When Speculators Attack Your Currency

Something is happening to the Egyptian Pound that happened to many currencies before it. The Pound is under attack by the speculators. Something like this happened in recent times to Turkey, to Russia, to Mexico, further down to a number of Latin American countries, and further East to a number of Asian countries. But more tellingly, it happened to the British Pound whereupon the speculator known as George Soros made a cool billion dollars in profit at the expense of the Exchequer without adding to the wealth of the nation as much as a grain of wheat, an ounce of meat or anything else.

Perhaps this is why the new governor of the Egyptian central bank flew to London only hours after being appointed to the post. Maybe he is there seeking to learn how the Brits handled the situation when it happened to them. Well, to attempt to understand something about what may happen in such a situation, we need to expand the discussion and talk about all sorts of speculative games that speculators play.

There are times when speculators must be thought of as financial sharks, and there are times when they must be thought of as vultures. The thing is that a shark is drawn to its prey when the latter gets hurt and bleeds, thus leaves a trail in the water for the shark to follow it all the way to the prey. As to the vulture, it can sense from high above that a potential prey is about to succumb to an injury or to exhaustion; even to hunger or to thirst. The vulture will wait for the prey to buckle under and when this happens, it will swoop down on it and start to feast.

Likewise, speculators will smell the scent of blood when a going concern gets into trouble and starts to bleed. Such concern can be a private enterprise or a government operating with a currency of its own. Like sharks, the speculators will swim to the prey as fast as they can and attack it mercilessly. At other occasions, the speculators will estimate ahead of time that a going concern is approaching the limit of its endurance. Like a vulture, they will observe it closely and wait for it to succumb. When this happens, they will make their move and start to feast.

This sort of drama unfolds all the time where hard assets or financial instruments representing them are bought and sold. It happens when the speculators who produce no wealth of any kind use the little that they start with – be it their own assets or be it borrowed cash – and rely on the turbulence of the marketplace to do transactions that allow them to make a gain.

Of course, they can also lose if they make the wrong bet; which some novices do and get out of the business in a hurry. But those who last in the business long enough to have mastered the game do very well in the long run. They do well not only because they know how to take advantage of the opportunities that present themselves but because they know how to create their own opportunities.

The speculators do so by “attacking” the instruments of the going concern. For example, if it is a company that is trading on the stock market, the speculators would short sell the shares, a move that drops their value – sometimes dramatically. The speculators will then buy back the shares at a fire sale price and make a profit. This can happen to a company that is healthy except that it was hit by something extraneous which may turn out to be real or be a rumor. In any case the short sellers, who may have been the originators of the rumor, will make their move and make a gain one way or the other.

At other times, a company would get into trouble because it had “bad luck” and its shares tanked on the stock market as a result. Eventually, the company solves its problems and gets poised to move up again which it does to some extent. But before it reaches the level where it deserves to be, something serious happens to the economy as a whole, and the stock market crashes. The company shares tank again even though its fundamentals remain solid. After a while, the economy recovers, the stock market goes bullish but the company shares remain tanked. Why?

This happens because the speculators know that the company shares are poised to make a dramatic move up. They are so greedy they want to acquire as much of those shares as they can before the upward move begins. But having sold their shares and remained without them for the duration of the bear market, the only trick they have up their sleeve is to short sell the shares they do not have thus scare the people who hold them and force them to sell. When this happens, the speculators buy what is being dumped at a dirt cheap price only to see the shares snap right back up like a slingshot. This is when they start to sell, making a very handsome profit in the process.

And this is what the speculators have determined is happening to the Egyptian economy at this time. They see it snap back like a slingshot, and wish to buy as much of it as they can. For this to happen, they want a cheap Egyptian Pound, and want the stakeholders of Egyptian assets to be so scared as to dump at any price anything they hold. The trick they employ is to “attack” the currency by dumping what they have (if they do) and what they don't have (which is more likely) in the hope that they will be able to buy back at a cheaper price.

Let us hope the governor of the Egyptian central bank will get good advice in London.

Lock Up The Demons And Free The Saint

This piece is about insanity in America, how to spot it and how to deal with it.

Amid young men going on a spree to mass-kill moviegoers and school children, an older American kills his sister and burns the house in which they both live. When the firefighters arrive to put down the blaze, he shoots at them, kills two and kills himself. He leaves a note to tell the world that killing people was the best thing he liked to do when alive. Yet, none of the mass killers looked or sounded so abnormal before committing their deeds as to convince someone they were evil enough to require being dealt with before it was too late. How could that be?

