Subtle is creative, but deceptively subtle is not

Here is an example that should be taught by teachers of creative writing as a style that must be avoided. It is a New York Times editorial that came under the title: “Mr. Netanyahu's Holocaust Blunder,” published on October 23, 2015 in that publication.

The essential element of the story which the editors are tackling is that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel – being the brainless attack dog that he is – did what he always does which is to attack the person he chooses to be his hated competitor for the day. The last time before now that Netanyahu did this, he targeted President Barack Obama of the United States of America and challenged him. This time, he chose to go after President Mahmoud Abbas of Palestine.

What Netanyahu did, according to the editors of the Times, is that he made this claim: “a Palestinian man persuaded Adolf Hitler to exterminate the Jews of Europe.” The editors called the claim outrageous, and advised that “the Holocaust is not a history to tamper with.” But that's not all they did in this botched attempt at writing creatively in a style that is subtle without being sublime.

What the editors tried to do is avoid what the rabbis did some time ago when a Jew went into a mosque in occupied Palestine and machine-gunned something like four dozen Muslim worshipers. Instead of coming right out and condemning the act, the rabbis who were in charge of the Jewish propaganda machine, tried to justify it by describing the perpetrator as an ordinary man, even a noble one who cracked under pressure and went berserk because the people of Palestine were resisting the occupation. They refused to accept it, and rejected the idea of learning to live with it, said the rabbis in a style that employed little or no subtleties.

Well, the editors of the New York Times, who are driven by that same mentality, wrote a piece that achieves the same objective but does it in a deceptively subtle way. Still, like the stink that cannot be masked by any measure you employ against it, the attempt of the Times editors remains as transparent and as obnoxious as the rabbis' work of an earlier time. The first thing that the editors did is reject the Netanyahu claim. They did so not because it is the view of a despicable war criminal that's seeking to monetize a lie, but because tampering with the history of the Holocaust is not a good idea, they advise.

Oh yes, the editors did absolve the Palestinians of the Netanyahu accusation by arguing against its very premise. But the idea to do so is one that was formulated some time ago by thinkers who were endowed with an IQ higher than that of Netanyahu. They reasoned that if the Holocaust is turned into a shared responsibility between the Germans and the Palestinians, the Jews will have to return half the compensation money they received from the Germans, and go after the Palestinians. But since the Palestinians have nothing, the Jews will collect nothing. It was therefore concluded by the Jewish Establishment that it is better to shut up and be fed than blurt out nonsense and go hungry.

All of those considerations paved the way for the editors of the New York Times to begin a process akin to that of the rabbis of yore. They tried in their clumsy way to justify Netanyahu's accusation to the effect that an Arab pushed the idea of exterminating the Jews on Hitler. What follows is a montage of the way that they approached this attempt. It is one that is subtle but not so high-minded as to be sublime:

“Mr. Netanyahu's evident intent was to drive home the idea that the current wave of violence has been incited by Palestinian leaders. Palestinian attackers have murdered at least eight Israelis in multiple attacks and more than 50 Palestinians have been killed. Mr. Abbas and other Fatah leaders not only have failed to denounce the knife attacks, but have made comments that seemed to fan the violence and even celebrate the killers. John Kerry called for an end to the violence but for that to happen, Mr. Abbas and the Palestinian leadership must make clear that these terrorist attacks are unacceptable.”

Of course, the editors know that for Abbas and other leaders to say that something is unacceptable; will not motivate third generation youngsters under occupation to listen to them. So then, why are the editors calling for it? They are for the same reason that the rabbis of yesteryear justified the crimes of the Jews by describing the perpetrators as good people who were forced to commit extreme acts by a Palestinian population that refused to enjoy the occupation, and never thanked the Jews for it.

This style of writing tells the readers they are looking at an American journalistic culture that used to impress but has been affected by a parasitic virus which is rotting it at the core. The infection is making it stink so badly, it cannot be masked by any measure you employ against it. The only way to get rid of the disease is to amputate the affected areas cold turkey.

