Could the mania have begotten the maniac?

 What is it about Canada that has its government promise to deliver on an issue that once rocked the nation, but neglect to do so for half a century? And then, after this much time had lapsed, and the government was reminded of the promise, it waffled as to whether or not it will take it another half century to consider fulfilling the promise. What makes an institution of that size behave in such manner?

 

It all began with Pierre Elliott Trudeau whose system of values caused him to reject the world order as it was fashioned in the aftermath of the Second World War. He felt an affinity with the human race; a natural bonding that was so strong, it caused him to develop a rebellion against the handful of nations that won the war, and with it won the right to impose their vision on how the world will be organized from now on, not just for themselves but for all of humanity.

 

In reality, Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s heart stayed with the wretched masses that he deemed will be most affected by the decisions of others, people who live their lives without being consulted as to what they want for themselves or their loved ones. And so, Pierre Trudeau responded to the itch that his proclivity was causing him to stay awake, by undertaking a number of gestures.

 

The most consequential gesture was his recognition of the Fidel Castro regime in Cuba. Also, being a performer at heart, and one that loved to be watched as he performed his job, Pierre Trudeau could not resist engaging in physical acts that reflected his heartfelt sentiments. To that end, he wore sandals of the kind that’s worn by the poor — even on solemn occasions. And he travelled to Yemen, the poorest of the Arab nations where he sat with the most backward tribe and ate the eye of a sheep; a skin-crawling habit practiced only among that tribe and nowhere else.

 

In addition, Pierre Trudeau did the things that had other people — mostly journalists — associate him with a persona he did not own, a development that began to wear him. What he tried to do was show off his physical prowess, especially at the swimming pool. Also, this being the era influenced by the Oriental gurus, Trudeau followed the trend. The most visible way to do so being to practice Yoga, he showed the journalists how well he could stand on his head. As it turned out, this kind of playfulness was so refreshing in a country that was ruled by the dictates of the stiff upper lip, it started the movement that came to be known as Trudeaumania. But that turned out to be a mistake.

 

It was a mistake because Journalists who could not tell the difference between hearing someone say: “I think, therefore I am,” and someone say: “help me get back on my feet,” mistakenly saw the Trudeau friskiness as proof that he was endowed with a superior intellect. They thought of him as being a Philosopher King, and so designated him. But knowing that he was neither a king nor a philosopher, yet daring not to correct the journalists, he tried to play a role he never managed to perfect. This reality made him feel insecure, and the feeling grew worse with the passage of time.

 

Coincident with all that, were the revelations that the security apparatus of the country had gone out of control. Being in the crosshairs of the deadliest retards since the appearance of scorpions on Planet Earth, I asked the Government of Pierre Trudeau to lift that burden off my shoulder. He could not do it, all the more so because his recognition of the Castro regime had placed him on the American list of the undesirables at a time when the security apparatus of Canada was taking orders from its American counterparts. I hit back at Trudeau’s inaction and he found himself caught between the immovable RCMP rock, and the firmness of my punches. Trudeaumania quickly disappeared, and was forgotten as the country began to sink into an era of lethargy made frightful by its maniacal dimensions.

 

This is the situation that Justin Trudeau, the current honcho heading the Canadian government, has inherited from his father. Can he turn things around and make Canada a normal country? Will Canada learn to respect its citizens enough to defend them instead of doing what it does now, which is to let the security apparatus use Canadians as currency with which to buy the goodwill of foreign charlatans?  

 

As strange as this may sound, the insecurity that Pierre Elliott felt, was neither indigenous nor unique to him. He shared it with the security apparatus that demonstrated time after time, it was so fearful of making a mistake and be proven incompetent, it turned itself into mere pimps engaged in the business of collecting information about Canadian citizens, and feed it to the foreigners who used it to serve the countries they represented.

 

I have waited 20,000 days to see my case resolved. I wonder how many more days I’ll have to wait.

To replace one holocaust by another a bad idea

 What do you do if you’re a gambler and you’re on a roll? You keep playing to win more and more, of course without thinking of the moment when you’ll have run out of luck. But it will happen that you’ll run out of luck — and then what?

 

This is the situation that the Jews have faced time after time since they massacred the babies of Egypt thousands of years ago, looted the kingdom’s treasures, and ran into the desert looking for new targets to ravage and feed on the spoils they generate. Citing that history answers the question asked earlier. But as can be deduced from their history, the answer that the Jews give to that question, has been different. It’s been this: Do more and more of the same.

 

What history also shows, is that the Jewish culture of war has depleted their ranks so thoroughly, their leaders had no choice but to weaken the tendons that normally connect an ethnic group to the religion it adopts. In the case of the eternally belligerent Jews who badly needed to replenish their ranks, they distanced themselves from their Hebrew origin and decreed that tendons or not, a convert to Judaism from another race or religion, was as good a Hebrew as a thoroughbred member of the original tribe.

 

Whereas the leaders’ decision solved the problem of depletion the Jews were facing, the ethnic dilution that resulted from the decision created another problem. But this was an artificial fabrication that did not have to be. It came about because the leaders’ attempt to integrate diverse groups from around the world into one ethno-religious mix, made the Jewish collective responsible for every reprehensible act committed by any one Jewish individual. Thus, it became kosher to punish groups of Jews for sins that most had nothing to do with. And like the Jews never stop pointing out, the most notable collective punishment in history has been what they call the Holocaust.

 

So, the question is this: Can a holocaust happen again? Yes, it can but that depends on many factors that must converge to begin with. The most important being the perception by people around the world that the Jews are themselves inflicting a holocaust on the people of Palestine whom they stripped of the means to defend themselves. The Jews managed to accomplish that feat by hypnotizing and manipulating the big powers’ wealth, influence and decision-making. They turned those powers into diplomatic gladiators who stand guard and remain on call to carry water for Israel.

 

An example that demonstrates how all those factors come together to maintain the status quo, came under the title: “With Christians’ help, providing aid and comfort to Ukrainian Jews is possible,” and the subtitle: “Hope on horizon after one year of destruction, chaos.” The article was written by Yael Eckstein, and published on February 23, 2023 in the Washington Times.

 

To have a clear view and to see through what Yael Eckstein is trying to do, we begin by thinking of a scene in which a massive fire burns through two adjacent neighborhoods. The producers of the local television network dispatches a crew to cover the fire. The crew returns and hands the video to the producers who get surprised by what they see — more accurately what they do not see. It is that the crew fully covered one neighborhood but neglected to even mention the other.

 

What we have in real life, are two neighborhoods which are not adjacent – but not geographically too distant from each other either. Both are suffering from a similar kind of fire, and struggling to cope with it in the same way. In each case, the fire was brought by an invading force that wants to rob them of their possessions. The people of both neighborhoods are resisting with the use of whatever weapons they can get their hands on. One of those neighborhoods is called Palestine, which is invaded by Israel. The other is called Ukraine, which is invaded by Russia.

 

Like the television crew that covered one neighborhood while neglecting the other, Yael Eckstein spoke of the ordeal that the Jews of Ukraine are suffering while neglecting to mention the suffering of the Christians and Muslims who are agonizing in Palestine. Eckstein even neglected to acknowledge that these people exist at all.

 

As pointed out earlier, the Jews (Eckstein among them) perpetuate the status quo by hypnotizing the big powers and using them to permanently maintain the Palestinians in so weak a condition that Israel can rob them at will. The following, presented in condensed form, shows how Jews such as Eckstein manage to hypnotize the elites of the American political class by whitewashing the sins of Israel at the same time as they condemn the sins of others. Here is how that goes:

 

“My team and I tried our best to show these Jews that they are not alone. The Fellowship coordinated rescue flights to help Jews safely make aliyah (immigrate to Israel.) As Jewish families got off the plane with their children, I could share story after story about the countless people I’ve witnessed find hope”.

 

As can be seen, Eckstein admits that the most important message that people in distress need to hear is that they are not alone. She said so but neglected to mention that the Jews of Israel and America spent the last 56 years urging everyone to abandon the Palestinians — which is what turned them into an even easier prey for Israel to gobble.