                                   

To try and answer that question, we do an experiment. Suppose you have a friend who looks normal in what he does, and sounds normal in what he says. Once in a while he talks to you about a neighbor who is a bad person but you let the words go in one ear and out the other. One day, you become so curious about that neighbor, you decide to listen to the words of your friend as he describes him, even ask a few follow-up questions of your own in an attempt to discover and determine what is really going on.

You find that your friend is calling his neighbor a bad person because he does not beat his wife, he tells his children to be polite and be helpful to others, he is generous towards other people, and he remains a forgiving person never to hold a grudge against someone. You conclude that the neighbor is not a bad person but that the one you thought was your friend is actually insane. You ask him what he would like to see done to that neighbor, and he gives you a list of things he would like to see done to him. You take the list to the authorities and recommend that they do to your so-called friend what he would have liked to see done to his neighbor.

You apply this method of discovery to the small circle of friends who surround you so as to find out who is normal, who may not be, and who may be insane. You also apply the method at the level of the nation to assess the level of sanity of the people who hold megaphones loud enough to shape the culture of the nation, and to tell its young as well as its old who is good and who is evil; who to love and who to hate.

To this end, you may begin a journey of discovery by going over what your neocon friends are saying with regard to Chuck Hagel; nominated to be America's secretary of defense. This man is a saint and yet, they are saying he is a bad person because he puts the interests of America ahead of those of Israel – something he says he does because he is an American senator and not an Israeli one. Horror of horror, they cry at this assertion. And they add that no one can be a good American unless they devote themselves to the causes of Israel absolutely and unequivocally, something they must repeat at every occasion like a nun who is forever mumbling the rosary.

Listen carefully to what William Kristol, Elliott Abrams, Rachel Abrams and Noah Pollak are saying and what they are writing about Chuck Hagel. Follow what they do in their capacity as executives of what they call “The Emergency Committee for Israel.” And look at the new website they have created to attack the man and portray him as evil because of the good things he is doing for America, for its people and for the world.

When you will have listened, when you will have followed and when you will have looked, you will come to determine that Chuck Hagel is the saint America needs today more than anything else. And you will determine that Kristol, Abrams, Pollak and all the neocons are made of the same psychological material that the serial killers who plague the nation are made of. Indeed, they are the very thing that is spreading insanity in America, and the ultimate authors of all the misery in the land.

Lock up these demons, and America will get back to being a normal nation again.

Child Fantasy Tempered By Adult Experience

As a child, I played all sorts of sports thus experienced my share of injuries, most of which were benign and not worth discussing. As an adult, I witnessed a few instances of violent behavior among people, two of which came to mind this morning, January 8, 2013, while I was reading the Wall Street Journal.

Let me first tell you about the two instances of violence I witnessed, after which I shall explain how I see them relate to what I was reading this morning. The first instance happened at eleven o'clock in the morning of a November 11 in a given year some four decades ago. I was working for a big company where the siren used to blare at that exact moment once every year, and we all stood silent for two minutes to honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice in past wars.

But on that particular day long ago, things did not remain as silent as they were supposed to. What happened instead was that a young worker who was a new hire was seen to lunge toward an older man. He had the look of anger on his face, telling the man to stand still while shouting other obscenities at him. The older man seemed to be dazed during those moments but regained his composure after a few seconds.

As the young hire was still telling him he must show respect for the heroes who “fought for our freedom,” the older man put his right leg behind those of the young man and pushed him with two fingers. The young man tripped and fell on his back whereupon he injured his head and was taken to the company clinic.

What the rest of us knew that the young hire did not know was that the older man was a veteran of the Korean War. He was wounded fighting for the freedom of the young hire who was now trying to lecture him on the subject of honor. What really happened at that moment which caused the incident in the first place was that the older man had just come out of a pit inside of which he was doing some work.

As it can happen at times, even younger and healthier men experience a moment of dizziness while exerting themselves to come out of the pit through the narrow opening which is there for the purpose. This is what happened to the older man, and this is why he was staggering; a sight that the young man interpreted to be a sign of disrespect for the abstract hero he had in his imagination not knowing that the real hero was staring him in the face.