Stop dreaming the impossible Dream

Imagine yourself dreaming that you won the lottery ... the one that carries a prize in the hundreds of millions of dollars. You now live in a mansion, and you own several businesses that pay you a million dollars a week in salary. You have a security ring around the mansion that nobody can penetrate. You also employ a team of henchmen whom you use to go after your enemies and your competitors.

Your neighbor, who lives in a small house, is the kid you grew up with. He was bigger than you; stronger, better looking, richer … and he had all the girls coming to him when you couldn't find one that would date you. So now that you have all this money, you make yourself look bigger than you really are; also strong and good looking. As a bonus, the girls come to you not because of the money you have but because, they say, you have a charming personality. And this is why you spend all that money on them.

You instruct your henchmen to go after the neighbor and ruin his life without leaving a trace that would cause him to suspect you, or lead a police investigation to your doorstep. And one day, that neighbor of yours – the old “friend” you always hated – comes to you and begs for help. He needs a job, he says, and he needs your protection because someone, he doesn't know who, is after him. So you take the opportunity to humiliate him by putting down conditions you know he cannot meet.

And just before he gets down to his knees, you wake up to the sound of your clock-radio. You hear a strange kind of talk coming out that thing. It is a talk that makes you believe you're still dreaming. You wipe your eyes but the talk persists. You turn off the radio and run to the living room where you turn on the TV. And there, in full color, you see your miserable neighbor being interviewed live in front of his house because he just won the lottery of millions you were dreaming about.

It would be cruel if this happened, would it not? Well, the reality is that something like it just happened on the world stage. The dreamers are the Jews who dreamed about an Israel that was so powerful it could blow Iran past the horizon with a simple wave of the finger. But now that the dreamers woke up from their self-induced dream, they are discovering that it is Iran which is bigger, stronger, more attractive and richer than Israel. It is also Iran that has the businesses of the world flocking to it. And all this is happening at a time when Israel is failing in its effort to prevent the world from boycotting it.

You'll get a sense of what the dreaming Jews are feeling now that Israel has been unmasked as the pauper nation of the world, when you read Benny Avni's article which came under the title: “Why Obama will let Iran violate the nuke deal,” published on October 21, 2015 in the New York Post.

Now that the Jews in Israel and elsewhere have waken up from their deep sleep, you find them whine the fact that on Oct. 10, Iran tested a “medium-range ballistic missile inherently capable of delivering a nuclear weapon.” The irony is that decades previous to that, the Israelis had borrowed a rocket and a satellite from the US, launching them into space from Israel. And the Jews around the world celebrated the event with loud fanfare as if Israel had produced the satellite and the rocket.

They who had conned the World into believing they possessed an arsenal of nuclear weapons ready to drop on their enemies – now sought to make the Arab and Muslim worlds believe that Israel mass produced the rocket that took the satellite into space. And they warned their imagined enemies with these words: “think of what else we can do with that rocket.”

Now that these folks have waken up you can imagine what they must be feeling as they read Benny Avni's assertion: “The Iranians are not shaking in their boots. The mullahs published images that depict an array of shiny-looking missiles stashed in a deeply dug tunnel, awaiting launch command.”

The poor buggers thought that Israel was the juggernaut that made the neighbors tremble, but found that Israel is the one that's trembling. Why is that? Because “America has no intention of toppling Khamenei's clerical system.” Worse, Obama is “striking a deal that enhances Iran's financial and military capabilities.”

This is why Avni and all those like him hope that “the next president [of the US] will at least give Khamenei reason to be paranoid about regime change.” What a pathetic bunch!

War Crimes by deliberate Jewish Ambiguities

They banged their heads against the wall, they pulled their hairs off their skulls, they beat their breasts to a pulp and they tore their entrails out of their bellies hollering they were innocent of the charge that they intended to change the status of al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied Jerusalem.