 

Yael Eckstein also spoke of the hope given to the Jewish foreign families arriving in Israel while neglecting to mention that these arrivals contribute to the hopelessness of the indigenous Palestinian Christians and Muslims who see their homes blown up, and their lands looted to make room for the foreigners.

 

Yes, it is a good thing to see people find hope, but when that hope comes to one at the expense of  another, morality compels you to do things differently. This, however, is so alien to Jewish culture, they’ll accuse you of harboring antisemitic sentiments if you do no more than suggest it.

 

All in all, while the American politicos are fooled by the performance of the Jews, the world is not. Billions are unhappy seeing the holocaust that Israel is inflicting on the Palestinians. If a day of reckoning will come, the certainty is that not many – if any at all – will lift a finger to rescue the Jews from the clutches of those who’ll wish to see justice done.

Like father, like son with a twist

 While most of the so-called democracies have much in common, every one of them has idiosyncratic traits that renders it unique in the way that it interacts with the rest of the world. In this regard, Canada’s idiosyncrasies began to reveal themselves by what their politico-journalistic crowd is doing and failing to do in the matter of human rights.

 

Pretending to wear the glittering crown of high morality when it comes to respecting the human rights of its citizens, Canada’s slip began to show. It heralds the moment when the scene in which Canada has long been reputed to eat her children, will show her wallowing in the fullness of her naked immorality.

 

Made of two wedded parts, the politico-journalistic crowd shares a common trait, but each part retains a distinct approach when it comes to dealing with a reproachful observation made about it. What happens in both cases, is illustrated by the way that someone put it long ago. He said: “You talk morality over their heads and they run around trying to cover their asses. For example, responding to a reproach concerning his conduct, the media mogul will hire a cameraman to follow him and capture on video his buying of artworks he’ll add to his collection or give to an art gallery — all of which is supposed to show the public at large the soft human side of the mogul.

 

As to the political honcho, when asked to deal with the mishap suffered by someone, he’ll act not to alleviate the pain of the one that’s suffering but alleviate the pain of someone else – better yet, the pain of a collective he’ll pretend is suffering and needs help. The acquisition of this habit came about when the Canadian politicos adopted the grand daddy of all idiosyncrasies. They copycatted the Jewish twisted logic that says, because Adolph beat up Weinstein in Europe, Joe Sixpack must pay compensation to Epstein here in America.

 

But how is that played out in a real life situation? Well, imagine the security apparatus of the country taking orders from the most formidable crime syndicate that has ever plagued Planet Earth. The two work hand in hand to inflict the most vicious kind of psychological torture on someone that has no means to defend himself. When reproached multiple times and told to cease and desist, the political honcho in charge of the security apparatus, will pop onto the scene and apologize. What produces a sickly kind of laughter watching the scene, is that the politico will be apologizing not to the victim that’s suffering but to a crowd that never heard of the victim and knows not what the politico is talking about.

 

How do I know that? I know it because situations of this kind happened to me hundreds of times during the 20,000 days that Canada’s Government allowed its cowardly security apparatus to work with World Jewry on crushing me. To atone for the sin, the big honcho of that Government would treat me as non-existent while he engaged in activities he hoped would hide his failings. For example, he would run unexpectedly to a native reservation and apologize to a bewildered audience, hoping that the noise generated by his fake apology will veil the cowardice of the Government and that of his own.

 

The corollary of this demonic approach is that Canada’s Government now goes barking at other governments, attributing to them Canada’s chronic violations of its own people’s human rights. Needless to say that no one is buying these fabrications, especially those who saw and heard Pierre Elliott Trudeau deliberately tell the world that the Canadian political regime is so frivolous, it amounts to nothing more than a joke. But who is that Pierre Elliott Trudeau?

 

Father of the current honcho at the head of the Canadian Government, he was a Franco-English hybrid that grew in a country made of two solitudes – one French and one English. As a young man, Pierre Trudeau did not get along with either ethnic group. Being half-French, he battled the English; and being half-English, he battled the French. In fact, he did so much of that, both verbally and physically, he came to be known as a street fighter.

 

Obsessed with the idea of justice for all but realizing that, left to itself, Canada will never achieve that ideal, he alleviated his disappointment by laughing at the situation, and by vowing to do what no one else did. He’ll work through the system he detests till he gets to the top; the place from where he’ll destroy the old regime and install his own. While doing that, he’ll get the rest of the world to laugh with him at the current situation, but more importantly, watch him change it for the better and succeed brilliantly.

 

To that end, Pierre Trudeau started a one-man campaign to destroy Canada’s taboos, some of which were revered and some detested by one group or another. Trudeau had no reverence for the taboos that were associated with institutions he grew up detesting. At the top of the list was the monarchy which he saw as maintaining Canada’s status like mothing more than a colony of the British Empire.

 

Trudeau did three things to change all that, the ultimate being the repatriation of the Constitution. But while getting there, he showed the world the frivolous nature of the regime he was laboring to change. He smashed one taboo by dropping a saying that used to send shivers down the spine of Canadians. It is that he borrowed a cry from the Nazi era, and spoke of a thousand years Canadian Empire. He got what he wanted; a Canada that erupted and caused the world to watch him perform.

 

Now confident and brazen, Trudeau worked on getting invited by the Queen to her palace. When he got there, and while standing beside her, he took one step back. Not seeing him, he performed a clownish pirouette meant to elicit the laughter of the audience. It was a performance that left the world aghast at the extent of contempt he had for the monarchy — an extent he could only have developed over many years while growing up in the French Province of Quebec.

 

Contempt is not new to Canada. It had it for others, and received it from them. What the current honcho that’s sitting at the top of the heap does, is project a holier than thou posture while giving away his own citizens to the rapists and murders of human rights. In so doing, he’ll be associated with the Nazi analogy produced by his father. He’ll thus prompt many world leaders to treat him like a Third World wannabe tin-pot dictator who will never make it.

 

And that, my friend is the ultimate in contempt that one can have for the cowardly that hide behind the wall of silence.

What’s with US diplomacy in the Middle East?

 Make no mistake about it. Israel is afloat today because it continues to feed its people on American Christian charity and the free propaganda that’s done for it by the American network Fox News.

 

And yet, as pointed out by Geoffrey Aronson who is an expert on Middle Eastern affairs, “Blinken’s low-key suggestions for diffusing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians signify the rapidly shrinking US diplomatic footprint on what was for many years a key component of US policy in the region”.

 

Aronson wrote those words in an article that came under the title: “The Death of US Diplomacy in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict,” and the subtitle: “The United States long ago surrendered to the inexorable increase in Israeli settlements.” It was published on February 4, 2023 in The National Interest.

 

If we begin with the observation that the ultimate aim of a terror campaign is to occupy someone else’s land by force of arms, we must conclude that the terror unleashed on the Palestinian people at the start of the twentieth century by the Jewish Hagenah and Irgun terror groups and continues today, succeeded beyond all expectations.

 

But how could this have been accomplished by a band that is so destitute, it cannot feed its current population, yet brings in more settlers from around the world to kill more Palestinians and rob more of their possessions? The answer to this question is that more of what’s screwy in a relationship, happen to go on in the interactions that developed between America and Israel. To understand this part, we begin with Geoffrey Aronson’s remarks that lay the background of what transpires at the ground level. Here are those remarks, presented in condensed form:

 

“The administration’s current engagement in Palestine continues to be based on the assumption the Palestinian security services must protect Israel’s settlers and soldiers, without any prospect of the payoff long awaited by the Palestinians: independence, sovereignty, and the retreat of the Israel Defense Forces and settlers to a recognized border. it has been clear since April 2002 that there is no real prospect of any Israeli security or settlement retreat in the West Bank, and that diplomatic efforts led by the US to confront this reality and transform occupation into independence. The US long ago surrendered to the inexorable increase in Israeli settlements. No serious diplomacy between the parties has been conducted, and it has been more than a decade since the Americans even considered a diplomatic effort to freeze, let alone reverse, the growth of settlements”.

