A Thought Experiment to end his Head scratching

Kevin D. Williamson wrote a piece to say that he has a problem he cannot solve despite the scratching of the head he's been doing. And so, with all the sincerity that I can muster, I promise I'll try to help him relieve the agonizing itch that's plaguing his skull.

You can read all about his problem by consulting the column he wrote under the title: “Head-Scratchers,” and the subtitle: “There are things in the news that I find genuinely difficult to understand.” The column was published on August 15, 2019 in National Review Online.

To benefit from the help which I propose to offer him, Kevin Williamson will have to cooperate in the process of healing his malady. The first thing he needs to do, is ignore for a moment, the sensations plaguing the outer layer of his skull. He should concentrate instead, on energizing the gray matter that's inside the skull. What he needs to do is engage his brain, and have it perform an exercise known as thinking. In fact, there are several forms of thinking, one being the art of imagining.

Of the things which are often imagined, one is called “thought experiment.” My purpose in getting Kevin Williamson to engage in the art of imagining, is to have him experiment with a theoretical situation that will help him understand what he says has been difficult for him to understand. In fact, he was good enough to state his problem as follows:

“We all are apparently expected to clutch our pearls because the government of Israel has, in accordance with its law, declined to host Representatives Ilhan Omar (D., Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (D., Mich.) that had planned to visit Israel”.

What I want Kevin Williamson to imagine, is an Arab or a Muslim country having a diplomatic or financial or military relation with America that is beneficial to both sides. One day, without warning, the Arab or Muslim country tells a Congressional delegation made of members in charge of foreign or financial or military affairs –– it cannot come into the country to see for itself what the country's leaders are doing with the goodwill and material benefits that America bestows on them.

What do you think will happen? Will Kevin Williamson and those like him be scratching their heads? Or will they explode their bellies, hollering with deafening rage the refrain: Cut every ounce of diplomatic, financial and military relations we have with these Stone Age, savage beasts?

Now think what would happen if Israel, and not an Arab or a Muslim country, did something like that to an ordinary, nondescript Congressional delegation. Will Kevin Williamson be scratching his head, or will he behave differently? Alternatively, think what would happen if Israel did it to Lindsey Graham, Liz Cheney, Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz. Will Kevin Williamson explode his belly, hollering the refrain: Cut every ounce of diplomatic, financial and military relations we have with these Stone Age, savage beasts? Or will he be scratching his head?

Once Kevin Williamson has answered those questions, he should take a good look at himself and all those like him. Are they patriots or have they sold their souls for a fistful of Benjamins … money that is theirs to begin with, but was relinquished to those who falsely claim adherence to a regime of dual citizenship, but remain loyal only to Israel, holding an American passport for convenience and nothing else?

After going through the thought experiment, and having digested the information it has yielded, will Kevin Williamson finally see the light? Will he then determine that neither his lethargy nor the violent engagement of those who complain about the Jews replacing them, will liberate America of the Jewish tyranny that was imposed on him and his people for decades?

After making that determination, will Kevin Williamson accept the reality that if salvation were to come to America, it will be brought by hyphenate Americans of the Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar kind; women of steel endowed with the spirit, the self-respect and the fervent desire to live a free and dignified life? When this happens, America will, in fact, have achieved the kind of life, its founding fathers dreamed of but feared that a generation of Kevin Williamsons and Donald Trumps, will not be able to keep.

It must be said in closing that none of this negates the reality that some things are happening in America which can lead to the scratching of the head. For example, how is it that the president of the United States has urged the prime minister of Israel to change his mind and block two congressmen from entering Israel to see for themselves what the scandal-prone leaders of that sorry place are doing with the billions of Benjamins they receive each year from America?

Come to think of it, those two clowns seem intent on realizing the prediction that was enunciated about the end of history –– but do it in reverse.

That is, instead of the world living permanently under a triumphant Liberal Democracy, it will have discovered that Democracy was turned into a weapon of mass deception, used by charlatans who will stage the periodic bread and circus shows known as election, thus put the useless in power, and the productive out of power.

Has Kevin Williamson stopped scratching his head? If he did, maybe he should start again, but scratch for a different reason this time.