They even called on President Abbas of Palestine and President Obama of the United States to come out and say they knew for certain that Israel was not planning to change the status of the mosque. No less than Benjamin Netanyahu went on television to deny that charge, and to accuse President Abbas of perpetrating a lie. He did so as Prime Minister of Israel despite the fact that his local propaganda machine and the one in America were preparing public opinion in the two places to accept a fait accompli on its way to become a reality.

This is the game of ambiguities that the Jews rely on when they have war crimes in the planning stage. From one side of the mouth they pave the way to unleash an escalating horror on the innocent; from the other side of the mouth, they try to convince someone prominent to absolve them of what they are about to do … making him believe that this will do some good but not telling him what repugnance they are about to let loose.

This is what the Jews have tried to pull off in the occupied territories as shown by the example of David French's article, published on October 13, 2015 in National Review online under the title: “Palestinian Reasoning: Yield to our Crazy Religious Intolerance or We'll kill You,” and critiqued on this website in an article that came under the title: “This Lawyer has gone Banana.”

In that article, David French articulated the lawyer's point of view with this argument: “The holy compound in Jerusalem, a place revered by Jews and Muslims … According to security arrangement [the law] dating back to 1967, the site, while open to Jewish visitors at specific times, is sealed off to non-Muslim prayer … Let's be clear – this is crazed, anti-Semitic religious intolerance, and Israelis are expected to 'respect' this intolerance.”

Now, a week later and despite the dozens of people who were killed, and the thousands who were injured, the war criminals in occupied Jerusalem are still at it. They are trying to justify what they did, and trying to whitewash what they plan to do next. This time, they summoned to the occupied city of Christians and Muslims, Clifford D. May, the Jewish president of the joint they call Foundation for Defense of Democracies – to come and articulate the jokers' point of view.

Clifford May responded to the request with an article he wrote under the title: “Cutthroats of the Holy Land” and the subtitle: “A spate of Palestinian knife attacks shows why peace remains elusive.” It was published on October 29, 2015 in The Washington Times. After listing the lies, the spins and the talking points that usually go into the articles written by members of the comical outfit, May started telling the story of Moshe Dayan, the Israeli General that was in charge of negotiating the Mosque's fate with the Jordanian authorities. He wrote this: “considering Islamic sensitivities, he decided that Jews should not pray there.”

In fact, that was the accord which Dayan and the Jordanians haggled over for long periods of time and codified into an ironclad agreement. But after spinning that history in a manner that suited him, Clifford May resorted to a sleight of hand reminiscent of the David French trick.

He went on to say this: “It was a concession Israeli officials have no intention of revoking. But ask yourself: While it may be inadvisable to open this sacred site to non-Muslim worshipers, should it really be unthinkable? How can there be progress toward a peaceful coexistence if Palestinian leaders believe the very idea of Jews and Muslims praying side by side justifies...”

What Clifford May has done here is kill two birds with one stone. First, he played the role of the humble petitioner that's appealing to the human side of the readers in the name of Arab-Jewish peaceful coexistence. Second, he left the door open for the unthinkable to become thinkable. That is, he signaled the Jewish rejection of what the Israelis have agreed to in 1967.

In fact, this approach is so typically Jewish, it falls in the category of “what's mine is mine, and what's yours is debatable.” You see it in practice when a ruling comes down in their favor and they seek to make it irrevocable. In contrast, they work to repeal every ruling they deem is no longer favorable to them. It's what they are trying to do with the al-Aqsa deal. They want the world to know they will work on it till they get it reversed or till hell freezes over, whichever comes first.

Meanwhile, the government of Israel will continue to provoke incidents such as the one that's ongoing at this time. It will escalate the encounters that result between the unarmed Palestinians and the armed-to-the-teeth Israelis. And the soldiers of occupation will be instructed to kill as many Palestinians as possible so that the rest will decide to submit in defeat, and hand the mosque to the Jews.

It is either this, says Clifford May, or Jewish tolerance “becomes more akin to submission.” The aim here is to tell Jews everywhere in the world that the battle has come down to Palestinians submitting to the will of the Jews, or the Jews submitting to the will of the Palestinians. There is no compromise here as the sheep-like petitioner that used to appeal to the human side of the readers in the name of Arab-Jewish peaceful coexistence, has finally revealed his wolf-like canines.

