…by Jonas E. Alexis
The Syrian rebels/terrorists as well as many observers are beginning to see that Assad will probably stay in power. Had Assad been kicked out, the Syrian rebels/terrorists/extremists would almost certainly have ruled Syria with an iron fist. How do we know this?
The British newspaper the Telegraph made it clear a few months ago that “nearly half the rebel fighters in Syria” are either jihadists or radical terrorists, which means that the Zionist regime would have put a Frankensteinian monster in power in Syria.
In fact, even though the holy trinity of neo-Bolshevism—the Israeli regime, the Zionists/neoconservatives/former Trotskyites in America, and Saudi Arabia—has been supporting the rebels’ ideology from its inception, those terrorists made it clear that once Assad was placed in the trash can of history, Israel was next on the list.
Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri announced last year, “Supporting jihad in Syria to establish a Muslim state is a basic step towards Jerusalem.”
Jewish neoconservative hawk Daniel Pipes certainly didn’t have much trouble with al-Zawahiri’s bloody ideology here. Pipes wrote a few months ago:
“Western governments should respond by helping the rebels to prevent Assad from crushing them.”
Pipes moved on to expand and expound on his essentially Talmudic thesis this way: “the West should prevent either side in the civil war from emerging victorious by helping whichever side is losing, so as to prolong their conflict.’”
If you did not catch that wicked and, quite frankly, Mephistophelian ideology, here is the translation: let Assad and the Syrian terrorists fight until they destroy each other. Let them fight until blood flows from all over Syria.
It doesn’t matter how long it takes or how much it would cost America and the Middle East, the West should give his last drop of blood to support that hellish plan. Let mothers and decent civilians weep and mourn for their children and love ones and their cherished country. Pipes only cares about Israel. He perceived,
“This policy recommendation of ‘helping whichever side is losing’ sounds odd, I admit, but it is strategic.”
Here Pipes’ conscience was telling him that the plan was wicked, but he seemed to have suppressed his moral and practical reasoning and replaced it with Talmudic mores.
What’s even more interesting, Pipes thinks that the Obama administration is too slow in invading Iran, even though Obama has been doing the neoconservative laundry from time immemorial.
You ain’t seen nothing yet. Pipes believes that Syrian refugees—people whose livelihood has been literally destroyed by the Syrian conflict—“should be allowed and encouraged to remain within their own cultural zone, where they most readily fit in, can best stay true to their traditions, least disrupt the host society, and from whence they might most easily return home.”
What Daniel Pipes indirectly ended up saying was that not only Assad and the Syrian terrorists have to be sent to the neo-Bolshevik slaughter house, but decent refugees have to follow the same fate. Keep in mind that in Syria, more than half of the hospitals are either destroyed or damaged. So if civilians get hurt when they try get out of their property, they just have to die, since there are not enough medical supplies.
Put simply, Pipes is trying to simultaneously and effortlessly kill four birds (Assad, the Syrian terrorists, the Syrian civilians, and the small minority of Christians) with one Zionist stone. Of course, to accomplish such a feat, the neo-Bolsheviks/neoconservatives cannot do it alone. They have to use a large number of the goyim and the American taxpayer’s dollars: “The U.S. military spent about $3 billion on drone programs last year” alone.
Pipes’ Talmudic ideology seems to be working. Interestingly enough, the British newspaper the Guardian has recently noted that the Syrian rebels have already gotten a huge hit:
“Their resources are dwindling, their families are shattered. Their villages and farm lands are lost to regime militias. Their allies are at best unreliable, and at worst actively conspiring against them.”
The story gets even interesting when it was reported that all Syria’s neighboring countries have Syrian refugees—except Israel.
This would not be the first time that people like Pipes attempt to accomplish such a goal. The neoconservative hawks did the same thing when they invaded places like Iraq, inciting extremists against Christians, and now Christians are “close to extinction” in the Middle East.
Finally, Pipes’ strategy here is completely congruent with what late Rabbi Ovadia Yosef pronounced in 2010:
“Goyim (gentiles, non-Jews) were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world – only to serve the People of Israel. Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat. That is why gentiles were created.”
Journalist Dan Murphy rightly acknowledged that those words would be universally “condemned if they came from an Iranian leader.” Jeffrey Goldberg for example cites Sunni cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi saying that
“Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the Jews people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them — even though they exaggerated this issue — he managed to put them in their place.”
Al-Qaradawi, says Goldberg, was a Jew hater.