A simplistic Argument to impress the Simpletons

Do you want to know how the politicos of the Washington Beltway are made to pounce on every bone that the Jewish lobby throws in their direction?

If your answer is yes, you may want to read the article that came under the title: “In Afghanistan, no deal is better than a bad deal,” and the subtitle: “To trust the Taliban would be naive and foolish.” It was written by Clifford D. May, and published on August 13, 2019 in The Washington Times.

What the writer wants to accomplish in this article is what he has fantasized about all his adult life. It is to have the “West,” led by America, launch a Judeo-Christian war against Islam, and make it a fight to the death. His view is that either the Muslims will be vanquished and the Jews will take over the world. Or America will be beaten to a pulp and the world will live under Islamic Sharia Law.

And so, Clifford May used the excuse of a new initiative that's in the works with regard to America's war in Afghanistan –– to highlight and promote the points which, if implemented, would lead to the outcome of his fantasy. And this is where the reader can get a sense of the simplistic logic that appeals to the political mind of simpletons. These being the characters that got to where they stand by going through years of trial by fire, a grueling exercise that turns them into a piece of rotting dead meat, your dog would not want to eat.

It is important to filter out Clifford May's unnecessary verbiage, and pick out the essential parts of his presentation to better focus on the core of his message. This is done in the paragraphs that follow. You'll see Clifford May introduce his narrative. From there, he proceeded to argue against having a peace agreement with the Taliban. He then backed-up the argument he had made for a perpetual American stay in Afghanistan. Convinced by now that he presented a solid case, he went overboard and asked for the moon.

So, here is how he introduced his narrative:

“Two years ago, Khalilzad praised Trump for adopting a realistic position regarding peace talks with the Taliban, moving away from Obama's pursuit of reconciliation. A year later, Khalilzad was appointed US Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation. He has adopted an unrealistic position, moving toward Obama's pursuit of reconciliation. Afghanistan is the longest battle in a very long war being waged against America and the West by Islamic supremacist groups and regimes”.

Here is how Clifford May started arguing against having a peace agreement with the Taliban:

“Khalilzad will soon announce a peace agreement with the Taliban. They will promise to cooperate against terrorism. The US will reduce its military presence in Afghanistan. What's the problem with that? The Taliban are committed to jihad, and their alliance with al Qaeda is ironclad. To take them at their word would be naive and foolish. We must verify. That requires a continuing military and intelligence presence in Afghanistan. Which implies reducing troop strength only if we see progress. Otherwise, Khalilzad should walk away”.

Here is how he backed-up the argument he had made for a perpetual American stay in Afghanistan:

“Gen. Petraeus and Vance Serchuk wrote that a military exit from Afghanistan would be ill-advised. The alternative they propose is accepting the necessity of a troop presence to safeguard US interests. The message would be clear: if the Taliban want peace and reconciliation, there's a path. If they seek America's defeat, retreat and humiliation, followed by a campaign to seize power, their ambitions will be frustrated”.

Convinced by now that he presented a good case, Clifford May went overboard and asked for the moon. Here is how he did that:

“A strategy for staying will allow us to maintain a base in Afghanistan for counterterrorism operations throughout South Asia. Petraeus and Serchuk add that the cost of retaining a few thousand troops in Afghanistan pales in comparison with the price the nation will pay if al Qaeda or ISIS rebuilds a terrorist platform there. On the diplomatic front, it's high time to get tough on Pakistani leaders”.

This is the theoretical construction of a narrative that works on America’s political types, and can be described in visual terms. You may think of it as a temple. What is striking about this temple, however, is that it has all the markings of a Jewish narrative, which may unsettle some folks.

To make it acceptable to an all-American audience, Clifford May felt he had to disguise it as a purely American discussion. He found that the best way to do this, was to wrap it with the American flag.

Since election time is a moment when the flag is celebrated, Clifford May found it opportune to associate his call for a never-ending war on Islam with the ongoing election campaign. This is how he did it:

“We're now in an election season. Trump can boast that he put the economy on a fast track. He also can say that his team is developing coherent policies for defending Americans around the world. He should tell Khalilzad that recycling Obama's policies is not how we make America great again”.