That's because “peaceful coexistence” is a product that the Jews fabricate in abundance by the muscles of their Jaws – and only that. They sell the product; they pocket the money and they run away before the buyer discovers how fake and useless it is.

The reality is that the Jews enter every battle with the attitude of “it is either us or them. We win absolutely or we lose absolutely because there is no room for the two of us.” So far the Jews lost every battle they instigated ... but like masochists, they have come back for more, and nothing says they will win this time.

Mutilating History by Truncation

An effective tool in the hands of propaganda wonks is the mutilation of history by truncation, and the Jews are the experts in the use of this trick. They play it like a magician, and they score victories they do not deserve before the absurdity of their game becomes apparent to the victims who unfortunately find it almost impossible to clarify the situation and expose the truth.

To see how this works in practice, we need to be aware that a dispute which remains small and contained, or one that escalates to endanger more than the original antagonists, has an absolute beginning and a number of secondary ones; the latter being what causes the cycle of fits and starts in a long running fight. To use their trick effectively, the propaganda wonks truncate history by starting the narration at a secondary start; one that suits them best – while avoiding the absolute beginning of the story.

For example, the disturbances that flared-up recently in occupied Palestine can be thought of as having started two weeks ago when the government of Israel allowed fanatic Jews to desecrate a Muslim holy site known as Al-Aqsa Mosque. That act coincided with Jewish demands that were floated in writing, both in Israel and abroad, to the effect that the 48 year-old agreement which forbids the Jews from doing what they did – must be scrapped.

That was a sure way to get the Palestinians to come out bare handed and defend the site. When this happened, the Jewish soldiers of occupation responded harshly, thus invited a more robust Palestinian response. This being what the Jews wanted, the army of occupation escalated the battle to a more savage level. And this is when the Jewish propaganda machine was put to work making the Palestinians look like the aggressive civilians who started the fight simply because they wanted to hurt the Israeli soldiers who had no choice but to respond by cutting down the Palestinians with live bullets.

As can be seen, when the Jews play this sort of game – which they do all the time, and start the narration at the point when the Palestinians respond to Jewish provocations – an important element of the real story gets lost. It is the answer to the following questions: Who started the fight and why? The effect is that absent those answers, history researchers get confused as to what has motivated each antagonist. This leaves the field wide open for the propaganda wonks to make-up a story that paints the Palestinians as the culprits, and ascribe to them the worst of motives.

One such propaganda wonk is Victor Davis Hanson. His latest work came under the title: “Moral Equivalence in the Middle East,” published on October 20, 2015 in National Review Online. He begins the article by mentioning Arab youth attacking Israelis without even hinting that there might have been a reason for their behavior. In fact, he does not mention Al-Aqsa Mosque – not once throughout the article.

This being the most convenient place from which to start his narration, Hanson goes on to denigrate the Koran which is the Muslim prayer book. He also criticizes the “Obama State Department” for condemning the use of excessive force by Israeli soldiers. And he suggests that America should stop aiding the Palestinians who receive half a billion dollars a year as opposed to the3 billions, or maybe 5 billions that go to Israel.

But there is something more important to Hanson and the Jewish propaganda machine … and he wants to bring it out here and now. Having called the Palestinians terrorists, he asks the question: “Why is the Obama administration morally incapable of calling out Palestinian violence?” And he says there are two reasons. One is that the Obama Middle East policies are in shambles. That's bad, he says, but there is something that's far worse, which is his second reason.

What he says in this regard is something he has been working on for a long while. It is his description of what he calls the postmodern culture into which America is sliding. He does not like it one bit because it runs contrary to the precepts upon which the Jewish culture stands. He does not come right out and say so, but speaks of the “relativist assumptions about human nature” that are plaguing Americans, leading them to believe that “the Westernized world is no longer threatened in any existential fashion.”