The second instance where I witnessed a violent moment happened at a bus stop. I had left my car in Toronto and went to do a temporary job for a few weeks in the Montreal region. I would take the bus at the terminal in the South Shore every morning to go to the island of Montreal where I spent the day doing what I had come to do.

One morning, while standing in line waiting for the bus along with the other passengers, we saw a man come rushing as the bus was approaching the terminal. He reached the front door of the bus as it was opening while shouting: “I am crazy, I am crazy, let me get there first.” And he got on the bus ahead of everyone else that was standing in the queue, but nobody objected.

The self described crazy man put on the same performance a number of days in a row while most of the time, the same passengers would be standing in line, and no one did something about it. But then one day, someone decided that the time had come to do something about it, and he volunteered to do it without telling anyone. As the “crazy” man was approaching the door of the bus, he was met by the volunteer who was standing nearby waiting for him.

The volunteer pulled a stick he was hiding inside his coat, started shouting: “I am crazier than you” and hit the legs of the other man. He kept hitting them till the man dropped to the ground at which time we all applauded and got on the bus. We never saw the original crazy man again but were happy to see the crazier one board the bus every morning after that.

What I was reading this morning that brought to mind the memory of those two incidents were first of all, the Bret Stephens column which has the title: “Chuck Hagel's Courage.” In it, the author denigrates the work done by the man whom the President chose to be his secretary of defense. To do the denigration, the author cites the history that fits the moment, interpreting it the way that makes the point he currently expresses. And you can be certain that he will contradict these views – as he always does – when discussing something else in the future; and will find it more convenient to say the opposite of what he is saying today.

But why does he want to denigrate the work of Chuck Hagel in the first place? He wants it because the man was not consistent in all that he said and did in the past, says Stephens. He adds at the end of the column that Hagel was consistent only when it came to expressing himself about Israel. He calls that a mental twitch that cannot be helped. And this is why young Bret Stephens is unhappy with the nomination of veteran Chuck Hagel to the post of secretary of defense.

Well, nobody is perfect but the difference between the man and the boy is that the man will give himself the right to be smarter today than he was yesterday. (This is a quote from a German politician whose name escapes me.) The man will change his views when the circumstances will change to remain on the right side of current events, and be in step with them. By contrast, the boy will make a smart aleck remark today only to reverse himself and make another smart aleck remark tomorrow – believing in his own mind that he is correct today as much as he was yesterday – and will be tomorrow.

And this is why Chuck Hagel should figuratively put one leg behind those of Bret Stephens and push him with two fingers. The kid deserves to be taught a lesson that will help him mature.

As to the second article I read this morning, it was an editorial in the Journal having the title: “A Hagel Education.” In it the editors do what Stephens did in his column in that they cite the history which suits them to make the point that works for them at this time. And the main point they make is this: “The Berlin Wall fell after Reagan's successes rebuilding U.S. Strength and credibility.”

No. Things did not happen like that. What Reagan did was stand tall on the strength and credibility of the United States of America as they existed already at the time. They were represented by the industrial might of what was a genuine superpower, not the borrower that has seen its industrial might hollowed out by such gamblers as those who work on Wall Street, are stationed on the West Coast of the United States, and are doing their dealings on some island off the coast of China.

The time in which Reagan operated was known by the acronym MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction.) And there was a kind of madness in the way that the events were developing, especially following the Cuban missile crisis when Kennedy basically said to Khrushchev: “I am crazier than you” in the same way as did the volunteer at the bus stop in Montreal.

But Reagan was smart enough to know that history never repeats itself in the exact same way. Thus, he did not repeat Kennedy's performance but relied on something he knew he had in the hand instead of gambling with something he feared could backfire.

Yet, this is what the boys in the editorial department of the Wall Street Journal are asking for today; and this is what the man named Chuck Hagel will most likely refuse to do.

And the whole world will thank him for that.

New Marxist Trends Replacing Old Marxist Ideas

It took someone like the Jew of Israel, who went by the name of Shamir, to go to America one fateful day and cry out: “zey know nossing about za damacracy of za Shamir” for a trio like Cheney, Rove and the W to be so impressed, they started to work on turning superpower America into super-joke America, something they accomplished in less time than a human life cycle. And while doing this, they became so impressed with their own work, they fashioned a doctrine according to which they went to the land of “zey” and tried to democratize the people there in the style of “za Chewish Shamir.”