In the not too distant past, having no pushback from those who see the world differently, and having no history to show that this kind of presentation turned out to be a pie in the sky, America's tired, lazy and simple-minded politicians turned the entire American store over to the Jewish lobby, making it the effective driver of America's self-destructive foreign policy. And the rest is history.

Now you know what it is that continues to plague America, and cries out to be reversed.

A deviously bestowed antisemitic Kiss of Death

People who dabble in philosophy and similar disciplines use an effective trick to crack open the cases that prove hard to unpack and analyze. What they do is take the discussion to its absurd extreme, thus demonstrate that if the current conditions deteriorated further, nefarious consequences will ensue.

That's well and good in theory because you're only conducting a pedantic discussion. In fact, most of the time, a debate of this kind is carried-on like a written script in which all the twists and turns as well as the ending are predicted in advance. But what if some evil spirit decided to make life imitate art, and turn the imagined script into a real-life situation?

You're puzzled, I know. I don't blame you for thinking that I am setting you up because I intend to take a case to its absurd extreme and prove a point that's hard to make otherwise. Well, let me assure you, my friend, this is not my intention. The truth is that there is one such case unfolding right now in real life. The worst part is that it is a script that played itself many times before, always ending in hard to comprehend tragedies.

You'll find mention of that menagerie in the article that came under the title: “The rise of anti-Semitism on the left,” written by Marc A. Thiessen and published on August 13, 2019 in The Washington Post. Although the article is a politically motivated Right-wing hit job on the Left, the most important part of the discussion is the piece of information that's revealed at the start of the Thiessen article. Here is how it goes:

“Recently, the State Department revised its definition of anti-Semitism to include 'drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis' –– an apparent response to the rise of the anti-Israel BDS (Boycott, Divest and Sanctions) movement whose supporters routinely make such comparisons. That is a good thing”.

No, that's not a good thing. It is never a good thing for a government department to suppress the truth. More than anything else, suppressing the truth about Jewish destructive activities has been responsible for much of the calamities that have plagued this planet. It is the attitude that has led to pogroms and holocausts, affecting not only the Jews but all of the human race.

Such tragedies took place in response to the wars, calamities and hardships that humanity has suffered as a result of the destructive activities which the Jews never ceased to instigate since they came into existence. They believed then as they do now that they have a divine right to own the planet, and they promised never to stop generating mayhem till they get what they want … which will be never.

To get a sense of where we're going at this time, it helps to recall the words of the mob of Jewish pundits and commentators when they were making the point that Saddam Hussein's imaginary weapons of mass destruction (WMD) were causing the contemporary situation to look like the Nazi set-up in the year 1938.

Also recall the less than fully developed George W. Bush when he mouth-farted what the Jews had stuffed in his mouth: that a storm was gathering and we may all die under a mushroom cloud. As well, recall what happened after that. What happened was the invasion of Iraq, a monumental blunder that proved to be America's worst mistake. Its harrowing reverberations are still felt today in the Middle East and Europe, and will be felt for generations to come.

Now, the same Jews who caused that calamity in order to give Israel the right to annex Syrian and Palestinian lands the way that the Nazis annexed the Sudetenland in 1938 –– are the ones who inspired the American State Department to define anti-Semitism as being the discovery that Israel's behavior matches the behavior of the Nazis.

What the Jews are saying to the American people through their own State Department, is that no one can be stopped from discovering the truth but they will be punished if they spread that truth around. The idea is that of all the people in the world, only the Americans will pay a price if they refuse to shut up, choosing instead to “draw comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.” This is Jewish style American freedom as practiced in the land of the brave. Who are these people kidding?

This being a case of a real-life situation taken to its absurd extreme, we can only surmise that the contemporary Jewish demands will again push America to commit other worst mistakes. When enough of these mistakes will have accumulated, and the pressure will have gone past the point of endurance, the inevitable explosion will happen. And the world will have seen how the Jewish destructive cycle has repeated itself one more time.