But Yosef, throughout his life, was never challenged by the Zionist kingdom for his rabid views. In fact, when Yosef passed away, Netanyahu declared that “the Jewish people have lost one of the wisest men of his generation.”
Goldberg declares that al-Qaradawi has a “pathological hatred of Jews…” If al-Qaradawi is wrong, how in the world has the Zionist kingdom revered Yosef as a patron saint?
Moreover, there are decent Jews who strictly opposed Israel’s occupation. Steven Goldberg, a lawyer and long supporter of the Jewish terrorist Meir Kahane, declared that those Jews should have been aborted!20 If we logically follow the arguments of the Holocaust establishment, Goldberg is a new Hitler. Where is Abraham Foxman when you need him? Where is the Jewish media?
But somehow Jewish intellectuals such as Daniel Jonah Goldhagen cannot understand how anti-Jewish reaction is on the rise. For him, anti-Semitism has reached an epic proportion and has shown itself in every single continent.
Moreover, anti-Jewish reaction has nothing to do with Jewish behavior and has everything to do with people hating Jews. This thesis has been weighed over and over and found wanting.
Goldhagen is not a careful writer and should never be taken seriously. Although he does not lack the academic expertise to grasp serious issues, his ideology does not allow him to move beyond stage one.
Goldhagen does not believe in historical scholarship and evidence. For example, when Norman Finkelstein and Ruth Bettina Birn meticulously documented that Goldhagen fabricated many of his sources in his best-selling book Hitler’s Willing Executioners, Goldhagen went berserk.
As a serious scholar, Birn went through the archives and checked the sources that Goldhagen had cited, and the majority of them were Goldhagen’s own inventions or distortions of the actual account. Knowing that the historical data and reason were not on his side, Goldhagen had to move on to a new territory: he wanted to sue Birn. Goldhagen
“enlisted a high-powered London law firm to sue Birn and Cambridge University Press for ‘many serious libels.’ Demanding an apology, a retraction, and a promise from Birn that she not repeat her criticisms, Goldhagen’s lawyers then threatened that ‘the generation of any publicity on your part as a result of this letter would amount to a further aggravation of damages.”
What Goldhagen ended up saying was that you cannot reason a supposed scholar out of a wicked idea which was not form on the basis of reason. If Goldhagen is a serious scholar, he would have admitted that he was wrong. But he deliberately chose the easiest path, which literally destroyed whatever argument he wanted to make in his book.
Goldhagen again and again proves that he is simply a joke. In his recent book, he writes that “John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt peddle…anti-Semitism dressed up in the garb of academic seriousness and respectability, with their invention of the bogeyman known as the Israel Lobby into which they subsume and thereby delegitimize people who vocally or in various ways materially support Israel.”
Goldhagen desperately and mightily tries to deconstruct the arguments raised in Mearsheimer and Walt’s The Israel Lobby not by evidence-based counterarguments but by ad-hominem attack on the authors, by begging the question, and by building one straw man after another. Mearsheimer and Walt are Jewish scholars from the University of Chicaco and Harvard, respectively.
But according to Golhagen, both individuals are rabid anti-Semites.Goldberg writes that The Israel Lobby “draws upon or echoes” a “small sampling of the anti-Semitic tropes,” which includes, but not limited to:
“Jews working collectively in concrete organizations for nefarious ends. Jewish conspiracy. Jews are filth columnists. Jews pulling levers behind the scene. Jews harming the broader society in which they live. Jews starting or starting or causing wars, in this case the attacks of 9/11, the Iraq War, and the war on terror.”
Throughout his critique of The Israel Lobby, Goldhagen could not even quote one word from the book itself to argue his point because his assertions are literally and hopelessly worthless as scholarship.
Every freshman in philosophy knows that the quickest way to destroy your opponent’s arguments is to deliberately misrepresent those arguments and intentionally attack what your opponent does not argue or believe in. This is textbook example of a straw man argument, and as soon as you walk into a philosophy or law class, one of the first things you will learn is that you should never base you argument on this premise—unless you want to look ridiculous and unless you want to make your opponent’s argument stronger.
In addition, straw man generally occurs when your opponent cannot refute your argument with rigorous logic and reason. Madsen Pirie perhaps puts it best in non-technical terms:
“The straw man is made incredibly easy to knock down so that when you are unable to refute your opponent’s argument, you can topple the straw man instead. The straw man is, in short, a misrepresentation of your opponent’s position, created by you for the express purpose of being knocked down….