Now, the disciples of that same Shamir are at it again except that this time, they are more organized, have more resources and are in possession of propaganda tools the likes of which Shamir could not have dreamed. To be sure, Shamir and all the others of his generation were hardcore Marxists whose understanding of democracy stemmed from the ideals of the collective communes known as “kibbutz” in which they lived; those upon which Israel was founded and whose so-called economy still operates to this day.

Totally ignorant of the Alfred Smith saying: “All the ills of democracy can be cured by more democracy,” the Shamir disciples are now trying to force upon America their new and improved notion of Marxist doctrine as it relates to the ideas of democracy and the concept of free speech. What these characters are saying is that all the ills of democracy can be cured by bombing the instruments of free speech in the lands where people speak their own minds with clarity instead of articulating the nonsensical and obscure ambiguities of our North American discourse.

And so they had their people in Israel bomb the offices of newspapers as well as the radio and television stations in Palestine and Lebanon because they could do so using the jets, helicopters and precision bombs that were procured from America's formidable arsenal. But where they could not do the bombing themselves despite all that they were given, they urged the American Administration of the Cheney, Rove and the W to do the bombing. One such moment came when they insisted that the Arab TV network Aljazeera must be wiped off the face of the Earth.

Luckily, something (probably the weather) prevented the mad trio from carrying out those Jewish instructions, and Aljazeera lived to continue giving people around the world the opportunity to express themselves freely; to speak their own mind with clarity as opposed to articulating the nonsensical and obscure ambiguities of the Jewish style discourses such as those which pollute the American marketplace of ideas on a daily basis. And these would be the ideas that fall on deaf ears when carried to the people in the Arab world by such instruments as al-Horrah (America's latest answer to Aljazeera) because the people out there know better than to be impressed by American voices modulated to spread the Judeo-Israeli propaganda.

While the Arab world is free of that kind of garbage, and while it is getting more free with each passing day where the TV channels are proliferating, America sinks deeper into the embrace of the Jewish propaganda machine that seeks to strangle its people emotionally, morally and intellectually. But the narrative of human existence is such that when things seem to reach their bleakest point, an irony pops into existence and turns the whole situation upside down – or maybe right side up.

What is happening now is that Aljazeera is buying a channel in America called Current TV owned by former Vice President Al Gore and other partners. And the people at the WSJ-Fox network of journalistic pornography are worked up about it. You can see this in the column written by Gordon Crovitz, and published in the Journal on January 7, 2012. It comes under the title: “Inconvenient Truths About Al Jazeera.”

Crovitz has a litany of instances which, he says, should cast doubt about the wisdom of Al Gore to sell to the Aljazeera network. He points out that Aljazeera has two channels; one that carries a neutral sort of programs in English, aimed at an international audience. As to the other channel, it carries programs which have a distinctly pro-Arab slant, he warns. And this is sacrilegious according to the point of view he so aptly articulates. Well, my dear reader, I too have a litany of instances that should cast doubt about the sanity of those who oversee the editorial content of the Wall Street Journal and the Fox News network.

Unlike Gordon Crovitz, however, who gives not a single instance in English or in Arabic that the ordinary reader can check, my list is right here on this website, and it is written in English. If you can read these words, you can click on any of the articles pertaining to the Journal from the 500 or so articles listed on the right side of this page. Moreover, unlike Crovitz who relies on hearsay in that he bases his argument on – so and so who said this, and so and so who said that – I analyze the ideas of the authors themselves as they have stated them in their own words. I do not rely on hearsay and do not ask my readers to trust me blindly.

And guess what, my friend, I read the Aljazeera website in English as you can too, and I watch their broadcast in English and in Arabic. I see little difference between the two but see a journalistic integrity that is infinitely more appealing than what comes in the Wall Street Journal or the Fox News network.

And I have news for you (not ladies of the night but ladies of the wee hours of the morning) who speak louder with your legs and your thighs than your mouth. I grew up in the Sixties and the Seventies when the boob tube first began to rely on the T&A (tits and asses) to draw viewers and to retain them. It did not work then and it is not working now.

Like someone put it crudely the other day in the company of scholars: If she has to show flesh as close as one inch from her pussy, she is one inch away from being a whore – and never a journalist.

The Upcoming Intifada In The U.S. Congress

Despite the fact that America's influence, prestige and nimbus in the world have greatly diminished since the neocons – who used to be Liberal Jews that conveniently turned their coats to become ultra conservatives – took over the reins of power in the congress of what used to be a superpower, the American nation still counts for something in the eyes of the world if only because that world expects the newly elected American Congress to have an intifada, thus loosen the grip of the neocons on it and go back to being its old self again.

