Whose News?

Who knew which nose . . .

Would be the news,
That was all the nose,
Fit to print?

She Gave Up Smoking at the Age of 117

. . . only five years before her death.

Only five years . . . before . . .

Wait! Let's just see if I got that right. The longest lived person ever . . .

Jeane Louise Calment

Well? There it is in stunning Wikipedia black and white. And always, I kept promising myself, "Next year I'll quit." But now I figure, hey! Why push it? Why not wait till I'm 118? And while I'm at it, just maybe I can also break the record of Jeanne Louise, for the world's longest living person--still smoking!

Lucky for her, she lived during a time when a smoker was not at hazard of catching her death of pneumonia, snatching a few puffs on lunch break; driven out into the cold, the wind, the rain, sleet and snow by a cruel, sadistic society of hysterics and upight squares who refuse to face the fact of a Mademoiselle Calment!

But at the price of an extortionately taxed pack of cigarettes these days? Shoot! you'd be first driven to poverty, starvation and death, simply for trying to keep puffing so long as that darling old dame.

And what a shame! Think of the Virginia Slims ads in Life Magazine we never got to see: Jeanne Louise in art nouveau vignette, her pretty plumed hat haloed in white curlicues of a slogan blown from her own rosebud lips, "You've Come a Long Way, Baby!"

Like Jesse Ventura keeps saying, "Don't Start the Revolution Without Me."

Me and the Devil

{The cover from a 1937 German best-seller, The Eternal Jew. Note the Hitler style dog-whip, which cannot help but raise the question: Is there nothing from the anti-Semitic schmaltz that is not a parody on itself?}

I was all of 12 years old when I first learned that my father was Jewish. It was like, one minute you're sitting there blithely as the breeze, Gentile as you please, completely above suspicion for any arch crimes of bloody awful god-slaughter, and the next, there you are suddenly susceptible to being rubbed out by about half the people in the world, or at least by so many millions of those who are not part of the nicer half which only wants to sensitively, compassionately and liberally blame you for all the trouble caused by that other half.

So here, 9 years after the divorce, should it be any wonder that this news was being kept from me by a merciful Gentile mother? I mean, there had been no problem with any other kind of news about my father, as reported by my mother and her mother, that he was a lazy, good-for-nothing, philandering gigolo and wife deserter--this was not thought too terrible for me to hear, soon as I was old enough to piece together a few words of English--but that he was a Jew? Such cruel news was strictly from something you might find in one of those "Confidential" or "Top Secret" magazines my ever so darling (and I mean it) Gentile grandmother (a full bore former Jazz Age flapper) kept stashed under her bed. It was like there'd be a picture of my dad down under there in the stack somewhere, with one of those black bars over his eyes, and it would be, "REVEALED! Shmendrik's Dad Caught Bloody-Handed with Good Friday Mob!" No, this was nothing for me in my tender, sheltered years to bear. And had it not been for a most particularly traumatic incident, I would not have received the Extra! Extra! Read All About It on my old man, for many more years to come.

Up until the day, if ever there had existed a terrible little shegetz of a 12 year old, that was me. Prejudice against Jews in the 1950s was no less common in that day than this, even despite a most nearly still smoking proximity to Auschwitz--it made no difference. And it really makes you wonder, if it won't make you crazy, or cause you to cry all day long or get so damn mad that you just suddenly go all blue in the face, and die.

But back then though, like I say, just as today, still it thrived rank as weeds, this monstrous disrespect, in the suburban dirt from which I was being grown. And being so impressionable as any other kid, the bigotry of my neighborhood pals and their parents was as a rich fertilizer of reeking manure to the cultivation of my mind. It hardly bears repeating the typical stereotype into which I was being tutored that Jews were (are) a lot of venal, grasping hock-shop shysters who always want to "give you the good deal" and steal your money by "jewing" you out of it. And the better the deal a Jew had for you, most absurdly, the more he was to be despised. But leave to the likes of a Joseph Goebbels to explain such a paradox: "He will use generosity and nobility only to trap his enemy." Ah, the brilliance of it.