For this reason, we cannot dismiss the thought that those at the State Department who embraced the Jewish idea and worked to implement it –– were not oblivious of those realities.

We must, therefore, suspect that these people took up the idea and acted on it because they wanted to see Hitler's Final Solution finally realized in America.

They pretended to embrace the Jews but gave them a devious kiss of death instead.

With Babbin cooking, this Dinner is not edible

Imagine a guy named Jed Babbin hired to work as dishwasher in a diner located in a remote desert-like area of the country. Sometimes when they get a busload of tourists, he helps the chef prepare the meals by doing simple chores like grinding the meat or peeling the potato.

Normally, the chef takes his days off during the tourist off-season, leaving precooked light meals and snacks in the freezer for the hotel staff and the cook to serve the occasional traveler that might come around and spend a night or two at the hotel. But then –– surprise, surprise –– on an off-season day when the chef was away, a busload of tourists came along to stay at the hotel for an extended period of time. And the staff told the cook he's the chef now.

Do you remember the story of the Sorcerer's Apprentice? At first, the kid made a mistake, and the more he tried to fix it, the more he worsened the situation. Well, almost the same thing happened to Jed Babbin … except that the real Babbin is not a dishwasher or a cook in a desert restaurant. He is a pundit who writes columns for the Washington Times. Something political happened, he stepped out of his element, and messed up royally. If you want a metaphoric image of how badly he messed up, think of the dishwasher trying to boil spaghetti in the oven, and baking bread on the stove.

Well then, go over Jed Babbin's latest column, and you'll see what I mean. The column came under the title: “The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions war against Israel,” and the subtitle: “Its first goal is to delegitimize Israel.” It was published on August 12, 2019 in the Washington Times.

The problem with Jed Babbin is that even though he began with an idea that is of his natural domain, he messed up because he had to go out of the domain to advocate for the idea. You'll tell what his domain is by the time you reach the end of the article. It reads like this: “If any Democrat is elected next year they will be under the influence of 'the Squad.'” As you can see, his domain is local American politics.

But to make a good case, Babbin needed energy, ideas and a strategy among other things. Well, he proved over the decades that he is adept at picking the facts of a situation, and producing what he needs to cobble together a piece that serves his purpose. But this time, the facts happened to be related to the “Squad,” and the most energy that the Squad has generated was in foreign policy … which is outside of Babbin's domain. And so, he went out of his domain to cook-up something he can serve to his readers.

That's what you see at the start of Babbin's column. You see it in the title, in the subtitle and in the first sentence of the column, which goes like this: “Ilhan Omar unveiled her plan to visit Israel, she also introduced a resolution that supported BDS that has, as its first goal, to delegitimize Israel”.

Well, having a start and a finish for his article was a good achievement already. But Babbin still needed to fill the middle of the column in a way that made sense. And that's when the dishwasher, working as a cook, couldn't tell the difference between the stove and the oven.

To sound like he is making a solid argument in favor of the Jews grabbing Palestine from its Palestinian owners, Jed Babbin invoked some of the legal points that pertain to the case. To that end, he mentioned the UN resolution that gave the Jews a homeland in Palestine. Aware that the partition of Palestine gave the Jews not even a tenth of what they eventually grabbed by force of arms –– all of which was condemned by the same UN that crated Israel –– Babbin had to do something.

To get around the difficulties, he invoked the right to self-determination, saying that the Jews must be allowed to have Palestine so that they can exercise self-determination. What he did not say, is that they cannot exercise that right in someone else's home. The Jews were given a home in what is known as the 1948 borders, and that's where they should have stayed. By going outside those borders, they denied the Palestinians their right to self-determination.

Having bastardized that legal argument, Babbin was forced to bastardize another legal argument to sustain the first. He mentioned the UN resolution that gave the Palestinians the “Right of Return.” He said that when the UN passed that resolution, there were only 700,000 Palestinian refugees. There are 6 million of them now. He went on to argue that if they were allowed into occupied Palestine, they will form a majority, thus deny the Jews the ethno-religious purity they wish to maintain in the apartheid state they have built.