“The straw man is set up as a deliberate overstatement of an opponent’s position. Many views are easier to argue against if they are taken to extremes. If your opponent will not make himself an extremist, you can oblige with a straw man. Any easily opposed misrepresentation will serve as your dummy.”
This is exactly what’s going on with Goldhagen’s new book. Goldhagen posits the claim that The Israel Lobby “is the best cloaked major anti-Semitic tract in English of the last several decades,” and one would hope that Goldhagen would proceed to make his case using evidentiary foundations. It was a complete disappointment and frustration. The book is worse than Ann Coulter’s new tirade.
Goldhagen gets even more hilarious when he says that Mearsheimer and Walt produced a “bogeyman concept” in The Israel Lobby “that is an update on the notorious anti-Semitic tract The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”!
Right then, I stopped reading the book. Right then, I was fully aware that I was in the presence of an intellectual impostor. And right then, I knew for sure that Goldhagen is willing to move heaven and earth, no matter what the cost, in order to slaughter his enemies through his academic advantage.
Keep in mind that Golhagen is a Harvard professor and is not some Joe on the street. Is this the kind of argumentation that he is proposing at one of the most prestigious universities in the world? Have our young and impressionable students been brainwashed by an intellectual impostor? Did students have to pay thousands upon thousands of dollars to learn that stuff?
Moving back to our analysis on the Middle East, it is pretty clear that Assad will stay, unless the Israeli regime does something really stupid. This means that we are confronted with an inescapable conclusion:
Millions upon millions of decent civilians have been displaced and died for Israel. Millions upon millions of decent people have fled their country because the Zionist regime wanted to oust Assad in order to attack Iran.
What’s equally worse, The Zionist regime took millions upon millions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers and sent the money to the Syrian rebels/terrorists, but Assad will still be in power. Those rebels/terrorists even had well-known connections in the U.S., but not a single U.S. official objected to it.
A few days ago, the British newspaper the Telegraph reported that “Al-Qaeda-linked rebels apologize after cutting off head of wrong person.” The “wrong person” happened to be one of their terrorist fighters. Indeed, the Syrian terrorists constantly fight among themselves for money and weapons.
“Groups are resorting to kidnappings for ransom to bring in much-needed cash…. Rebel leader Riad al-Ahmed did not die in battle against the Syrian Army, like so many fellow Free Syrian Army fighters. He was killed by other rebels in a clash over money and weapons…
“Mr. Ahmed was one of those kidnapped for ransom in January. Soon after, his captors released a grisly video showing his eye being pulled out and demanding a 300,000-euro ransom ($400,000). Three months later, his ransom unpaid, Ahmed was killed. Members of the opposition found his body in the mountains near the Syrian town of Jabal al-Akrad, 50 miles from the Turkish border, after weeks trying to locate his kidnappers.
“Ahmed, a former Syrian Army officer from Latakia, is one of the highest profile leaders to be abducted, but dozens of lower ranking fighters have been kidnapped in the border region since the Syrian war began. Even less is known about their final days than Ahmed’s.”
Keep in mind that the C.I.A. covertly trained the rebels.
Here’s what the New York Times has to say:
“Changing course is urgent, the critics say, because as the prospects for the peace talks in Geneva recede, Syria is falling apart. In the north, extremist jihadist groups are terrorizing residents, clashing with rival rebels and establishing a base that poses threats beyond Syria’s borders.
“Hunger and disease are on the rise. Polio is resurgent. More than nine million Syrians have been displaced from their homes, the equivalent, by percentage of the population, of more than 100 million Americans on the move.”
How would you like to see 100 million Americans being displaced from their homes? And would you seriously say that the Western world stands for democracy if Western officials simply see those Americans and do nothing? Yet somehow the neo-Bolsheviks do not “know” how countries in the Middle East cannot accept this Zionist madness.
The United Kingdom also supported the Syrian terrorists, but this is all at the expense of young college graduates.
“The question is being asked by millions of young Europeans. Five years after the economic crisis struck the Continent, youth unemployment has climbed to staggering levels in many countries: in September, 56 percent in Spain for those 24 and younger, 57 percent in Greece, 40 percent in Italy, 37 percent in Portugal and 28 percent in Ireland. For people 25 to 30, the rates are half to two-thirds as high and rising.
“Those are Great Depression-like rates of unemployment, and there is no sign that European economies, still barely emerging from recession, are about to generate the jobs necessary to bring those Europeans into the work force soon, perhaps in their lifetimes.