But at 12 years of age, what did I know from any such philosophy? I just wanted to be like my friends, and be liked by them. In my home there was never a word of racial or ethnic prejudice spoken; my dear ever so liberal mother had not garnered her masters degree in social work for nothing! But as I think, now I do recall that more than once I heard from her on the subject of Jews, that "they are clannish." And she of Scottish ancestry, no less. Then there was always the searing, searching stare that came with the "I see that you're going to grow up to be just like your father?" The Jewish Question. You'll just have to try and imagine the look in her eye that went with it. It's the one that makes you know you are the Devil. So, maybe that could be kind of rough on the tender young psyche of a little Shmendrik, but given that there was any truth to it, as per me and my Dad (not me and the Devil), then you see how those of the Jewish blood DO stick together. I was just a chip off the old shittim wood block.

Me and Bernie

Clearly, this attitudinal schmaltz of folk wisdom about Jews I was learning both at home and out under the Elms on the suburban avenue was altogether so politically non-partisan as it was multi-cultural, and was being imparted freely to anyone without regard to race, creed or color. Why! you could learn it in no time, like the Polka, the Two-Step or the Hokey-Pokey. From the Swedish- Italian family across the street came the catchy little "Do You Want to Buy My Goods?" ditty that was so often sung to an up-tempo sort of Kletzmer melody and performed with a rubbing motion over the nose, and of the thumb over the fingers. "Do you want to buy my goods/ Do you want to buy?/ I give you such good deal, today,/ I give you such the deal!"

But it was true! The very best deals in town did come from Jews. If you needed a loan and had something to pawn--from where else but the Jew downtown on Washington Avenue would you get it? And this was reason for nothing but to despise the author of this noble generosity of which the Nazi propaganda minister speaks. What else? But the reason is not as Goebbels gives it, and nowhere near. It has to do with a fault in the Jewish character; nothing genetic but social and ethnological. And what is it but that the Jewish person wants to be respected and treated with dignity someday in this world; he wants to be known among the Gentiles as a good and generous person. So what does he do? He gives, often beyond his capacity, lest he should otherwise be the more prosperous. Even the great Ponzi man, Bernie Madoff truly thought he was in business to give people a good deal, that somehow he would find it in his capacity to make all his bad bets right, if only the market would turn around once more and move into a deep enough Bear cycle to allow for his genius bond buying and short- selling scheme to work for him and all his "friends" again. In the beginning, it made him rich perfectly within the law on his own money. But then, poor Bernie, he got Jewish about it, got generous, desiring to help the people who had heard of his success and wanted in. Jewish fool that he was, he let them in.

The Jew (being human) wants to be liked, wants to be able to do for people, and this unto his own destruction. Why? Everyone knows why! Spare the rod and spoil the child. The Jew wants to spoil the Gentile, wants him to go away thinking that he's been given a good turn. The Gentile gets spoiled; he gains a little by the Jew; he gets a loan, a good buy--is he grateful? No! The little he gets is never enough, not when he's paid a little for it. And it's that little bit that he resents, and this is the amount he got "Jewed" out of, and the absurdity is that in effect, if he paid anything at all, that was too damned much!

Look at Gaza; land won fair and square as a spoil of war to become property of Israel, but then, one day not so many years later, it is unconditionally given to the people who are resident there. It was not "given back" to Egypt under whose occupation it had stayed since the war of Israeli independence. It was not "given back" to Turkey, nor to England. It was taken from Egypt and given to the people who live there; taken in the Six Day War from the occupier, and given for the first time in History to the people who live there.

It was not enough. It is never enough. And the Jew is hated for the very fact of the gift, more than had he never given it, and he is hated more than he had ever been hated before. And why? Because something for nothing means nothing. Something for nothing IS nothing. So he who gives in return for nothing is him that shall be despised. It goes against the pride of the animal nature. There must be an honorable exchange, or there is dishonor. What is given is not a gift, but booty taken from a fool. The giver will not be respected. He will not be treated with dignity. He will not be liked. He will be hated as the state is hated by the recipient of its charity, a person who always feels robbed, short-changed. The state says, "We owe you a living." You say, "the State is rich and it is not enough."