Well, there were less than 50,000 Jews in Palestine when this whole thing began, and their number has increased to now count in the millions. So, nothing really has changed from the legal standpoint. The right of Palestinian return that was valid then, is valid today. But why would the world let this kind of garbage go on?

No, the world isn't doing that. It is speaking about the Palestinian case the way it did when Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) and South Africa were running similar sort of regimes. Whereas the apartheid governments of those two places advocated a political and military sort of push-back against the world, the world responded with a BDS kind of movement that ultimately triumphed over the two racist entities.

This is what the world is doing now with regard to Israel's political and military push-back that is exercised in the Middle East by Israel, and articulated in the Jewish influenced press of North America.

The world is implementing a BDS movement against Israel, and the Jews are doing badly as you can see by the fact that Jed Babbin could do no better than boil spaghetti in the oven and bake bread on the stove. His meal is not fit for human consumption.

The self-Deception that keeps on deceiving

Once again, the Jewish cycle has come to the point of intersection where the Jews will have to make a choice between living like the rest of humanity, or renewing the claim that they tower supremely above everyone else, thus deserving of special treatment.

This is the point in the cycle when the Jews always made the fatal claim of touting their supremacy, a move that sent them into the arms of a pogrom or a holocaust century after century. Seeing them standing at that intersection, makes you wonder which choice they will make. While their leaders seem to rush headlong into repeating the pattern that sent their flock into the ocean of bottomless abyss, the rank-and-file seem willing to push back against the leaders like they never did before.

The struggle between the Jewish leaders and the rank-and-file is a new phenomenon. As well, both the political and cultural settings in which the drama is unfolding are different from the past. Thus, we cannot rely on history to tell us how the drama will develop or where it will end. All we can do is rely on our instinct to tell us how human beings might behave under the prevailing conditions, and surmise how some people will react to the unfolding events, and how other people might respond.

Two articles published recently will help us understand what the Jewish leaders are doing, as they try to convince the rank-and-file they should follow their instructions. One article came under the title: “Paradoxes of the Middle East: A Frequently Asked Questions,” written by Eugene Veklerov and published on August 11, 2019 in the American Thinker. The other article came under the title: “It was a tough July for congressional anti-Semitism,” written by Jack Rosen, who is president of the American Jewish Congress, and published on August 12, 2019 in the Washington Examiner.

Eugene Veklerov began by laying out the premise of his article: “The older [Jewish] people tend to support Israel, whereas the younger people tend to view Israel negatively.” And so, to convince the younger Jewish generation that it should be more sympathetic toward Israel, Veklerov proposed to do the following: “The purpose of this piece is to list a few dry and well-established facts with little or no commentary.” He went on to list the frequently asked questions, and gave what he says are fact-based answers.

So, you go through the list of Q and A, and realize how loaded they all are with deception. In fact, the first Q and A sets the tone for all that follows. Understanding the trick employed by the writer with the first Q and A, gives a clear indication as to how deceptively the entire piece was put together. Here is what Veklerov did:

Q: Did Jews immigrate to what is now Israel as a result of WWII?

A: No. Jews have always lived in the Middle East … During the period 1850-1875 more Jews than Muslims lived in Jerusalem.

What's wrong with that? What's wrong is that the question points to a serious legal and moral concept, whereas the answer points to something that's trivial and irrelevant. The point of the question is that the Jews made a mess of their lives during the centuries that they lived in Europe, a sojourn that culminated in the Holocaust. This resulted in the Palestinians paying the price for the Jewish misbehavior and the Nazi overreaction to that misbehavior. This is unacceptable morally and legally in any civilized culture.

Now look at the answer that Veklerov gave to that question. First, he began with an assertion that's totally irrelevant. He said this: “Jews have always lived in the Middle East.” So what? Jews have always lived in Europe, Asia, Africa and the Americas too. Does that give them special rights? Of course not. But the writer made it sound like it does.