 

What follows, also presented in condensed form, is what Geoffrey Aronson is talking about. It is taken from an article which came under the title: ‘The construction surge in Judea and Samaria will return,’ and the subtitle: “Israeli decisions to expand Jewish life in the biblical heartland meet with joy and condemnation.” That article was written by Josh Hasten and published on February 15, 2023 in Jewish News Syndicate:

 

“The Israeli government is on a collision course with the US and others, including the UN, on the announcement of the advancement of 10,000 housing units for Jews in Judea and Samaria. At the same time, the Palestinian Authority is seeking a UNSC resolution condemning Israel’s decision this week to authorize nine outposts in Judea and Samaria. Israel’s Security Cabinet also announced it would regularize the legal status of several illegally built communities. The US Department of State released a joint press release on Tuesday along with the foreign ministers of France, Germany, Italy and the UK condemning the move, stating: ‘We are troubled by the Israeli government’s announcement. We oppose these unilateral actions which will undermine efforts to achieve a negotiated two-state solution’”.

 

So then, what happened when the superpower donor and the derelict beggar came on a collision course? Nothing happened except for the few meaningless words that were uttered by the superpower; words without the threat of a response that would have compelled Israel to change its ways. In the absence of anything like that, the status quo, as Israel wants it, persists. And while this kind of relationship exists between America and Israel in what concerns the Palestinian question, we wonder what it looks like when a collision course develops between the two in other situations.

 

We find the answer to that wonderment in the article that came under the title: “Israeli Minister Tells Us Envoy To ‘Mind His Business’ On Judicial Reforms,” published on February 19, 2023 in Jewish News Syndicate.

 

If that title shocks you, you’ll grasp the farcical nature of what’s played out here when you recall that America’s charity for maintaining Israel afloat has developed and continues to be sustained because the Jews of Israel and those of America never cease to tell the latter that Israel is a so-called democracy; one that’s modeled in the image of America’s own. But when the Jews of Israel began to mess with the thing, and America told them to be careful, they insulted America, spat in its face and kicked its rear end.

 

Was that all? Or was it just the beginning? The answer is that it was just the beginning because what’s exposed next is what had led to the development of that kind of a relationship in the first place between the wussy elites of a superpower donor and a derelict beggar — a relationship that’s now being rejected by a populist movement which began to grip America. In fact, what’s exposed came in an article that was written under the title: “Israel shouldn’t cherry-pick the American model in its judicial debate,” co-authored by Dennis Ross and David Makovsky. It was published on February 14, 2023 in The Hill. Here it is in condensed form:

 

“Israel’s Knesset voted to send a key provision of the judicial overhaul package for its first reading to the full plenary. This package, if enacted into law, would change the balance of power between the branches of government. Israel’s finance minister argues that the proposed judicial reform simply mirrors the American model. That, however, is not true. What is true is that it selectively takes the part of the American approach that politicizes the selection of judges and legal advisors, even as it ignores the checks and balances that protect individual rights. In the context of the US-Israeli relationship, the Israeli judicial independence has served the relationship well. It enabled Washington to urge groups like the International Court of Justice to trust that there is judicial oversight in Israel. It has enabled successive US administrations to believe there is due process in Israel when it comes to Palestinian land claims”.

 

Having exposed the reality of what’s developing in Israel at this time, the writers gave this warning:

 

“Much is at stake. With progressives and increasing numbers of younger Americans more critical of Israel, the last thing Israel needs is for it to look like it no longer shares American values. Israel will find it difficult to preserve what it has held for 75 years: a strong [near hypnotic] hold on the imagination of America’s [wussy] elites”.

 

It looks like America is on its way to become de-wussified at long last.

The day they hung up the phone on me

 I did not have solid proof at the time but I instinctively reckoned that the mob comprising the Canadian Government, the criminal organization known as World Jewry and the loop of elites practicing omerta with my case, was acting like the gang of rapists who feared that the truth about what they did will come out, thus haggled about what to do to erase every sign that might show I once existed and defied them.

 

This being the case, I concluded that to survive the most horrible mob ever assembled to eliminate me who stood alone, by savagely and relentlessly persecuting me – I needed to achieve a breakthrough in one of two areas. Either I persuaded someone in the Canadian Government to say enough was enough and worked to end the persecution of me. Or I broke through the wall of the mob’s silence by getting published in the mainstream journalistic or entertainment media.

 

In fact, it was much later on that I obtained solid proof to that instinctive early reckoning. It came when I started a newspaper in the town where I lived. At first, the Provincial and Federal politicians welcomed me, showered me with congratulations and praised me with words and large checks before I even invoiced them for the advertising they ordered. Get this now, the checks were issued on the account of the office they occupied. But then, all of a sudden, everyone of these people seemed to have received a memo from what could only be Jewish Central. The memo told them to freeze and get ready to start doing something else.

 

The politicians did as told by delaying paying what I invoiced them, and when the checks were sent to me at long last if they did at all, they were no longer those of the office they occupied. It is that everyone of those politicians found a nondescript female who paid me by personal checks for advertising ordered by the politicians. I understood that this was the Judeo-Bolshevik way of erasing from every official registry, the history of someone that existed but they wished he never did.

 

Even without that proof, and having instinctively reckoned early on what the mob was trying to do, I had started an intense campaign of writing both fiction and non fiction works, which I sent to the mainstream outlets for their editors to consider publishing. One of those outlets was the government financed Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC).

 

Among other things, I wrote 26 episodes for a half-hour series for children to be played by children at around the late tween and early teenaged years. I sent the pilot script to the CBC, and discussed it by telephone with several people at one time or another. I remember talking to a male who liked the script enormously and wished it will be accepted by his bosses. Discussing the script with two females who might have been his bosses, I detected less enthusiasm – not for the quality of the work – but for the realization that they will not use the series because the Jews had so ordered.

 

The last time I called the CBC, a female that was not familiar with my work took the call and started checking it on the computer. After a moment, I heard her emit a cry of horror as if the computer displayed the face of the devil. The woman uttered: “Somebody messed this site.” She mumbled a few incomprehensible words, and I had no choice but to accept her apology and end the conversation. I expected to hear from the CBC after that incident but never did.

 

The next thing I did was to call the office of the federal minister of Heritage Sheila Copps to ask that they help me convince the CBC it was time to treat me like everyone else. After listening to my story, the interlocutor at the other end of the line hung up the phone on me, and that was that — well, at least temporarily. What happened next was so unconscionable it can only be viewed as cannibalistic behavior.

 

It was to my great surprise that I received a phone call from the president of a production company that did work for the CBC. I asked him if he was talking to anyone at the CBC, and he said no, he was calling me because he received a copy of the blurb I have been sending out pitching the series. What he wanted, he said, was that I send him all 26 episodes of the series, after which he’ll decide to buy them or reject them. I asked him to put that request in writing so that I feel legally protected in case the scripts found their way into the hands of people who might not be as honest as himself. He refused to put the request in writing, and I refused to play the role of sucker. And that was that … this time for good.

 

And now that there is enough out there to convince every member of the mob they will not get away with what they are doing to erase me from the roster of human existence, you wonder what motivates them to continue their futile attempts at doing just that. If they have any capacity at all to reason at least at the minimum level of human thinking, they should also be aware that the more they persist in doing things their way, the more they will cement the idea (in the case of the Canadian Government) that they are the cannibals who are reputed to eat their children. Worse, they have been exposed to invite the most terrible of foreign terrorists to come and enjoy sharing the feast with them.

 

Why do these things happen only in Canada? We may be forced to explore answering that question the next time we discuss this subject. Stay tuned.

Whose side are these people on?

 You live in a house, the drainage gets plugged, you call a plumber and negotiate a deal with him. He’ll get your drainage flowing and you’ll pay him so much for his service. It is a contract of short duration to be executed instantly and put behind you so that you may tend to other business.

 

You get into your car to go somewhere but the car does not start. You call a tow truck that takes it to the dealership from where you bought it, where they repair it. This is done because months ago, you pledged to make monthly payments in exchange for a car you expected will run or be repaired under warranty for the next three years. That too was a contract, but it was made conditional because it was of a long duration in a setting that’s unpredictable yet had the potential to cause you extreme hardship were it not for the warranty that protected you.