You see, my friend, he wants to scare the people of America in the same way that the Jewish leaders scare the rank and file to better control them. You could say he is working to judaicize the American culture more than it is already.

The Chain Reaction of their Delusions

Decade after decade, the Israelis, the Jewish establishment worldwide and the Jewish lobby in America worked hand in hand to convince the Western powers – and when they could, the Eastern powers – to deny the nations of the Middle East the ability to develop economically, technologically and scientifically.

The Jews felt it was necessary for them to adopt that attitude, and do what they did because – motivated as they were by the religious belief that humanity is evil at its core – they were ignorant enough, fearful enough, hateful enough and delusional enough to judge that what was good for the others was going to be detrimental to Israeli interests, if not Israel's existence … and by extension Jewish existence.

And much of what happened in the region since that time, has been influenced by the attitudes that were adopted towards it by the West generally, America specifically, and the East incidentally. This is history now, and no one can tell for certain how the Middle East would have developed absent those foreign interferences. The “what if” approach to writing history is better left to fiction writers.

What we can tell, however, or perhaps imagine with a high degree of certainty, is what will continue to happen if the Israelis, the Jewish establishment worldwide and the Jewish lobby in America, continue to have the success that they had in the past. To put it simply, the region will descend into a more frightening hellhole than the one in which it finds itself at this time.

In fact, this is the game that the Jews kept trying to play recently. Fortunately, however, they were having a hard time succeeding because people everywhere are beginning to realize that the evil which the Jews thought was at the core of humanity motivating it to do bad things, is the evil that was discovered to be motivating the Jews themselves. And this is a condition that remains so tenacious; they cannot be cured of it. They will resist you and fight you to death if you try to exorcise them of it. They, and that evil, are one and the inseparable same.

The drama – or perhaps the melodrama – which used to be played out hush-hush in the past, has recently exploded on the world stage. It happened during the past two years as each of the various characters tried to play a constructive role negotiating the Iran nuclear deal. The exception has been the Jewish character which hung on to its evil tradition, and played the role of spoiler but lost in the end.

The Iran nuclear deal has been signed, sealed and delivered by all sides, and the time has come for the Israelis, the Jewish establishment worldwide and the Jewish lobby in America to lament, wail and cry their eyes out over the spilled milk of their desire to see the destruction of others, and rejoice at the pathetic delusion that Jews will be safe only when surrounded by the weak and the dispossessed.

You can sense, feel, even see in your mind's eye the distress signals that these people exude when someone in the region – be it a foe or a friend – takes a step towards modernization. A short and succinct example is the editorial that came under the title: “Nuclear chain reaction” and the subtitle: “As the Iran deal is formalized, the region begins changing for the worse.” It appeared on October 19, 2015 in the New York Daily News.

You do not need a PhD in philosophy to see that what these people pretended to stand against was not the potential for weapons of mass destruction to proliferate in the region; it was the potential for the nations of the region to enter the modern age riding a new economy, new technologies and a more advanced science.

Look what they say was the intent of the Western powers as expressed by President Obama: “to ensure Iran fully fulfills each and every one of its commitments.” Look what they are moaning about now: “Saudi Arabia has plans to build 16 [civilian] nuclear reactors.” They went from Iran the foe to Saudi Arabia the “friend,” from nuclear weapons to power generation. They lied about their intentions because of one reason: They are Jewish.

Two or three generations from now, the fossil fuels that were discovered in that region in abundance, will be exhausted. Brought by their riches to the gates of the modern era, those nations – including Saudi Arabia – are planning to fuel their future with nuclear energy. This is what the Jews wanted to arrest, and this is where humanity arrested them. They are whining, and the world is no longer impressed with their crocodile tears.

She can hear a Palestinian Marseillaise

The deputy foreign minister of Israel, who goes by the name Tzipi Hotovely, is trying to tell us that the Palestinians are unique in the sense that they have an ongoing love affair with what she calls the culture of death. But instead of doing that, she ended up demonstrating that the Palestinians are similar to the rest of the human race in the sense that they have an ongoing love affair with freedom.