Second, Veklerov said that during a 25-year period, more Jews than Muslims lived in Jerusalem. No. Not in East Jerusalem where even today, more Arabs (Christians and Muslims) than Jews live there. What happened toward the end of the Nineteenth century was that Jews began to move into a western district of Jerusalem where mostly Christians used to live. At some point there might have been more Jews than Muslims in that district, but not more Jews than Arabs (Christians + Muslims). And then, by 1875, the Muslims outnumbered the Jews again in that same district. In any case, this occurrence does not give the Jews a right to claim Jerusalem or Palestine any more than they can claim ownership of New York or America because they outnumber the Buddhists or the Christians or the Muslims or whomever in Brooklyn.

When confronted with this kind of arguments, the older generation of Jews gets tired quickly and sticks with the idea that Israel can do no wrong, therefore must not be asked to change anything. The same is not true with a younger generation that knows it will have to live with the consequences of Israel's behavior whether they live in America, in Europe or anywhere else in the world.

This attitude of the young is scaring Eugene Veklerov and all those like him, including Jack Rosen, the writer of the second article.

Being president of the American Jewish Congress, Rosen must have felt duty-bound to discuss the future of Israel and the Jews in Pollyannaish terms to a younger generation that's growing restless by the day.

The problem is that Rosen remains totally oblivious of the fact that the young wish to see an Israel that can stand on its own. They want it to work on winning the approval of the American people, not the approval of the political scoundrels in either Party.

They also want to see an Israel that will work on winning the approval of the 200 or so countries in the world, not an Israel that keeps running into the arms of America, asking to be sold to foreign leaders who will hold their noses with one hand, take a bribe with the other hand, and vote in favor of Israel at the United Nations or some other international forum.

Today, young Jews have more than their grandparents to teach them history. They have highly qualified professors who talk about many topics, not just the Holocaust. They have a mountain of publications they can consult at the library. And they have the internet which offers an infinite amount of information that's literally at their fingertips.

The young have realized that they stand at the intersection where they must choose between living a normal life on equal footing with the rest of humanity, or continue to be the black sheep of the family; the one that will end up being culled in the gas chamber and incinerated in the crematorium yet again.

More and more, young Jews are choosing the life that humanity is offering them, rejecting the death that their self-appointed leaders are trying to heap on them.

Good for them.

Demonic Operations executed in the post-JDL Era

An article that appeared in the Washington Examiner on August 9, 2019 prompted me to engage in this discussion. The article came under the title: “Neo-Nazi writer hides from verdict punishing his threats.” It was written by Quin Hillyer.

It tells the story of a Jewish real estate agent that was harassed online by a neo-Nazi writer and his followers because she got caught in a dispute with the mother of a white supremacist friend of the neo-Nazis. The harassment came in the form of publishing personal information about the woman and her family. This gave the followers the information they needed to go after the woman and her loved ones. The important part of this story, is what it reveals about the state of culture in North America. And that's what I'm discussing.

As the situation in Europe was beginning to deteriorate at the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century, the Jews of Europe began to migrate to America along with the other nationalities and ethnic groups. Feeling safe in their new home, not long after their arrival, a group from the Jewish population made common cause with a group from the Italian population. They were known as the Jewish mafia and the Italian mafia, who worked together in criminal enterprises to enrich both.

The American authorities clamped down on them, causing a rift between the Italians and the Jews. The result was that most members in both groups diverted the money they had accumulated to legitimate businesses, leaving the life of crime behind. However, a small faction from each group continued to practice the business of crime. The Jewish faction took on the name of Jewish Defense League (JDL) and pretended to defend the Jewish population against a rising tide of antisemitism. Decades later, the authorities designated them a terror group and blacklisted them.

True to the nature of their culture, the Jews did not stop here. They proceeded to do what they say sets them apart from everybody else. Prevented by the American authorities from doing the dirty work themselves, they devised a way to get those same authorities to do the work of terrorizing the Arabs in their stead. They did it by pretending to have become willing informants, and went on to inform the authorities on such plots as Abscam (supposedly Arab Scam) that turned out to be the Jewish scam of the century. Please note the supreme irony in the work of a Jewish terrorist organization being done by the American authorities that banned the organization. Where else can this happen but in America?