 

As to who you are, you were elected to serve as a member of the legislative assembly where contracts of short and long durations are devised to ascertain that tranquility will prevail in the country, that a reasonable standard of living will be maintained through the efficient allocation and use of the available resources, and that justice will be done if and when it is breached. What you’re busy making in the name of the nation, are open ended self-imposed contracts designed to fashion an ideal condition in which the nation will be able to bask today, tomorrow and for as long as the condition will last.

 

All of that sounds so ideal and so doable, you hate to think that something can go wrong with it. But can it? Can something really go wrong with that? The answer is yes, something can go wrong, and does all the time. That’s because life changes, and what’s ideal today may not be tomorrow. This is why you’ll find that most often, problems present themselves, not because people change, but because they refuse to adapt to the changing circumstances.

 

For example, medical science has advanced so much, we now live decades longer than our forebears. As a result, the demographic makeup of society has changed so significantly, it is becoming increasingly more difficult for the working population to sustain the pensioners’ standard of living. Elected to find solutions for this kind of problems, you wonder what can be done.

 

What you do is listen to advisers, one of whom happens to be David Harsanyi who wrote an article on the subject. It came under the title: “Sunsetting Federal Spending Programs Is A Fantastic Idea,” and the subtitle: “Why do Americans have to live with legislative decisions made nearly 90 years ago?” The article was published on February 9, 2023 in The Federalist.

 

Together, the title and subtitle of that article reveal David Harsanyi’s mode of thinking. In addition, the body of the article says that the writer’s thinking is based on what he believes are fundamental principles. In fact, he says that no federal spending program can henceforth be made open-ended. The programs that will be devised in the future will therefore have to contain a provision at which point they will end by themselves, or contain a provision for their termination by the government. The article also reveals that the sense of principle is what motivated Harsanyi to mock derisively the idea that Americans are forced to live with legislative decisions made nearly 90 years ago.

 

Here, in condensed form, is how David Harsanyi expressed those thoughts:

 

“Asking Congress to reauthorize federal spending bills every few years is a great idea. Why would stalwarts of ‘democracy’ oppose revisiting spending decisions made by legislators nearly 90 years ago? No living person has ever voted on them. And though ‘liberals’ are generally more protective of Social Security than the Bill of Rights, entitlement programs aren’t foundational governing ideas, they do not protect our natural rights, nor are they at the heart of the American project. Every year, hundreds of thousands of private-sector establishments go out of business, and yet not a single federal government program ever does. It is madness”.

 

This being the first time in a long time, as far as I can tell, that a Jew spoke in terms of principle, it behooves us to hark back to a time when principle was the mainstay of Jewish deliberations, however quibbling their deliberations were. In fact, it can be said that the Jews won the battle to conquer America wearing the protective shield of the lawsuit around one arm, and wielding the sharp sword of principles in the other hand.

 

So equipped, the Jews clobbered their political, judicial and journalistic non-Jewish counterparts by making them look like unprincipled lightweights who will never win the propaganda fight of the Cold War against the Communist World. In contrast, they presented themselves as the potent alternative that can restore to America the glory it lost having been defeated in Vietnam. In consequence, the doors that were traditionally closed to the Jews in America, opened widely for them, and they walked in by the thousands. Before you know it, they had occupied the District of Columbia and the State Houses the way they now occupy the West Bank of Palestine. The takeover of America by the Jews was complete.

 

But that situation did not last long because the American public knew how to respond. It developed a healthy contempt for its treasonous elites, and went on to express the deep distrust it developed for the ungrateful Jewish double-crossing scoundrels. So the question that poses itself is this: What exactly irks the American public?

 

It is the disloyalty of the Jews as shown in David Harsanyi asking: “Why would stalwarts of ‘democracy’ oppose revisiting spending decisions made by legislators nearly 90 years ago? No living person has ever voted on them,” which means he wants to end America’s assistance to needy Americans without suggesting an alternative.

 

Worse, he suggests neglecting the needs of Americans without proposing that the Federal and State legislatures repeal all binding and non-binding open-ended resolutions they voted on to privilege Israel. These were and continue to be resolutions whose cost add to the hurt of needy Americans.

 

But David Harsanyi and all those like him do not care because they care more about Israel.

Monkeys recognize the self looking in a mirror

 Even though monkeys — as do most animals — instinctively accept as normal seeing their image reflected in the water of the pond to which they go have a drink, they get confused when seeing themselves in an artificially made mirror. Looking in that contraption, they tend to think they see another animal who could be a friend or a foe, thus respond accordingly.

 

But monkey trainers have shown that a primate as advanced as a chimpanzee can be made to realize it is looking at a reflection of the self. When this is achieved, the monkey is seen to experiment by touching spots on its face, thus see the move replicated in the mirror. The question now is this: Does the monkey believe that what it sees in the mirror, is real like the world in which it sits? If the answer is yes, can the monkey be corrected and made to understand that reality and its reflection are two different things?

 

If we can resolve these questions, we will be on our way to resolving the mystery of human beings who can be so riveted by the power of the fanaticism that’s imbued in them, they fail to realize there is a demarcation line separating the real from its mirror image. The result of that failure is that these people move back and forth between the two domains as if they were one and the same sphere.

 

We happen to have an example we can work with and see how far we’ll go trying to resolve that mystery. It is an article that came under the title: “State Anti-BDS Laws Pass the Constitutional Test,” written by Bobby Miller and published on February 12, 2023 in National Review Online. What we sense in this article, is the confusion of a writer who fails to differentiate between morality, which is the sphere of the real where nature has placed us, and the man-made laws which make up the sphere of the artificial that’s supposed to reflect that morality but miss the mark when morality and the law conflate by chance or by design. How can this happen?

 

Having gained centuries of experience at manipulating and exploiting the people with whom they mingle, the Jews fashioned the key they now use to help them maintain open, the door that’s supposed to separate what’s legal from what’s moral. Here is an example from the Bobby Miller article that shows how the Jews do it:

 

“BDS seeks to delegitimize the Jewish state. The stated goal of the movement, which frames the Israeli presence in the West Bank as an occupation illegal under international law, is to pressure Israel to withdraw from those lands; in reality, it aims to punish Israel, isolate it from the international community, and undermine its security. Tennessee became the first state to pass an anti-BDS law, calling the movement ‘one of the main vehicles for spreading anti-Semitism and advocating the elimination of the Jewish state’; the law described BDS as ‘deeply damaging to the causes of peace, justice, equality, democracy and human rights for all the peoples in the Middle East’”.

 

As can be seen, faced with the reality that Israel delegitimizes itself with its continued occupation of the West Bank, Bobby Miller reversed the logic of the situation by starting his discussion with the accusation that it is “BDS [which] seeks to delegitimize the Jewish state.” In so doing, the real — which is that Israel is the architect of its own condition — became conflated with the mirror image of it, which is that BDS “aims to punish Israel, isolate it from the international community, and undermine its security.” Thus, with the stroke of a pen, the aggressor became the victim, and the victim became the aggressor.

 

This being the case, the moral sphere of the argument — which is that everyone has the right to enjoy “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” without interference from others — was made to conflate with the legal sphere by asserting that BDS became a vehicle for spreading anti-Semitism. This being a consequential matter, it created the need for Tennessee-like laws to defeat BDS whose stated aim was said to be the delegitimization of Israel. And this is how the demarcation line between the moral and the legal; between the real and its mirror image, is erased, conflating the two spheres into one world where the fanatics dwell with ease.

 

With the completion of the conflation, the writer gains a lever he can use to weaken or destroy any moral stance adhered to by the existing culture           — if and when such stance would get in the way of him making his case. All that he has to do is contend that such stance will lead to an increase in antisemitism, and the world will stand in attention to listen to him. But when you study what the Jews do most often with that leverage, you’ll find them promoting a double standard whose goal is to force a universal acknowledgement that Jews are superior to everyone else.