This is what the world expects, not because it has information as to what goes on inside the shame that has been the Congress of the United States of America, but because it is what the world wishes to see happen. Indeed, this has been the consistent wish of the world because without an intifada and the hoped for loosening of the neocon grip on America, the entire human race will continue to suffer wars, intrigues and plagues as it has suffered for centuries because of the influence of an evil ideology that was passed on from generation to generation down to the neocons of today.

Throughout the centuries, that ideology was given various names, but what it boils down to is that it is a religion which says that people who convert to it become the chosen children of God. Its promise has been that such people will have the right to inherit what God has created, to take possession of it and to claim dominion over all living things including its stock of human beings. And because it was imperative for a message of this kind to be credible that miracles be shown to happen, the self appointed leaders of the Jews have worked to create the illusion of miracles which they used to impress the feeble minds of America who nevertheless were occupying high positions in business and in government. The sad part is that these people had massive influences in the lobbies and the corridors of the Republic – influences that were transferred to the Jewish leaders who then used them to advance their own causes.

Of all the lobbies and the corridors of power that they probed, the Jewish leaders concluded that the Congress of the United States of America was the grandest depositary in all of history for what is mentally feeble, spiritually corrupt and potentially purchasable with no more than a song, a bit of fancy footwork and an empty promise. And so, the Jewish leaders pulled all the tricks they had up their sleeves, and used them to marvel the pushover Representatives of the House, amaze the strayed Senators of the Upper Chamber, and make them all believe that the Jews have powers no one else has; least of all they who are non-Jewish mortals of the American brand. And so in the eyes of the congressional nobodies, the Jew became a god-like figure to be worshiped by all mortals, be they of the American brand or something else.

Bit by bit – over the years and the decades – the congress of the United States of America was transformed into the cesspool of corruption, shame and treason it is today. As it stands at this time, that hapless institution is hated no end even by the people who are electing its members. And this is because the congress is doing nothing to move the business of America, yet doing everything to move the business of Israel and the other Jewish causes both in America and everywhere else in the world.

Needless to say that the countries of the Third World which sink into despair, share with America the blight of seeing the business of their population neglected by the leaders of the nation while the business of someone else is being advanced at a breakneck pace. The difference is that the characters in the Third World whose business is advanced at the expense of the population would be local dictators who take on the image of gods whereas in America, the image is taken by a Jew (any Jew at all) as demanded by the demonic pastors of the airwaves and the media freaks who use the megaphones at their disposal to shove the thing down the throat of the American people and force them to bow to it.

As a consequence of all this, it goes without saying that to do little or do nothing that moves the business of America only serves to erode the standard of living which the American people used to enjoy. As well, it goes without saying that to labor and to champion the agenda of Israel (the outlaw entity which earned the contempt of the world by its behavior and its actions) is hurting the standing of America throughout that same world.

Thus, by working to advance the causes of Israel and those of the Jews while neglecting the business of America, the Congress of the United States is hurting the nation and hurting its people on every front where the nations of the world are judged to be viable or not, and where no superpower can claim its title without demonstrating a healthy respect for the interest of its people.

And this is where the world hopes, prays and believes that the Congress of the United States has learned a bitter lesson. It expects at long last to see that Congress initiate and maintain an institutional style intifada thus get rid of the Jewish influence, the intrigues of its people, the double-dealings of its agents, the back-stabbings of its charlatans and all the things that have plagued the system and have plagued the nation for half a century, as they have the rest of the world for thousands of years.

And when all will have been said and done; when the sun will shine again over an America that has lived in the dark of night for half a century, there will be hope again for it and for the rest of the world. It will be a sincere hope that America will get back to a time similar to that which followed World War II; a time when looking forward was the natural thing to do, when progress and great achievements were seen to be in the future of mankind.

The supremacist Nazis were defeated then, and the world breathed a sigh of relief. The time has come for the defeat of Zionism, its twin brother so that the world may again breathe a sigh of relief, and get on with the business of reconstructing itself.

When this will happen as it must someday, America and the world will see to it that the people of Palestine who have suffered so much will get a great big thank you.

A Bottle Of Vinegar? Or Is It New Skin?