Hotovely made her views known in an article she wrote under the title: “Abbas: We Welcome Every Drop of Blood Spilled in Jerusalem,” and the subtitle: “Palestinian leaders have created a culture of death that is motivating the latest violent terrorism.” It was published in the Wall Street Journal on October 19, 2015.

She begins by accusing the Palestinian leaders of explicitly calling for the spilling of blood, and that the current cycle of clashes in the West Bank of occupied Palestine is a well-orchestrated campaign by those leaders. She ignores the talk that is emanating from her own government to the effect that the clashes are caused by what they call self-motivated lone wolves with no one to organize them.

The government source further explains that such loners are inspired by material they gather from social media. To counter this revelation, Hotovely seeks to buttress her argument – which she must know is false and absurd – by saying that Palestinian children are taught to kill Jews, and taught to regard their own death as the pinnacle of their aspirations. Well, there is only one thing to say about that:

It appears that the lady was reading the words of the French national anthem known as La Marseillaise before writing her piece or maybe while writing it. She must have been impressed by this passage: “Arise, children of the motherland, the day of glory has arrived. Bloody banner is raised; they are coming to cut the throats of our sons and our women. Form your battalions; let an impure blood water our furrows. To arms, citizens...” And so she attributed to the Palestinians the revolutionary fervor expressed in those words.

Still, conscious of the fact that the Palestinians she is talking about are of the third generation, born and raised under the influence of the Jewish culture imposed on the Palestinians for half a century; Hotovely tries to place the blame for what the children have become, not on the roots of the Jewish culture, but the roots of the Palestinian culture. And so, she says this: “Such violence has deep roots. It goes back to the rampages at the behest of Haj Amin al-Husseini, a Muslim activist and at one point grand mufti of Jerusalem, in the 1920s, '30s and '40s.”

This forces the question: Why not Che Guevara? Better yet why not Maxmillien Marie de Robespierre? After all, these were great revolutionaries who actually achieved independence for their people … unlike al-Husseini who lost the Palestinian motherland to the Jewish hordes that came from the sea. But like they say: Ask me no question and I shall tell you no lie.

Convinced by now that she made a brilliant presentation, the deputy foreign minister of Israel takes on the international media for failing to see things her way. This is how she does that: “The apathy shown by the international community and the manner in which violence is treated by the media is doing long-term, irrevocable harm to generations of Palestinians.”

Note that she says she wants to media to change and get better – not to benefit the occupation which is her only motivation – but to benefit future Palestinian generations about whom she could not care less. Like they say, hypocrisy comes without shame but always reveals something new about its practitioner. This time it is revealing that the Israelis have no intention to end the occupation and get out of Palestine.

Immersed in a fantasy-land that delivers all that she wants for now, an important concept escapes her. It is that Israel's soldiers who may be criminals in the eyes of Palestinians are heroes in the eyes of the Israelis. When they die while on duty, they are honored by their government. Likewise, when Palestinians who may be called terrorists by the Israelis are honored like heroes by their people.

Thus, she complains that the Palestinian families of dead heroes receive a stipend, and that monuments are named after them. And so, she wants the world community to do something about it. If not compensation, these people always want the others to do something for them. They are hopeless.

Blue Smoke, Mirrors and the Fog of War

It is said that the first casualty of war is the truth. That's because there are two ways to miscarry the truth. There is the deliberate way, which is done with the use of blue smoke and mirrors. And there is the inadvertent way which is caused by the fog of war.

Parts of the Middle East are in turmoil at this time, and much has happened that can be studied to help us put those two realities in perspective. Now, as before, the Jewish propaganda machine has exploded what may be called a cluster bomb of lies over America. These are the same blue smoke and mirrors which, for several decades, have been shaping America's views about the Middle East. Having monopolized the public square in the absence of the social media of today, the Jews excluded all opposition from the square while spewing massive amounts of lies, something they did around the clock ... throughout the years ... decade after decade.