That's where you see a difference between the way that the Jews operate, and the way that the neo-Nazis operate. Suppose now that the neo-Nazis (white supremacists as they are also called) learn from the Jews, and instead of doing the dirty work themselves, infiltrate the law and order apparatus, as well as the federal and state legislatures and the executive branches –– and go after the Jewish woman the way that the Jews go after the people they don't like. What do you think you'll see? I'll tell you what you'll see. I know what it is because I lived through that hell for half a century.

I was not harassed online by the Canadian Jewish Congress or their Christian fanatic followers. I was harassed –– sometimes openly and sometimes stealthily –– by the security apparatus of the federal government. At times, the federal called on the provincial or the municipal (Toronto) police to do work for them. It consisted of tracking me and collecting information as to where I went, where I lived, where I worked, who I met, who I talked to, what I said to people on the telephone, and so on and so forth. And guess what they did with the information. They circulated it inside the loop that brings together the Jewish organizations, the press, the politicos and everyone that's considered a worthy dude by any of them.

The ultimate beneficiaries were the Jewish organizations that needed this kind of information to make sure I would not succeed at anything that might lead me to go public with my story and be credible. The Jews succeeded in their cowardly endeavor by going behind my back and contacting the people that would have given me a break, and scaring them with slanderous stories about me. It was a beastly behavior that makes you wonder why these things are still considered members of the human species.

I was informed of some things while they were happening, and was told much more after I launched this blog. What those Jewish characters did was so disgusting, it makes you think that God created the Jews, not to be his favorite children, but to stand as an insult to the human race.

Still, like it happens with most bad experiences, something valuable may have been revealed by this episode. I began to learn about it from watching the reaction of the people who were in the loop, and were talking to me about what was happening, which they did sometimes openly and sometimes obliquely.

Here is how that went. Whenever something private about me or the family was revealed, the people in the media would express shock, even dismay that the security apparatus of the country would spend all that money and would lower itself to that level just to please the Jews. But then a day later, the sense of voyeurism would take over, and you'd see those same media types bask in the gossip that's generated by the windfall they now savor like a delicious dish.

And then, during one magical moment, a synthesis happened inside my head. It was to the effect that the media types participated in the ongoing conspiracy of silence because the Jews bribed them with the private information about me and my family, which they gave away free of charge. It was information collected by the security apparatus of Canada at a high cost to the taxpayers, but no one cared because they all benefitted.

And there is more to what the synthesis has revealed. Bribe being the currency that the Jews employ to draw the simpletons into their fold, the promise of a “Jerusalem in the sky” must be the bribe they are offering to the Evangelical male and female whores of America, bringing them to worship at the feet of their Jewish gods. What a horrific kind of disease just to think about!

And you know what, my friend? It won't be long before the various groups in America, including the neo-Nazis, will have learned the Jewish trick. They will infiltrate the institutions and the services that suit them, and will have the government carry out what would have been criminal offenses for them to do.

You won't be surprised to see that scenario unfold in America when it does, if you find out what is happening in Canada at this time. It is that the Canadian government chose to act out of character, and pursue a fascist Netanyahu-pleasing foreign policy because the Jews convinced the country’s politicos that if they don't embrace Netanyahu’s politics, they'll be viewed as embracing the content of this blog of mine.

Yes, my friend, the government of Canada is antagonizing the whole civilized world just to satisfy a handful of local Jews that it does not subscribe to what appears on my blog. This is the low point to which the democracy of the West has sunk at this moment in time.

Exculpating Jake Tapper, naming the real Culprits

The self-appointed Jewish leaders love to be “offended” or worse. It's because when this happens, they can go after the offenders and demand compensation from here to the moon, and from there to eternity.

If you have deep pockets, such as being a government or a bank or an institution where money flows in and out like a river, the Jews will ask for monetary compensation. They call this kind of find, discovering a treasure trove, and celebrate the moment as if it were the apparition of their long-awaited messiah.

Otherwise the Jews will ask for an apology of the type they can publicize and talk about forever. Or they'll demand a declaration that you have reversed your views, framed in such a way as to render it possible for them to make big propaganda hay out of it.