Situated in the United States of America, the District of Columbia has gotten itself a new congress; one that will be inaugurated on this day, January 3, 2013. And the question everyone is asking at this time is the following: What should the rest of the world expect from this congress going forward? Will it turn out to be a new wine in a new bottle? Or will it turn out to be a new version of the same old vinegar disguised as wine and packed in the same old bottle?

Because institutions are designed, put together and managed by human beings, they tend to have a run that more or less resembles the run of a living organism, if not match the run of a human life. That is, all institutions begin their run as forward looking ideal projects endowed at the start with what looks like a clear plan, and having ample energies to implement the plan. Such institutions would be willing to try new things, expecting to make a large contribution to whatever field they are meant to serve.

What happens with the passage of time, however, is that the institutions begin to experience the same sort of ailments that besiege the human organism as it gets on with age. And this is when the people who run those institutions spend more time and more effort not to do what is expected of them, but to mask their failure to act where they were required to act, and to mask the mistakes they made where they acted unwisely and failed deplorably. The analogy often used to describe a situation like this is that the same old wine is now being served in a new bottle.

As an institution, the congress of the United States of America is no exception in that it has gone through a similar sort of evolution in a period of time that has lasted nearly two and a half centuries. What is unique about it, however, is that the new bottle in which the congressional wine is supposed to be served was found to contain neither old wine that is getting better with time nor wine of any age that is going stale. Instead, the bottle was found to contain vinegar that is becoming more tart with the passage of time – and there is a reason for that.

It is that the content of the bottle is not evolving as expected even under the worst scenario you can imagine. Rather, the content has gone sour as would a wine that has been contaminated with bacteria. And this is where the analogy about the American Congress being like wine no longer applies, and must be abandoned in favor of adopting another analogy; one that will describe the current situation more accurately. To this end, we need to consider the analogy of the snake whose skin is now shedding once every so often.

So far, one hundred and twelve Congresses have served the United States of America since independence where a part of the snake's skin has shed once every two years, and another part has shed once every six years. Likewise, the one hundred and thirteenth Congress is about to be inaugurated with a House of Representatives in which all the members were elected or reelected for a two-year term, and a Senate where a third of the members were elected or reelected for a six-year term.

Two trends have conspired to transform the image of America's congress from the analogy of a wine that was supposed to get better with time to the analogy of a snake that is shedding its skin at regular times. The first trend is known as the practice of gerrymandering the districts; something that is done by the governors of the various states in the Union. The second trend is known as the meddling in those districts by the Jewish lobby which has been renamed the Israeli lobby for a reason that remains obscure to this day. But whether you call the lobby by this name or you call it by that name, the meddling is done openly some of the time, and done when no one is watching most of the time.

The first trend entails that the governor redesigns the boundaries of the districts in his or her state to make as many of them contain a majority of voters favoring one's own Party. The aim here is to help elect enough representatives of one's own persuasion, thus lend to the electoral college of the state the color of one's own Party. This practice has resulted in many districts in America becoming solidly of one political persuasion or the other; a trend that has inescapably polarized the Republic into factions forever at loggerhead with one another.

As to the second trend, it entails that the Jewish lobby use the dirt gathered on the candidates running for office to blackmail them and make them serve the Jewish and Israeli causes which – we were told time and again -- were one and the same because to be a Jew is to be an Israeli according to Israeli law. Indeed, the members of the lobby were able to accomplish all that they did not because they acted as agents of a foreign government but because they claimed to be Americans who happen to adhere to the Jewish faith; a group that has rights under the American Constitution.

Thus, by fusing the two identities (Jewish and Israeli,) these people had it both ways: they served the interests of a foreign government not as traitors but as Americans whose treasonous activities were protected by none other than the Constitution of the land. And nothing could be more Jewish than having it both ways.

The result of the two trends has been that the Congress of the United States of America has become totally paralyzed when it comes to serving the interests of America and the American people, forever “kicking the can down the road” when it comes to serving the nation.

But when it comes to serving the Jewish and Israeli causes, the members of the now infamous congress fall over each other to demonstrate what obedient servants of the Jewish lobby they have become. And they work like loving dogs to advance the Jewish causes at home, and the Israeli causes abroad.

All this has been happening at the cost of American wealth and American blood; a reality that shows why the analogy of the snake applies more aptly to the current situation.