This very day, as Bibi Netanyahu is sworn in to be installed as the new Israeli Prime Minister, the liberal newspaper Haaretz editorially expresses the wish that his government should not succeed; should in other words fail. And it is the same sentiment expressed by American right-wing talk show Host Rush Limbaugh concerning the presidency of Barak Obama. Jews want to give! Jews want to be liberal. They want to be in step with the opinions of the rest of the world about Gaza and all the rest. Jews in Israel and in the United States are heard to be making excuses for the Hamas rocket attacks on Israel, saying that the people of Gaza really didn't know what to expect from Hamas when they voted for that party, "to their sorrow" as I saw one Jew express it.

Ask yourself! Is it any wonder that one such as Jesus of Nazareth was spawned of the Jewish blood? "If thy right hand offend thee, cut it off!" And "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you." But all the more telling, "Whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." There's your Jew for you. You want a "liberal"? Look for a Jew. Look for Yeshua. Look at him! See the Christ as he faced the multitudes and opened his mouth to speak: what he had to say to them was nothing new! He was only there to reaffirm for them in their own minds, and to their hearts, that what they'd been doing all along had always been the right thing, by Jewish default.

And God Created Brigitte Bardot

She's 73 years old, and still HOT. And what's so hot about her, might you ask? She's hot under the collar, for one thing, having to show up in court now for a fifth time, charged with the crime of hating Islam.

Bardot was busted for something she said in a letter to French President Sarkozy. As a dedicated animal rights addict--excuse please!--'advocate', she was protesting the ritual slaughter of sheep for the Muslim high holiday of Eid-al-Kabir. The letter was sent in 2004 when Sarkozy was yet French Minister of the Interior, and as it was subsequently somehow leaked to the press--now she is being prosecuted and tried for what she said privately, in a letter.

To think of it. To see everything that Orwell would, in view of this, seem to have prophesied for his horror fantasy of totalitarian European government post-1984; that this may now be threatening to have come true, today for France, and tomorrow, why not for the rest of a former "free world"?

The offending language in Brigitte's missive was, to wit, "this population that leads us around by the nose, [and] which destroys our country." Time Magazine

There is another girl by the name of "Brigitte" who also is totally HOT. Her last name is Gabriel and she, a best selling author, is today here in the USA as an immigrant and new American citizen from Lebanon. I hear from her every day in a newsletter. This morning I read this . . .

Dear John,

While Americans are lulled into complacency as to the threat of Islamofascism because there have been no “9/11’s” since 9/11, the kettle that slowly boils the frog to death is heating up around us.

If you take a frog, put it in a kettle of water, and gradually raise the temperature, the frog will, without thinking and without awareness, adjust to the temperature changes until it boils to death. This is THE metaphor for incrementalism.
--
Any connection between the words "frog" and "French" would be entirely coincidental, and not intended to be understood as being in any way 'significant' or 'prophetic', let alone, least of all, "frog-bashing."

But getting back to the French Brigitte; if all this were not enough to get a free spirit like Bardot hot, after she was already hot and had long been hot, especially in the 1950's and 60's when she was the hottest thing on the international marquee since Theda "Kiss me, my fool" Bara--then consider how trying the whole thing must be for that poor zealot of a prosecutor acting in service of Big Brother, France; Anne de Fonette who has made her feelings plain for the reporters of Time magazine, having said, "I'm a bit tired of trying Madame Bardot," as again according to Time, "she urged the court to impose 'the most striking and remarkable' punishment in the case. A verdict is expected on June 3." Time

Here once again they are saying that Brigitte Bardot "hates Muslims" but how absurd! How can this be, that a lovely little retired sex-kitten like Bardot could 'hate' anything so innocent and defenseless as a religion? What, after no more than five arrests by the French flics, four convictions, four fines and suspended sentences--all this for 'hate'?

Hardly! Such punishment as this can only have been suffered for love, by a French woman--everybody knows!

It is only because Bardot loves France, and loves for France to be France, to stay French and not to be changing into something other, something alien and utterly foreign to French culture and manners.

Where is the 'hate' crime in that?

Why Israel Had to Whack the USS Liberty

All night and day in the hours leading up to the first day of the Six Day War, Moshe Dayan was in continual contact with executive offices in the White House of Lyndon Baines Johnson. Of chief concern to the Israeli defense minister was that the United States should keep him briefed as to the positions of all, and that meant ALL naval traffic in the eastern Mediterranean, international waters or otherwise; this in order to avoid the least possibility of exactly what happened to the incognito spy ship, USS Liberty.