Powering this behavior of the Jews, is an undercurrent they developed decades ago. What they did was latch on and exploit a virtue of the democratic system which says that to be impartial and fair-minded, you must refrain from tilting too much to one side of an argument. Thus, you must balance the criticism or praise you heap on every argument you happen to be discussing.

The best way to give you an idea how the Jews exploited that virtue, is by telling of an experience I lived and relived dozens of times when I was calling on potential publishers, trying to get my work published. I never had to wait long before the marketplace of ideas was deluged with commentary by Jewish pundits and their gentile sycophants who always took one side of an argument and never even hinted there could be another side to the same argument.

So, I would write an article to draw attention to the reality that there is another side to the same argument. And guess what happens. Invariably, the publisher I am facing would tell me I failed to balance the article, which I should have done by plugging the Jewish argument and saying nice things about it. I would respond that the Jews do not need me to publicize their views; they do it continually themselves. Moreover, by the time they have built-up a case the size of a mountain working the echo chamber collectively, I would have the means to respond with a case that's only the size of a grain of sand.

And then, I would look the publisher in the eyes and ask: And you want me to split that grain of sand in two, and dedicate one half to the Jewish side? What kind of balance is this … having a mountain plus half a grain of sand on one side, standing against half a grain of sand on the other side? You call that balance? This is when the publisher would make it clear to me, I'll never get published in this country or anywhere else.

Well, my friend, now that the Jewish rank-and-file is drifting away from the self-appointed Jewish leaders, the old mentality is back operating at full throttle. It is that those leaders are monitoring the publishing landscape, keeping a sharp eye on the moderate Jewish pundits whose work appears in print, as well as the Jewish hosts of audio-visual programs where they invite guests to come and present their views.

When the Jewish leaders see these people hint at an attitude that says they would give the other side as much credit as a grain of sand, they come down on them like a ton of bricks. The Jewish leaders do it by pressuring the publications' bosses to force their underlings to split the grain of sand and add one half of it to the Jewish mountain that's already there.

One such moment came when CNN's Jake Tapper interviewed Rashida Tlaib on his Sunday show. You cannot imagine how many bellies burst open hollering: “What's this guy trying to do?” These were the bellies of the Jewish leaders who then called CNN's management and asked them to force Jake Tapper to balance the interview with Tlaib by unleashing the mountain of anti-Egypt and anti-Palestine hatred which the Jews have been puking for decades without anyone balancing what they were doing.

As if all of that were not enough, Steven Emerson came along and tried to squeeze from the situation a few more drops of propaganda he could use to boost the Jewish side of the argument. To that end, he wrote: “Blind Anti-Israel Hate Drives the Campaign to Fire Jake Tapper,” an article that was published on August 8, 2019 in the Jewish online publication, Algemeiner.

Look how Emerson started his article: “If the horrifying terrorist attack on an El Paso store had taken place in Israel, leaving a number of Israeli dead, the killer would not rot in jail knowing that his family would be taken care of”.

Yes, my friend, whereas the Americans are careful not to politicize a tragedy of this kind, Emerson has politicized it. He did it, not to serve an American interest, however legitimate or dubious it may be, but to serve the system that allows the Jewish leaders to run to the American political crowd and ask for the transfer of more money to Israel, and the shipment of more weapons to it.

Well, let me tell you this, my friend. I watched the video in which Jake Tapper spewed the words that sparked the controversy. Honestly, Tapper looked like someone under stress, forced to express a sentiment that runs contrary to his free will. I must conclude that these were not Tapper's own words.

I have the firm conviction that the odious words were those of the Jewish leaders who stuffed them into Tapper’s mouth, forcing him to regurgitate them. It all happened when the self-appointed Jewish commissars pressured the bosses at CNN –– one of whom is Wolf Blitzer who needs no persuasion to begin with –– to force Tapper to go on the air and speak the unspeakable words ... or find another job.

This being the case, if something must change at CNN, it is that Wolf Blitzer and his team of producers and floor directors must be sent to pasture or to any place that doesn't house a camera or a microphone.

These creatures have done too much damage already, and we all need a reprieve to relax and take a deep breath in a sphere of information that is free of their polluting influence.