 

Consider the following passage, presented here in condensed form:

 

“Anti-BDS statutes have drawn fire from Israel’s detractors and from free-speech advocates, who claim that the right to boycott is an integral component of the American experience that cannot be contravened. But according to a recent academic study, anti-boycott laws are nothing new either. Josh Halpern and Lavi Ben Dor trace a consistent tradition of regulating boycotts back to before the Founding. Those who attack these laws might consider how fighting against the antisemitism that underlies BDS would be a better use of their time”.

 

What the passage says basically is that as long as no one’s freedom of speech is violated, everyone has the right to boycott others or oppose such boycotts. The trouble is that it goes on to say in a very subtle manner that there is something exceptional about the Jews. It is that if you oppose them, you step on the third rail of antisemitism. You are zapped out of existence in an instant and gone forever.

 

This planet was not meant to be for the apes or the chimpanzees or the fanatics. We risk losing it if we abandon the eternal vigilance that made us good custodians of it up to now. So let’s renew our pledge to maintain Planet Earth in a healthy condition to be here for those who will give morality its due, and respect the laws reflecting that morality in its unadulterated state.

The copycat’s weasel once fed me grape leaves

 Despite promises made public and made to me privately over the decades, I still have not been notified of why the Government of Canada teamed with Jewish Central, the foremost terrorist organization of all time, and robbed me of my entire adult life through a regime of persecution that makes the Holocaust look like a game played by children to amuse themselves.

 

This is causing me to hark back to moments in my journey through hell; to instances that refuse to slide into oblivion along with what else is beginning to fade from my memory as I move onward into old age. Amid all this, however, a series of moments I still remember vividly began to unfold when Professor Jay Leyda, who considered me to be the best student he ever had, wanted me to move to the United States where he said I’ll do very well. To that end, he gave me the name and phone number of a person I should call in New York when I get there; someone who’ll guide me to play it right and succeed.

 

Given that long distance communication by telephone was not done as easily then as today, I did not call. Instead, I filled a shoulder bag with clothing and took the bus going to New York City. Long before we get there, something happened that told me it was not going to be an ordinary trip. The bus stopped in Buffalo, New York and was boarded by an officer of the border patrol. He walked around looking into the faces of young men as if trying to identify someone. He found him, and it was me. He asked if that was the only bag I had, and I said yes. He took it to the booth, came back ten minutes later, gave it back to me and allowed the bus to go on its way.

 

It was afternoon when we arrived in New York City. I looked around for the nearest hotel where I rented a room equipped with a telephone I could use. To my dismay, I discovered that the phone number I had with me was not a direct line to the person I came to talk to. It was that of the switchboard where the receptionist spent time trying to locate the person whose name I gave her. She finally reached the office where he was working. Like getting kicked in the gut, I heard the man’s assistant inform me that he was on vacation, and will be back in two weeks.

 

I spent the afternoon and early evening watching local television. As I tried to go out and sample the nightlife of New York City, someone grabbed me by the collar and told me to stay in because something’s happening, and it’s dangerous to be out there at this time. I went back to my room and watched television but saw nothing happen that was unusual. I reasoned that after the Buffalo incident, American security agents were told to keep an eye on me. They feared that if something happened to me, even by accident, they’ll be blamed for it. And so they did what they could to protect me.

 

The next day I took the bus headed for Toronto, and the return trip turned out to be even more bizarre than it had already been. We stopped at the terminal of a small town where a number people came off the bus, and new ones boarded it. One of those was a weasel-like, very Jewish-looking diminutive man. As I was sitting on the right side of the bus near the window, he sat beside me on my left. The bus started moving again but filled me with suspicion because the driver seemed to negotiate the streets of the small town rather than head for the highway. The bus stopped and was boarded by a big, bodybuilder kind of man that happened to be of African descent. He sat behind the weasel as if to protect him from I don’t know what.

 

An hour later we were on the highway when the Jew first addressed me. He said he was of Lebanese descent, and his mother, who was still alive, liked to cook Middle Eastern foods. She gave him rolls of stuffed grape leaves, considered a delicacy in the region. Thinking that he would not dare poison me in a bus full of people, I ate the thing to go along and see what exactly he was trying to accomplish. He revealed his hand when he started talking about contraband. At times he seemed to ask if I were engaged in such activities; at other times he seemed to ask how interested I might be to engage in such activities. I played dumb and asked him if he was trying to smuggle his mother’s stuffed leaves into Canada without paying import duty. He shut up.

 

Years later, I had moved from Toronto to Montreal. Sporting a beard and walking alone on the street near where I lived, I encountered Pierre Elliot Trudeau, the Prime Minister of Canada. He too was walking on the street but not alone. Walking along a few meters away was his bodyguard. Guess who that was? It was none other than the weasel-like, very Jewish-looking diminutive man, the dumb-dumb who fed me grape leaves and tried to entrap me by enticing me to break the law.

 

I mentioned my name and Trudeau recognized it. We exchanged a few pleasant words, and moved on. A few weeks later, I saw him on television, and he was sporting a beard. I knew whom he was copycatting and told nobody till now.

 

He did not keep the beard for long and neither did I till I started growing it again after a long hiatus.

The securely built-in mechanism of a lost cause

 Clifford D. May wants you to believe that the relationship which exists between Iran and the Houthis of Yemen, poses the greatest threat to peace on Earth.

 

The reason why he wants you to adopt such thinking, is that in so doing, you’ll inadvertently hide the reality that the Jews conned the United States of America into believing similar lies, causing the superpower to lavishly fund and arm Israel’s cultural genocide of its neighbors.

 

The writer put his thoughts in an article that came under the title: “Iran’s arsenal of tyranny,” and the subtitle: “Country arms jihadis, terrorists and neoimperialists.” It was published on February 7, 2023 in The Washington Times.

 

Reading the article, you’ll discover that Clifford May has much to say about many people and institutions, but the one thing he does not mention is the fact that the struggle in Yemen is between the proxies of Iran and those of Saudi Arabia, two equal powers in terms of the wealth and armaments they possess. In contrast, the struggle in the Middle East is between Israel which is a proxy of a generous superpower, and the Palestinians that have no one to protect them but world opinion.

 

It was in 1953 that the Iranians learned a bitter lesson to the effect that the has-been and the wannabe colonial powers would not leave it alone to develop in its own way, at its own pace. They did so by interfering in Iran’s electoral process, choosing for it a form of government that would serve their purpose instead of serving the Iranian people’s interests.

 

And it was in the 1980s that the Iranians learned of the even more bitter lesson to the effect that the has-been and the wannabe colonial powers would not leave them alone — doing so by arming Iraq’s Saddam Hussein with the chemical weapons he used on their people. Unarmed and unable to defend themselves, the Iranians vowed to develop the means to do so as fast as possible. They started several programs in this direction, and scored successes in many fields where they exceeded their wildest dreams.

 

In competition against America that is the biggest trafficker of locally-made weapons in the world, and in competition against Israel that has become a big trafficker of American-made weapons in the world, the Iranians were forced to become the suppliers of last resort to the downtrodden in the Middle East whose necks continue to be crushed under the boots of the has-been and the wannabe colonial powers, now using Israel as proxy to do mischievous work for them and get paid handsomely.

 

And yet, despite these realities, Clifford May begins his discussion of the role that Iran plays in its region by making this declaration: “The Islamic Republic has become the Arsenal of Tyranny.” He goes on to list the groups and organizations that supposedly benefit from Iran’s largess. To give the readers a false sense of security, he hastens to add that, “Israel does its best to destroy such weapons caches either en route or upon arrival.” What he omits, however, is mention that both the quantity and quality of weapons reaching their destinations, increase month after month.

 

As usual, Clifford May looked for and found an excuse, however flimsy it may be, upon which to call on the United States to abandon the quest of trying to forge a deal that will delay or prohibit Iran from ever developing nuclear weapons. The following, in condensed form, is what he said in this regard:

 

“Most recently, Tehran has been sending drones to Russia to be used by Vladimir Putin. Over the weekend, it was revealed that Moscow and Tehran are building a drone factory in Russia. That should be the last nail in the coffin of the Iran deal that former President Barack Obama concluded”.