Had there been an honest “freedom of speech” in America during the past half century, we would not be discussing the situation in occupied Palestine the way that we do today. It would have been pointed out that when Jewish grandmothers and babies are taken into a war zone where they can get hurt or killed, the responsibility for their fate falls on the shoulders of those who sent them there, not on the Palestinians who do not want them on their property. And this would have been the end of discussion the way that discussions have ended with regard to South Africa and the former Zimbabwe.

If you find it difficult to believe this, recall what happened when Israel bombed a UN post in South Lebanon, killing scores of peacekeepers. The post was populated by Canadians, among others, sent there by their government to observe a ceasefire and report on violations if and when they happened. Well, the bombing of the place is what happened, and when the Prime Minister of Canada was advised of same, he blurted out: “What were they [Canadian peacekeepers] doing there? Don't they know there is an ongoing war?” And that was the end of this discussion. But if a Prime Minister can imply that his soldiers asked for what befell them and were responsible for it, ask yourself: what can be said about grandmothers and babies that were sent into a war zone by their Israeli government?

Alas, when it comes to Jews, the discussion does not end here. Despite the fact that not a single question of those that were asked of reporters by their TV anchors (regular and cable) was put to them without a preamble that portrayed the Israelis as victims and the Palestinians as aggressors – the Jewish pundits and their echo repeaters have been spilling rivers of tears because, they say, the “mainstream” media is biased against Israel. And they undertook to deliver tons of spoken and written sermons to explain their point of view.

Two examples illustrate the difference between the deliberate use of smoke and mirrors to miscarry the truth, and the inadvertent miscarrying of it when the fog of war plays a role. The first example is what happened during the last Israeli assault on Gaza, a time when scores of innocent people were bombed in their homes, on the beaches and in schools operated by UN personnel. Israel and its American supporters blamed the mishaps on the victims because they opined that civilians had no business being close to military installations. They said this, knowing that Gaza is an overpopulated small territory where no place can be remote enough to avoid the explosive force of 500 pound bombs.

Several investigations are ongoing to determine if war crimes were committed by Israeli commanders, but that's not the focus of this discussion. Of interest to us at this time are the walls of smoke and mirrors that were erected to paint the Palestinians as the architects of their own misery. The Jewish logic being that the Palestinians were to blame for staying in their homes when the Jewish aggressors came to bomb them. But the reality was that the bombing turned the entire Gaza strip into a war zone, a place from which grandmothers and babies could not escape.

Note that when people are killed – deliberately or inadvertently – the incident becomes a mistake that cannot be corrected because dead people cannot be resurrected.

Now contrast that reality with the incident which the Jewish propaganda machine is using to argue that the mainstream media is biased against Israel. It happened that a reporter for MSNBC was in occupied Jerusalem when a Palestinian young man came running, and was shot dead by the Israelis. He fell to the ground, and the reporter said he could see neither a knife nor a gun in his hand. But the camera never blinks – like says Dan Rather's book – and a replay of the scene with freeze-frame showed that the young man had a knife in the hand before falling to the ground. Well, that was a minor mistake on the part of the reporter, something that resulted from the fog of war. It was corrected instantly, and no one was hurt but the ego of the reporter.

Note that the mistake in this case was made inadvertently, that no one got hurt or killed in the process, and that it was corrected. Such mistakes happen all the time in the fog of war, and they are fixed if not instantly, after a while.

The upshot of all this is that time after time, what happened as a result of Israeli mistakes, is that Palestinians were killed, and the Jews erected walls of smoke and mirrors to argue that it was the fault of the victims. But when – as a result of the fog of war – someone said something that turned out to be exaggerated or false, the Jews and their echo-repeaters blew their entrails out of their bellies, hollering their pain at a media they accused of being biased … even after the media corrected their mistakes, and no one got hurt in the process.

If you don’t mind the gruesome spectacle of seeing entrails blown out of their bellies, watch Fox News. If you want to visualize the phenomenon as you read the sopping articles, read the right wing publications – some of which are delivered electronically before they come out in hard copy. They all sound the same because they all repeat the refrains handed to them by the Jewish propaganda machine.