The U.S. complied with this request only to a limited extent, this being due to a massive failure of understanding, or which is the more likely, a bull-headed lack of respect for Israel's critical position, one which demanded in the emergency, a war-time agreement for disclosure between allies, the neglect of which, in terms of the consequences for the USS Liberty, can be viewed by History only at so many fathoms of depth beneath contempt as to be completely out of sonar range.

At first, Dayan had made it plain that since the US, along with all Europe, had opted (in fear of the USSR-UAR alliance) to do nothing about the Egyptian naval blockade in the Gulf of Aqaba; about Egyptian expulsion of UN forces from Sinai; the movement of Syrian, Iraqi, Jordanian and Egyptian tanks, artillery and troops toward Israel's borders; therefore, because the US and Europe would not stand with Israel against this aggression, there was no reason at all, for US naval forces to be in place anywhere near the coasts of Israel--and that meant NONE whatever.

It was not in honor of Israel's critical position, that President Johnson ordered the Sixth Fleet drawn back a hundred miles and more from the theatre of potential conflict. It was done strictly to avoid any appearance in sight of the Soviets that America had even the least intention to honor any form of commitment to her ally, Israel.

Dayan put 'Israel's friend' LBJ on notice that any foreign ship in waters off the coast of Israel and Sinai would be regarded as a threat and an obstacle to Israel's unencumbered mobility in those waters--and because there was nothing to prevent UAR nations, or the USSR from disguising a ship for one of American or European registry, then minus 100% disclosure, there was no way for Israel to gain full assurance as to what the nature of any craft might actually be. Israel had to know the identity and coordinates of any US ship not pulled back with the Fleet, lest that ship should stand as a target, pure, plain and simple.

From Wiki . . .

"The IDF, in its History Report about the attack, says it asked the United States to inform them of any U.S. ships in the area but was not told of the Liberty's presence.[3](p.22) The IDF air and naval forces, respectively, misidentified the Liberty as an unknown destroyer and the Egyptian cargo ship El Quseir.[3](p.15)"

As the US had by this refusal of disclosure failed to stand out of the way of the logistical mobility Israel had to have, the Liberty disaster became inevitable. And it happened only because LBJ, in his tragic pride-bound way, was refusing to face the dynamic of what his timidity before the Soviets had come to; a greater threat, so to hobble an Israeli defense against a sure-fire Second Holocaust, burgeoning belly up to her borders and coasts. For Israel, there would be, in short, NO time for any complications: nothing would be allowed to stand in the way of an unfettered defense--no damned ambiguities of uncertainty and doubt would be tolerated, pure, plain and simple.

From Rabin's Memoirs . . .

"According to Israeli Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin’s memoirs, there were standing orders to attack any unidentified vessel near the shore. The day fighting began, Israel had asked that American ships be removed from its coast or that it be notified of the precise location of U.S. vessels. The Sixth Fleet was moved because President Johnson feared being drawn into a confrontation with the Soviet Union. He also ordered that no aircraft be sent near Sinai."
--
By brunt of critical necessity, Israel was forced to treat that ship for the thorn in the side to her defense that it was, and blew the bull-headed, disrespectful son of a bitch out of the water--sad as that is to say.

And that is the true story of Israel v. LBJ and a pitiful fate for the pride of the USS Liberty.

By Force of Historical Necessity

And to think there are these days so many who would blame the Jews, if they would fight to save their lives. What is missing from the understanding of all but a few concerning the Zionist migration which led to the triumph of Israel as a Jewish state, is that what arises among a people by necessity of survival cannot be argued against.

For "Palestinian" Arabs and their supporters, the "not in my backyard" argument has no force, as the necessity for one people to keep their lives can be in no way equal to what that Arab is trying to keep in an exclusive title to land. The man who migrates and fights to preserve his life has the more valuable possession to keep and defend, life itself--and he will fight the harder for that, than any man can to keep exclusive claim to a piece of land. Titles to land can change hands, an entitlement to life cannot.