 

Also as usual, Clifford May the Jew cited a Jewish method to deal with the situation. Briefly, this is what he said to the Americans and their allies: Steal Iran’s money that’s now under your control, and keep it for an indefinite period of time. And these are his words, shown here in condensed form:

 

“The Iranians would receive hundreds of billions of dollars they could use to better arm their cronies, make more sophisticated missiles, and continue imprisoning dissidents at home”.

 

How seriously should we take May’s presentation? The answer is: Not very. That’s because the article as written by Clifford May lacks coherence. And the history he cited points to an incoherent Jewish approach to foreign policy.

 

First of all, without alluding to a miserable series of Israeli failures, the writer asserts that Israel does its best to destroy Iranian weapons sent to its clients. He then tells about Iran’s spectacular success at lining up Russia to be its newest client. He abandons that line of thought to delve into his favorite subject; that of urging America not to get into a nuclear deal with Iran. And finally, he betrays the premise of his bragging by begging America to do “all it can to prevent Tehran’s weapons from reaching its proxies.” What happened to Israel’s effort in that regard?

Second of all, without alluding to a Jewish relentless campaign to drive the wedge between America and the Arab World, Clifford May discussed the bond that kept Saudi Arabia and America friends during the decades. These are the words he used:

 

“The Saudis, an American strategic partner since President Franklin Roosevelt met with King Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud on Valentine’s Day 1945. The tacit understanding since: The US will provide security and the Saudis will keep the oil flowing at reasonable levels and prices to fuel international economic growth”.

 

It is abundantly clear by now that the Judeo-Yiddish culture will not allow its followers to cohere when it comes to formulating a regime of harmonious coexistence with the rest of humanity. As a consequence, the Jews will continue to suffer the misery they heap on themselves in return for the thrill they experience when slandering others while praising themselves.

If the tropes fit, elucidate the conspiracy

 Whereas the whole world believes that because the shoe fit, Cinderella had the right to be queen, the Jews want you to believe otherwise. In other words, they want you to look at all of what they call tropes, and dismiss them as phantom apparitions despite the fact that they make a solid case for a Jewish cabal engaged in a non-stop collusion to take over the world.

 

Just ask yourself: What can the reason be for a House that’s supposed to represent the American people, trampling all over the First Amendment of their Bill of Rights, and thoughtlessly vote to suspend freedom of speech, the most cherished of America’s rights? What was there that could deliver such a destructive blow to the Constitution but the Jewish power of hypnosis that tranquilized the members of the House long enough to vote how the voices inside their heads were telling them to vote?

 

It is when you start probing deeper into the situation, and ask why the Jews would do such a thing, that you realize they are playing a multifaced, complex game that exploits America’s standing, power and prestige to take over the world, after which they plan to dump America in the debris it helped create. That is the ultimate aim of the colluding Jews. It is also the “Pandora’s box” that houses the other realities concerning Jewish behavior. One reality is that truths which can pierce the eye like a burst of flashlight, are made to look like tropes.

 

You get a sense of how enormous such a discovery can be when you read the article that came under the title: “Republicans stripping Ilhan Omar from her committee seat compromises free speech,” and the subtitle: “Confirming a terrible precedent.” The article was written by Michael McKenna, and published on February 5, 2023 in The Washington Times.

 

Here, in condensed form, is what McKenna said:

 

“The House of Representatives has decided it would rather not have Rep. Ilhan Omar sitting on the Committee on Foreign Affairs. She’s annoying [but] that does not matter. The irreducible truth is that the people of a Minnesota district elected her to represent them. Their votes should count the same as everyone else’s. The Omar vote accelerated the House’s spiral toward oligarchy and irrelevance. The Republicans have now cemented the precedent of precluding members of Congress from sitting on committees for reasons unrelated to their actions. They concluded that some speech is unacceptable – in this instance, political speech, which is not criminal and is protected by the First Amendment. That’s contrary to the oath of office they take. It also diminishes the professional currency of members of Congress – political speech. Ms. Omar is guilty of many things, but she hasn’t been convicted of any crime. She is being removed from a committee assignment because of things she has said”.

 

Given that it was at the insistence of the most prominent Jewish writers — considered to be members of Jewish Central — who instigated that event, and given that they specifically mentioned it was Rep. Omar’s stance regarding Israel, that motivated them to call for her removal from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, it stands to reason that these people hurt America to serve Israel. And there is no firmer way to tell America and the world that they, as Jews, are first and foremost loyal to Israel. This is now a proven reality that must never again—repeat, never again—be called a trope.

 

In fact, we can rely on the word of David Harsanyi’s — a member of Jewish Central — who admits that “the vote to remove the Somali-born Muslim lawmaker came after her past comments critical of Israel.” And this prompts us to go through his article where that quote appears, and see what else is there that may reveal how the Jewish cabal exploits America in a massive collusion to take over the world.

 

Harsanyi’s article came under the title: “The Media Keep Lying To Protect Ilhan Omar,” and the subtitle: “Debunking the ‘critical of Israel’ canard.” It was published on February 2, 2023 in The Federalist. It is near the end of the article that we encounter what comes as a direct contradiction to what Harsanyi said earlier about the Somali-born lawmaker. Here is the contradiction:

 

“When Omar says House members are expected to pay ‘allegiance/pledge support to a foreign country’ or that supporters of Israel are in it for ‘Benjamins,’ she is not ‘being critical’ of any policy, she is spreading ugly ‘tropes’”.

 

What this reveals is that the Jews maintain a firm grip on America by confusing the public about the nature of the relationship which exists between America, Jewish Americans and Israel.

 

In any case, if we agree that the denial of a true event calls for the mobilization of the human race to restore its credibility, we begin to understand what the Jews are doing to bring to life the horrific realities of the Holocaust while seeking to punish the deniers who would have you believe that the event is nothing more than a Jewish anti-humanity trope.

 

By the same token, however, the Jews who deny the horror they inflict on others — which they do by characterizing the innocent observations of humans as being tropes invented to inconvenience them — they cause the mobilization of the human race, and prompt it to send the following clear message to all Jews:

 

When you deny your terroristic and cannibalistic behavior, you encourage those who want to deny the Holocaust. Therefore, you must choose between telling the truth on both sides or telling tropes on both sides. What you must not do, is tell the truth on one side and tropes on the other. Doing so will ultimately punish you with a Holocaust that will exceed the horror effect of the first.

 

The ball is in your court, and the world is watching.

Nothing can justify prolonging 20,000 days of terror

 Whereas the world is becoming conscious of the fact that the group of so-called democracies priding itself on its spotless Human-Rights record, has in reality been a phony and hypocritical bunch, the government of Canada that maintained itself at the forefront of the group, is now demonstrating how phony and hypocritical it has always been.

 

If you can imagine a democracy as being a healthy human body, you must now think of the so-called democracies as being a dead and decomposing corpse being devoured by magots. It is that the government of Canada has allowed a foreign criminal organization with worldwide reach to use Canada’s own security apparatus (RCMP) in a long term scheme to terrorize a citizen that refused to toe the Jewish line. That citizen is yours truly. Thus, I speak from personal experience.

 

Instructed by the Jews, the RCMP maintained a constant regime of surveillance on me, and widely spread the raw information among those in the loop whose veins were simultaneously being pumped with poisonous lies about me engaging in illegal activities that endangered human life on Earth. The result was that I lived most of my adult life under a constant regime of psychological terror imposed on me for no better reason than I would not praise the foreign criminal organization while trashing my people, my race and every moral stance I stood for.

 

If you think that the use of the internet, which gave me the opportunity to take my story public, motivated the Canadian government to feel shame and respond to my call to come clean by honoring the promise it made to acknowledge what happened, and tell me of my options — I say think again. You get less response talking to these people than talking to a wall. It has been more than 40 days since I went public, and the government of Canada has made it clear by its stonewalling that it is comfortable prolonging its terror campaign against me for as long as it will take to silence me by exhaustion or by old age.

 

Because what made it possible for me to survive the RCMP tricks designed to push me over the cliff of despair, and do something stupid that would have justified their beastly treatment of me — was to think there could be a way out of the horror I do not see now but will see in the future, I renew that kind of hope and cling to a similar notion, even believe there is a better chance now that the government of Canada will see the light and move to end the rapacious devouring of Canada’s dead Human Rights corpse by the Jewish magots advising it how to handle this case.