Time For America To Turn Right Side Up

The New York Times (NYT) ran an editorial on December 27, 2012 that began this way: “Ideally, a new constitution … would unite citizens around a consensus … The Islamist-backed constitution that took effect this week [in Egypt] has only exacerbated divisions...” On the same day, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) ran an editorial that began this way: “Egypt … rammed through a new constitution this week … at a steep price in … political … turmoil.” Coming out on the same day, neither of these editorials could have been the echo of the other, but being almost identical, they must be echoes of something that has been in the works for sometime now.

In any case, when you read passages like these, you cannot help but ask yourself: What's wrong with these editors, anyway? Do they believe that a referendum on the constitution is a kind of wedding ceremony where it is all kisses and pleasantries? Still, you go on to read the rest of their works and discover that there is more which is puzzling in the Times piece that is titled: “Egypt's Flawed Constitution”. You also discover that there is more which is similarly puzzling to the Journal's piece that is titled: “Egypt's Constitutional Disorder”.

While reading those editorials, you are reminded of how the practitioners of Yoga look when standing on their heads. In fact, such posture may be a useful thing to have if you consider the world to be upside down, and you wish to see it right side up – something you may achieve by turning yourself upside down. Whether or not this is the intent of the Yoga people is, however, another matter. But mentioning the practice here only serves to give a metaphoric support to the discussion that follows. It is that the American media – be it of the Left such as the NYT, or the Right such as the WSJ – are turning the world upside down when it comes to the discussion of any subject that relates to the Middle East.

What puzzles you even more is that when you read such editorials, you discover long before you reach the end that “group think” is still very much alive in America. You see, for example that speaking of the Egyptian President, the Times said this: “...the chaos he did so much to create...” As to the Journal, it described the situation as being a “crisis of their [the leaders] own making.” Moreover, the Times made sure to mention that this was an “Islamist-backed constitution.” As to the Journal, it made sure to mention that this was the work of “Egypt's Islamist leaders.” No, these are not echoes of each other; they are echoes of something that has been in the works for sometime now.

And both editorials ended by making the same veiled threat against Egypt. To be fair, however, it must be said that the Times was more subtle in that it did not mention a condition that must be met by Egypt for revoking the threat. This is how it formulated its version of the menace: “Egypt's … foreign currency reserves have plummeted from $36 billion to $15 billion … The country requires a $4.8 billion loan from the IMF … other aid, from the United States and elsewhere ... is waiting on the fund...” Make what you will of this.

As to the Journal, it formulated its version of the menace this way: “Foreign currency reserves are $15 billion, down from $43 billion [oops, their typo not mine] … and Egypt needs the IMF loan to unlock other sources of foreign credit … The U.S. can help.” From here, the Journal went on to cite the condition for revoking the threat. It did it this way: “Mr. Morsi needs American support … His commitment to preserve peace with Israel is one important test for [that] support.” It is to be noted that the Journal is owned by Rupert Murdoch, the Australian Jew who now lives in America. He is also considered under Israeli law to be a citizen of occupied Palestine whether or not he likes it.

That approach to foreign policy has been followed by America for a long time now despite its repeated failures. And so you ask aloud: How much longer will you, America, remain upside down considering that if the world is not upside down and you are, you will be seen as the odd man out? If and when this happens and if it persists, it will result in you being ineffective in whatever you try to achieve. But if the world is indeed upside down – as you seem to believe it is – and you choose to be like it, you will have turned yourself into another one of those crazies who populate a world that has gone mad. But think about it, America, if you choose to become this kind of nation, you will not be able to contribute to the effort that will fix the world. And this attitude, as far as I can tell, was never a part of your vision of yourself. Have you forgotten your past, America? Or is it that the Jew is so overbearing, you cannot shake loose from his grip?

Whatever the answer to that question, this is where America stands today. It is upside down looking at a world that is right side up while asking itself: Why is the world so skewed? Some of the nation's leaders – such as those in the media or inside the political apparatus – answer the question by engaging in daily acts of deception that can only be described as colossal frauds mercilessly inflicted on the self and the nation.

What these people do, in fact, is say to themselves and to the world that the world is upside down because America has neglected to maintain it in the right side up position. The solution as they describe it is for them to walk the Earth while dangling the carrot of reward in the face of those who look in America's direction, and waving the stick of punishment at those who look in the other direction. But guess what, my friend, they have been trying this solution for a time now, and it has consistently failed because the conditions that come attached to the American offer reek of Jewish interference so badly, they nauseate even the strongest of stomachs. As to the threats America makes, well since the days when George the W was in office, the world has discovered the middle finger of the right hand, and has learned to wave it in America's face. In short, the carrot has been invalidated, and the stick has been voided.