That's just life in a world governed by one immutable and inviolable law: Survival of the Fittest. There is no room in Darwinian necessity for ideals of "fairness" considered over puffs of pipe smoke in an easy chair. One man's rightful claim of exclusive ownership to his own backyard is suddenly made petty and indefensible, the moment that his fence is jumped by a man who does so in order to save his life.

You tell that man to go back over the fence from whence he came and what you've done is to perpetrate the lie that ownership of land is a greater good than ownership of life. Such a liar as that, under a biological code of survival of the fittest will prove himself unworthy, flawed, not strong enough to hold that land against the claim of the other man who will enter it because he must, to save his life. The one man needs the land, the other only wants to keep it.

Necessity rules in the blindfolded, objective sight of Justice. Sometimes there is no force in the argument, it is mine because it is mine, or because daddy gave it to me."

A New Crusade

Right from the start when they had their sky-high butts run out of Mecca, they rode like the guerilla gang of Bloody Bill Anderson (at Lawrence, Kansas) upon that quiet Jewish date plantation at Medina to begin their terror religion of invasion, robbery, rape, enslavement and murder that never has changed ever since that day. How can they not hate the Jews seeing there is no other way to justify the savagery they visited upon them to establish the earthly foundation of their religion at that place, in the first place?

Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Joseph did nothing of the kind in the beginning of the Hebrew religion, turning to violence ONLY when necessary to throw off the chains of Egyptian enslavement, and to conquest ONLY when there was no other way open for them to return to the home of their fathers in Judea.

Not only did the bandit horde of Mohammed rob the Jews of their date palms and wells at Medina, they ripped off the Jewish scriptural tradition as well, as there would be no Koran without the totally distorted version of Torah that forms the heart of it--an accusation you cannot bring against Christians, who have had the respect and reverence to preserve the Jewish scriptures in pure form without change--unless by ignorant translation.

You can't argue against or debate with the barbarian progeny of Mohammed, people like that, because the very substance of their faith has its foundation set against truth in the lies of justification necessary to rationalize the bloody aggression splashed over the very pedestal of that foundation. When arguing religion, a Muslim has no choice but to lie in favor of lies and of violence, in favor of gender slavery, in favor of adultery (polygamy), all in order to maintain reverence for the killer, slaver and harem keeping adulterer who is the "prophet" (falsely so-called) of that savage religion.

You can't argue with a Muslim whose evil empire of religion is all bound up in slavish submission to spiritual pride, to a form of idolatry where the idol is ego, fashioned of flesh and blood, paper and ink from the envious megalomaniacal ravings spewed from the mouth of Mohammed.

This is a religion that instills a fear of blasphemy so chaotic and irrational that a will to think and speak truth is blasphemy, and utterly forbidden. The Muslim can only argue blindly in the darkness beyond the pale of truth and reason's illumination, crying out, whining his grief over a separation from truth so pathetic that nothing except violence can suffice to act in furtherance of his faith which is the sad passion he wails from that minaret.

We must stop this futile argument with Islam in a debate where truth is banned and cannot stand as arbiter. Solomon said, "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou be made like unto him."

Very well, you may say, but what then is to be done instead--outside of spiritual warfare and conquest?

Spiritual Warfare and Conquest

These are the only things a Muslim can perfectly understand. But will you say his religion is one of submission? Very good, then let him submit to the spiritual conquest that shall be brought in crusade upon him. The one thing that is most broadly, most viscerally detested about Islam is its bloody violence, and insofar as this is the thing that is by civilized people most deeply abhorred, it is therefore the thing that must be practiced not in the least by civilized people in battle against violence.

Let verbal, written and graphic combat be waged without mercy. Let no holds be barred, no prisoners taken, in firing truth against a Religion of Lies. And let 'blasphemy' against the "holy" prophet of Islam be as a Call to Prayer that is sung from every high place in the West. Let that miserable wail of endless recrimination from the world of Islam be utterly vanquished in volume by a song of joyful joking and laughing from those who have reached the limit of their patience with the monstrous ego of Islam which like some spoiled brat just simply will not for a minute sit down and shut up in this world, that mankind might have the peace to think and hear of something, anything else for a change.



Have you heard enough of it?