 

I say this because the signs are there to the effect that some honorable souls are prepared to break through the wall of the conspiracy of silence, and take the story to the general public where the government of Canada always feared it may end up. In fact, an incident that shows how the fear factor motivates the government to do the right thing, happened to me when I was in Montreal, but there is a lesson in it for all of Canada and the rest of the Anglosphere.

 

This part of the story started because I got fed up one day with the editors of the Globe and Mail. They were suppressing my right to free speech by pressuring others to treat me as non-existent while at the same time “mining” what I was writing and what information was gathered about me by the RCMP and their cohorts. The editors encouraged everybody to have a field day while enjoying an intellectual freebee for breakfast every morning.

 

I sued the editors of the Globe and Mail in Montreal, and this required that I subpoena the big honcho among them who was in Toronto. Because the Civil Code of Quebec requires that I obtain permission to subpoena someone, I had to fill an application in accordance with the demands of the Code. I did that … not once but 13 times because the clerk at the courthouse refused to approve it each time without telling me why except to say it did not conform with the requirements of the Code.

 

Having to go home and retype the application several times before going back to the courthouse not knowing if this will work, got me so frustrated, I thought of a way to scare the clerk into moving out of his paralysis, and granting me the permission that will allow me to proceed with my lawsuit — or telling me what in the application required fixing. Knowing that nothing scares Quebeckers more than someone telling the Americans how horrible these people are, I threatened to write a letter to an American publication or two, telling them about my dreadful experience on that day. A man sitting near the clerk, who turned out to be his supervisor, jumped to his feet and ordered him to stamp the application with the approval seal.

 

He explained to me that the Code asks that the subpoena be delivered to the witness by an adult. Because I did not use these specific words, the clerk had the technical right to reject the application. However, because I said that the application will be delivered by the sheriff in Toronto, who could only be an adult, I fulfilled the demand required by the Code, and should be granted the permission.

 

Why the fuss? What really was going on there?

 

What happened on that day had roots that went back years prior to it. It is that to scare the world about the evildoings they constantly attributed to me, the Jews would use the true information gathered about me to tell scary stories that seemed to have the scent of truth in them. And so, what they did one day was to say I was on my way to the courthouse planning to plant an explosive in it. And they left a “suspicious” looking package where it was thought I’ll be going.

 

The police cordoned off the area, recovered the package and found nothing dangerous in it. But ever since that day, the mention of my name first scared people such as the subpoena clerk, who then proceed to have fun pulling my legs being a privileged member of the mischievous crowd that’s legally allowed to give me a hard time and be protected by law.

 

I cling to the hope that public opinion will eventually put an end to the habit of Canada’s politicians who would terrorize their citizens, make their own activities look like fun games, and invite the Anglosphere to share the little joys of life.

Kevin McCarthy must be a fan of Ilhan Omar

 Look at the title of an article that was published recently. It said this: “Ilhan Omar Fundraises Off Her Ouster from Foreign Affairs Committee,” which is the result of what Speaker Kevin McCarthy did to Omar. But is it possible that the Speaker of the House didn’t realize that something like this was going to happen? No, it isn’t possible.

 

Like they say: money is the mother’s milk of politics, and McCarthy who is a consummate politician, knows it as well as anyone. He also knows that clumsy politics is the mother’s milk of fundraisers and yet, he went ahead with the plan to seemingly punish Omar. Why did he do it? Why so clumsily?

 

We find clues to answer these questions in the article mentioned above. It was written by Caroline Downey, and published on February 2, 2023 in National Review Online.

 

The following quotation is one of the excuses that Kevin McCarthy gave for ousting Ilhan Omar off the House Foreign Affairs Committee:

 

“Omar has disqualified herself from serving on the Committee on Foreign Affairs, a panel that is viewed by nations around the world as speaking for Congress on matters of international importance and national security”.

 

But this is precisely why the man should be proud, and probably is, of the work that Ilhan Omar has been doing, and seen around the world. In fact, she had been repairing the image of America — broken during the Donald Trump years — the way that Barak Obama made the Europeans and the world, fall in love with America while stomping the continents as he ran to be President of the United States.

 

McCarthy also chastised Omar, accusing her of downplaying the September 11 attacks in a speech she delivered to a Council on American-Islamic Relations event—asserting that the event was used to justify persecuting Muslims in America. Here is how she expressed that thought:

 

“For far too long we have lived with the discomfort of being a second-class citizen, and frankly I’m tired of it, and every single Muslim in this country should be tired of it. CAIR was founded after 9/11 because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties”.

 

But really, what’s all the fuss that’s made about this occurrence? Well, the best way I can answer this question is to speak from personal experience. Here is my story:

 

I was asked more than once to tell someone what they can do to improve their writing skill and become as compelling as me. I always answered that beside the acquisition of experience by writing as much as possible, two rules must never be broken.

 

First, respect your audience. That is, do not use the phrasing of a sentence in such a way as to confuse or deceive your readers. They may not be in a position to fully explain what you just did, but they will have detected your intellectual dishonesty, and will have rejected what you’re trying to convince them of.

 

Second, focus on the subject matter about which you are writing. The way to do it, is to speak in concrete terms about it while abstracting everything else that’s not directly related to it. You’ll understand the utility of this rule if you recall a time when Iranian diplomats were first interviewed on American television. Before anything else, they would express their religiosity by praising Allah, the Prophet or both.

 

The Iranians discovered that their habit got the audience so fixated on their religious mumbling, it missed the other points in the message that the diplomats were trying to convey. By contrast, the Jews never shed the habit that keeps dragging them into the sewer of irrelevance. It is a habit they practice themselves, and force others to adopt. It is the wall to wall praise of Israel which they stuff into every conversation and demand that others do likewise whatever topic is discussed. It is also the wall to wall slander they want to hear about those they designate as hated characters.

 

And so, when Ilhan Omar used the word “something” to refer to the 9/11 attacks, she did so instinctively to avoid confusing the audience by equating the horror of 9/11 with that of having to live like a second class citizen. It is a sign of respect for her audience. It is also the recognition that the two phenomena are so different, they cannot be equated by a mumbling that would add nothing to the conversation.

 

Because the resolution to kick Omar off the committee was introduced by the Republican Jew Max Miller, and because I cannot see how Kevin McCarthy would have decided on his own to chastise Omar for what she said, I must conclude that it was the Jews who pumped into his vein the cultural formulation of what makes Jewish opinion irrelevant, and wipes the sheen off America’s proclamations.

 

Kevin McCarthy may have been caught in the vortex of a confusing cyclone generated by the Jews to eliminate every source that can develop to prevent them from helping Israel by exploiting America, and had no choice but to go along — or he knew what he was doing but did it anyway to give Ilhan Omar the opportunity to shine brighter than all the Jews of America could dim her for a moment.

 

That man Kevin McCarthy can only be a fan of that woman Ilhan Omar.

They did more than tattoo their foreheads. They seared it into their souls

 Here is a headscratcher: What is it that the Jews are so fond of, they did more than flash it on their foreheads for the world to see, but seared it with steel and fire into their souls for the world to love them, fear them and hate them – all at the same time?

 

You don’t have an answer to that question? Well then, let me give you a hint. Here it is:

 

We are the Gold, we are the Silver, we are every Stein (German for precious stone) who wields the power of the mighty purse. We can buy you, we can sell you, we can elevate you, or we can trash you by the power of our will — the power that nobody can resist when commanded to annihilate you and your family for not loving us, and saying so.

 

Do you get it now, my friend? The answer to the above question is that the Jews are so fond of money, they gave themselves names that almost literally turned their flesh and blood physique into paper and stone-like money, money, money.

 

What’s wrong with that? Nothing is wrong with that if it is what they like to do with themselves. But what’s wrong is what came next. You’ll see what it is when you read the article that came under the title: “Local Congresswoman Accidentally Spends A Decade Being An Antisemite,” written by David Harsanyi, and published on January 31, 2023 in The Federalist.

