it like it happened, Robert Satloff who wouldn't know what
his twin brother (if he had one) might be thinking, interpreted the sentiment
of the Iranian Ayatollah in such a way as to tell a story that was meant to
serve the argument he was making. And he expected the world to believe the
absurd nonsense he was spewing.
Like
the story of the scorpion that asked the frog to take it on its back across the
pond, the Satloff story turned out to have an unhappy ending. What happened was
that by the time that the frog carrying the scorpion had reached the middle of
the pond, the scorpion stung the frog. Before dying, the frog asked the
scorpion why he did what he did given that he will die by drowning. And the
scorpion replied that he did it because that's what scorpions do regardless of
the consequences. Likewise, Robert Satloff did what he did, not thinking of the
consequences, because it is what Jews do.
Knowing
that Donald Trump is not adept at conducting negotiations with world leaders,
Satloff should have done his best to give Trump the straight story, thus help
him negotiate a good deal with the Iranians, if negotiations were going to
happen. Satloff did not do that, however, because he preferred to confuse Trump
and make him negotiate a bad deal or no deal at all.