To an American who is upside down, however, the aforementioned solution would be seen as the most generous thing his country can do. To a world citizen who is standing right side up, that solution would be like the anorexic character that wants to teach the world how to gain weight. It would be like the 500 pound individual that wants to teach the world how to lose weight. It would be like the sex addict that wants to teach the world all about the virtue of chastity. It would be like the castrated eunuch that wants to teach the world how to perform the duties of a he-man stud. It is all a charade and a sick one at that.

In short, that solution would be like a dysfunctional American Congress that never tires of telling the world shamelessly and with a straight face it must learn to be functional. It would be like the Congress of an America that has become a laughing stock for the whole world to laugh at. It would be an atrocious happening inflicted on a world that never expected something like this to happen, and knows not how to deal with it except to pray that no destructive force will be unleashed at the end of it all.

But how did this situation come about in the first place? We find the answer to this question by reading an article that was published on December 26, 2012, one day before the two editorials came out. It has the title: “Talking Turkey” and the subtitle: “As Turkey's 'chief social engineer,' Erdogan talks up secularism and prepares the way for sharia.” It was written by Daniel Pipes and published in the National Review Online. It is, in fact, the sort of thing that has been in the works for sometime, and has served to produce the echoes we heard reverberate in the two infamous editorials, and in all similar editorials carried by the American media.

When you see that sort of subtitle, you get the impression that it summarizes the conclusion of the writer. So you read the article to see what could have led him to reach a conclusion that is as harsh as this. You find that he starts the piece by describing a situation he characterizes as being odd. It is that the menu on a Turkish Airlines flight said the food was free of pork even though alcoholic drinks were served on that same flight. What Pipes sees as odd is that Islam prohibits pork and alcohol, but here on that flight, they banned one and not the other. Odd, the writer cries out, and builds a case on that.

But as if to discredit himself, he mentions an article he wrote more than five years ago in which he speculated on something that turned out to have no relevance. It is that he was asking about the intention of those who are now governing Turkey. He wanted to know if these people retained an Islamic program or if they had accepted secularism. But as he learned from his recent discussions in Istanbul, the Turkish people “worry less about [Erdogan's] Islamic aspirations than about his [other secular] tendencies.” He is a human being, after all, and has human weaknesses that are not much different from those of everyone else.

In fact, the people in Turkey have told Daniel Pipes that “applying the sharia in full … is not feasible in Turkey because of the country's ... nature.” They also told him about the ongoing debate by which they struggle to find a balance between maintaining the best of the old traditions, and mixing them with the more modern trends. But being the Jew that he is, Pipes ignores the speculative mistake he made five years ago, and repeats it by again seeing something inherently evil in something that is inherently good. In this vein, he says that the Party of Erdogan (AKP) softly coerces “the population to be more virtuous, traditional, pious, religious conservative, and moral.” Who is he talking about? Is it Santorum? Is it Huckabee? Were these people coercing the population when they ran to be president of America?

The idiot then administers to himself the deathblow by making one statement at the end of a paragraph, by making an opposite statement at the start of the next paragraph, and by ending the article with something that contradicts the entire premise of his presentation. If this sounds too stupid a mistake for someone to make it, check it out yourself. Here is how he ends one paragraph: “Put in terms of Turkish Airlines, pork is already gone, and it's a matter of time until the alcohol also disappears.” And here is how he begins the next paragraph: “Islamic practice, not Islamic law, is the goal, my interlocutors told me.” And here is how he ends the article: “Erdogan possibly will win enough … power … to achieve his dream and fully implement sharia.”

Stupid but mind goggling in that it was possible for someone to make it. Consider now that this sort of toxic rubbish has been the steady diet that was fed to the American media for nearly half a century absent a push back to mitigate the damage being inflicted on a steady basis during all these years.

Now you know why – try as they may – neither the New York Times nor the Wall Street Journal could write an editorial on the Middle East that would sound normal. It is that massive doses of toxicity have been injected in their systems for too long.

You can only pity them for their handicap and hope that America, as a country, would recover from the damage that the Jew has caused it, and get back into the mainstream of civilized behavior.