 

Unaware of what the Jews are doing to themselves but eager to protect them from the likes of Representative Ilhan Omar who did nothing more serious than point out what the Jews have done and brag about — Harsanyi attacked Omar with unprecedented vehemence. And given that Representative Rashida Tlaib is Omar’s best friend, he attacked her as well for pointing out that despite the pain the Jews are inflicting on her Palestinian people, she is proud of the fact that Palestine, the country they stole from her, was used to save many Jews from the gas chambers and crematoria they provoked the Europeans to use on them.

 

To maintain and continue the verbal diarrhea which he started, David Harsanyi asked a rhetorical question, and got busy answering it. Meant to clarify whether Omar used antisemitic tropes deliberately or because she didn’t know they were tropes, the writer came down on the side that she knew what she was doing but did it anyway because she is antisemitic at heart. But deliberately or not, the problem lies somewhere else.

 

It is that Harsanyi has contributed to the effort of pumping into the American system, the kind of visceral hatred for the Jews that led in the past to pogrom and holocaust them. And this begs the question: Why do the Jews keep repeating the behavior that ends up annihilating them? The answer is that they started their journey through life on the wrong foot, a choice that gets every step they make to engender the next deadly step. Here is how it all started:

 

Their bragging about their exploits led them to create the first trope about themselves. It is that they wanted the Europeans to believe God was on their side when they slaughtered the babies and looted the treasures of Egypt on their way out of that ancient kingdom. They so began the trope that came to be known as “Blood Libel.” Hated and feared everywhere they settled in Europe, they moved from one place to another on the Continent. This being inconvenient when it came to taking their possessions with them, they chose to invest their wealth in the easy to carry gold, silver, precious stones and other forms of currency. This led to the trope that painted them as lovers of money.

 

That history was forgotten by the time the Jews had started to settle in America. This being the land of the rush to discover gold, and the mad pursuit to accumulate money of every kind, the Jews relied on the lessons they learned in Europe, and did better than others serving themselves. Also, more than anywhere else, it was in America that the Jews learned about the relationship which exists between having money and wielding political power. They who would ask, “is it good for the Jews?” before doing anything, wielded their newly discovered power to help their causes, which later included the false glorification of Israel. And this is what led to the tropes relating to loyalty, the buying of influence, the Jewish cancellation of individuals that refuse to toe their line … and so on and so forth.

 

But what is a trope to begin with? Well, let’s put it this way: A trope is no trope if it is truth. When someone looks at a physical object, you cannot tell him, he only sees an image of the real thing. Similarly, you cannot talk to someone who is looking at the intertwining of Jewish money and American politics, and convince him that he sees a trope and not the real thing.

 

Punish those who call what they see by their real name, and you’ll help construct the gas chambers and crematoria of the future. Who is so mad and so beastly as to do something like this – except maybe the American Congress of ignorant and cannibalistic savages?

Jonathan S. Tobin alone is the moral disgrace

 Consider the following three relationships you may someday forge with someone:

 

First: You are neighbors, and his young family seems to have much in common with yours. You have a car which you take everyday to go to work. He does not have a car but rides with you to his. You do him a favor by taking a detour to drop him off at the door of his workplace. At the end of the day, you retrace your trajectory to get you both to your homes.

 

Second: You’re the office manager of a multinational conglomerate’s chairman of the board. You have a number of assistants working for you — keeping track, organizing, recording and filing all that you do. As if possessed by the spirit of a busy beaver, one young assistant begins to leave mark of his work in places that should not concern him. The other assistants do not complain and neither do you.

 

Third: You’re getting on with age, thus pay for a companion to be with you most of the time. He is there to help you do the things you cannot do for yourself alone.

 

But wait a minute. The reality being that you’re a science researcher doing experiments on the nature of the universe, you discover that you were not just thinking about those situations, you actually lived them in three alternative universes. And so, eager to find out how each situation ended, you revisit those places where, to your chagrin discover that you ended up betrayed each time.

 

In the first case, your friend’s wife had been freeloading on your wife as if your home was a foodbank dedicated to aiding a poor neighbor. In the second case, the busy aid in your office turned out to be a spy planted there by a rival conglomerate to sabotage your work and improve theirs. In the third case, it turned out that despite getting on with age, you were neither deaf nor blind, and certainly not in need of a companion. But a sneaky conman had managed to intrude into your life, and dominate it by telling lies and pulling tricks that built on your old fears, hangups and demons. He took over your estate by feeding you drugs that caused you to see and hear what was not there to be seen or heard — telling you what it was that you must be seeing and hearing.

 

And so, here is the question that must be asked: Which of the three situations would fill you with so powerful and so visceral a sentiment of hate, you will be motivated to respond in ways that you’ll most likely regret later? The answer is that the third situation leads the pack. That’s because the conman relied on your weaknesses to exploit you. And nothing can be more cowardly or vicious than that.

 

You know what, my friend? A situation analogous to that is unfolding America. It is where the politico-journalistic and other elites want the public to engage in self-deception by pretending they do not believe what they see with their own eyes — namely that the Jews (1) have dual loyalties, (2) use money to hypnotize politicians and get them to serve Israel instead of America, and (3) forge relationships with others for the sole purpose of exploiting them, sponging on the suckers who listen to the Jews and respond warmly to their flattery.

 

Now that the public has had enough of this nonsense, and says as much in every forum it is allowed to freely express the people’s thinking, Jonathan Tobin rushed to start working on maintaining the system of deception by which the Jews turned America into a Jewish plantation. To that end, Tobin wrote an article under the title: “Israel’s Critics Continue to Hold the Jewish State Responsible for Palestinian Terror,” published on January 29, 2023 in the Jewish News Syndicate.

 

So then, what’s Tobin doing to maintain the old system?

 

To start with, he spoke of a “Palestinian century-long war on Zionism.” Pity Jonathan Tobin for, nobody told him it was the Zionists who declared war on the Palestinians, not the other way around. It is so because it was the Zionists — led by terrorists Begin and Shamir, and having made a mess of their lives in Europe — who invaded the Palestinian homeland armed to the teeth with modern weapons. They started shooting at everything that moved, including the Brits who were the ones to promise them an enclave in Palestine in the first place.

 

Tobin ignored that reality because if he didn’t, he would have admitted that the portion of Palestine which the UN never gave to the Jews, continues to suffer the weight of occupation — the ultimate and most definitive form of cannibalistic terrorism. This being the case, every part of occupied Palestine is by definition a war zone in which the occupied population has the duty to resist the occupation, whereas the occupying power is deemed to commit war crimes, and crimes against humanity with every response it conducts to oppose the resistance. It is that justice is rightfully, heavily and shamelessly biased in favor of the victims. Period.

 

Still, wanting to get around that, Tobin added two arguments to his explanation, one of which boils down to whining about the following point: “Much of the press claimed a moral equivalence between the war on Israel, and the IDF operation earlier in the week to [kill] Palestinians in Jenin, during which nine people were eliminated”, said Tobin.

 

Note that he whined using the Nazi-formulated trope “eliminate” to cement the view that a savage Netanyahu will be good for Israel. Unfortunately for him, however, this did not overcome the bias that justice has for naturally favoring the Palestinian victims.

 

The other argument, used by Tobin to explain himself, boils down to the following:

 

“Palestinians have repeatedly rejected peace offers and compromises with Israel regardless of where its borders might be drawn. And this puts a lie to the concept of a two-state solution being the answer to Israel’s problems”.

 

This is a straightforward statement that’s made of two parts, and expressed in a single breath. The first part suggests that the Palestinians are the ones who continually reject the formation of a Palestinian state. The second part is a firm assertion by Tobin that it is the Jews who oppose advancing the principle of a two-state solution.

 

Jonathan Tobin is such a disgrace, he needs help because his brain is screwed up so badly, it holds two high-stake contradictory opinions simultaneously.

 

America needs help because its politico-journalistic establishment wants the public to engage in self-deception pretending they do not believe what they see with their own eyes, a situation that led in the past to visceral hatred for the Jews, and the hard to imagine consequences.