“Dozens of interviews with young people around the Continent reveal a creeping realization that the European dream their parents enjoyed is out of reach. It is not that Europe will never recover, but that the era of recession and austerity has persisted for so long that new growth, when it comes, will be enjoyed by the next generation, leaving this one out…
“Young people caught in that cycle are at the edge of a growing category that economists call NEETs: those who are not in employment, education or training. According to Eurofound, as many as 14 million young Europeans are out of work and disengaged, costing European Union member states an estimated 153 billion euros (about $206 billion) a year in welfare benefits and lost production.”
In short, whenever the neo-Bolsheviks and Zionists are in power, you can be sure that there will be massive suffering, massive death, and ideological conflicts. Whenever they destroy a country, they replace it with something that is suitable to their weltanschauung. Afghanistan for example has turned into the world’s largest opium producers by 2013. The LA Times reports,
“The annual survey underscored the growing threat of the narcotic in the world’s largest opium-producing nation. The unchecked spread of opium cultivation has triggered widespread corruption, political instability and enormous profits for the Taliban insurgency, which controls Afghanistan’s primary poppy-growing provinces.”
Aarne Heikkila of NBC has said that the U.S. spent $7 billion “to combat the problem.” What Heikkila doesn’t know or doesn’t want to tell her viewers is that the CIA is one of the main vehicles in spreading drugs in those countries.
“In country after country, from Mexico and Honduras to Panama and Peru, the CIA helped set up or consolidate intelligence agencies that became forces of repression, and whose intelligence connections to other countries greased the way for illicit drug shipments.
“Although each of these cases is now public and has received scattered coverage in mainstream media, journalists (and politicians) remaind reluctant to squarely address the recurring CIA-drug problem…
“Today the United States, in the name of fighting drugs, has entered into alliances with the police, armed forces, and intelligence agencies of Colombia and Peru, forces conspicuous by their own alliances with drug traffickers in counterinsurgency operations.
“One of the most glaring and dangerous examples is in Peru. Behind Peru’s president, Alberto Fujimori, is his chief adviser Vladimiro Montesinos, the effective head of the National Intelligence Service, or SIN, an agency created and trained by the CIA in the 1960s…
“Washington’s proclivity to tolerate, protect, and reinforce the influence of Third World drug traffickers didn’t die with the end of the Reagan-Bush years. Indeed, the Clinton Administration, guided by White House drug czar General Barry McCaffrey, has consistently asked for large increases in counternarcotics aid to compromise Latin American police and military forces.”
And who is largely controlling the illegal opium production in Afghanistan? You guess it: the Taliban. It must also be emphasized that the C.I.A. at one point was a Jewish revolutionary cell, and the organization has supported Jewish revolutionaries and magazines in the past.
Chaim Bermant (British journalist, and satirist; Orthodox Jew and supporter of Israel) wrote back in 1977:
“There is the story of the Jew on a train who kept moaning: ‘Oy, have I got a pain…Oy, have I got a pain…Oy, have I got a pain…Oy…’ Finally one of the passengers, who could stand it no longer, jumped to his feet, searched the length and breadth of the train and came back with a doctor, who gave the Jew a pill, and all was quiet for a minute or two till the voice began again: ‘Oy, did I have a pain…Oy, did…’”
Bermant commented, “It is perhaps time for an end to oying. A sense of guilt does not make for a healthy relationship between ex-persecutor and ex-victim.”
The oying is still going on, particularly when it comes to crippling Iran. Earl Cox of the Jerusalem Post called the current Iranian president, Hassan Rouhani, “a smiling, venomous snake!”
Ben Stein revived the oying nuisance when he figured that Obama seems to be exhausted about placing more sanctions on Iran. Stein wrote in the American Spectator,
“The Iranians in the recent past have pledged to destroy the Jewish people in the Middle East. Some of their leaders have boasted that if Iran gets nuclear weapons, Iran will have ‘a holocaust in an afternoon’ by rocketing a few nuclear weapons into Israel. Naturally, the Israelis are desperately worried.”
Stein proved himself to be a hoax with respect to Iran when he said that Iran “has not signed the non-proliferation treaty. It has not allowed inspectors in its most secret plants. It has raced on towards nuclear weapons that could in a half hour or less cause another holocaust. Iran is the world’s leading state sponsor of terror. Many of its top brass have expressed a wish to see an earth rid of Jews altogether.”
Iran has not signed the non-proliferation treaty and has not allowed inspectors? Although this is categorically false and completely stupid, let us take it for granted that it is true. Would Ben Stein write the same thing about Israel, a country that has not signed the non-proliferation treaty and has not allowed inspections? Why the double standard?