‘So, the infamous US-Iran MOU has been signed. As far as Israel is concerned, the deed is done. The betrayal is complete. What remains is but to confront its consequences.’
ed note–not just entire books, but indeed entire LIBRARIES of commentary could accompany this, but in the interests of not over-burdening the already over-burdened Gentile attention span, we’ll keep it ‘short & sweet’ as the saying goes.
Firsto, the obvious, and which does not need any decoding, which is the fact that the Jews, AS AN ENTIRE GROUP, FROM THE FAR LEFT TO THE FAR RIGHT AND EVERYTHING IN BETWEEN, are boiling-blood furious over POTUS stopping short of Iran’s complete incineration as the Jews and the bloodthirsty ‘religion’ that is encoded into their devilish DNA demands.
And why make this point, fellow war-weary Gentiles?
Because within the hallowed halls of the ‘Great Awakening’ known as the ‘truth movement’, there is little to no discussion whatsoever taking place about the fact that the Jews are indeed boiling-blood furious about POTUS DJT’s ‘pulling out’ of ‘doing the deed’ on Iran, which, as already mentioned, is nothing less than its complete incineration.
And why is there ‘little to no’ discussion of this fact, fellow Gentiles?
Because the chorus that has been sung, whether for the last 10 months or for the last 10 years, is that POTUS DJT is a willing ‘slave’ for Netanyahu, for Miriam Adelson, and for the rest of the Learned Elders of Zion out to conquer the world for yahweh.
Therefore, as the ‘logic’ goes, it is hard to discuss the manner in which POTUS DJT is obviously bucking the Jews while one has made his/her bread & butter for the last 10 months or 10 years claiming that Trump is a ‘willing slave’ to the Jews.
So, the bottom line here folks, is that YES, unequivically, the Jews are furious with POTUS Trump, and no, it isn’t all ‘an act’ or a case of mere ‘political theatre’ as doubtless the chirping class is claiming within certain ‘neighborhoods’.
Now, onto the other thingy involved in all of this, which is the veiled yet obvious threat being issued by the Learned Elders of Zion against POTUS for his refusal to go ‘all the way’ with Iran’s incineration as the Jews are demanding–
‘ET TU, DONALD…?’
There is no mistaking the origin or hidden meaning associated with this, fellow Gentiles. It comes from Shakespeare’s play which describes and details the assassination of Rome’s emperor, Julius Caesar, and even though in that particular work of literature, the question is asked of Brutus rather than of Caesar, nevertheless, the general theme of murdering the Commander in Chief is exactly the ‘gist’ that the nutcase terrorist Jew who authored this piece is trying to convey, even if only amongst his fellow terrorist Jews.
The other thingy, specifically–
‘A DAY THAT WILL LIVE IN INFAMY…’
–Also needs to be understood within the context of assassinaation, war, and murder, as these were the words which were uttered by FDR at the beginning of America’s entrance into the Jews’ WWII that only ended after America demonstrated the destructive power of the hell-bomb which the Jews developed in honor of ‘yahweh’, the violent deity that has always been their ‘guiding light’ throughout the 3,000 years of their miserable stay here on this planet of the Gentiles.
Martin Sherman for Israel National News
Indeed, perhaps the most apt and accurate way to characterize the dramatic metamorphosis that seems to have taken place in the US relationship with Israel and Donald Trump’s association with Benjamin Netanyahu, is from ‘hand-in-glove’ cooperation to ‘slap-in-the-face’ repudiation.
On the face of things, this breathtaking U-turn seems almost inexplicable. After all, virtually all the factors that precipitated the joint Israeli-US strikes on Iranian military and infrastructure installations are no less valid today than they were when they were launched.
Moreover, for anyone aspiring to attain the stature of a towering global leader, dominating world events, keeping stable prices at the gas pump is hardly the stuff of which storied presidential legacies are forged.
On the other hand, vanquishing the single greatest peril to Western civilization and democracy is undoubtedly the stuff of which such legends are crafted.
After all, the Islamic Republic of Iran today is no less ominous than it was before the outbreak of hostilities. It is no less infused with baneful and baleful ill-will towards the non-Islamic world, just as antithetical to the American ethos of individual liberty, equality, and religious freedom as expressed in the US Constitution.
Qatari compliant realtors?
This, of course, raises the question of how anyone could seriously entertain the childlike belief that a regime that could nonchalantly massacre tens of thousands of its own unarmed citizens can be counted on to fulfill its MOU obligations. Indeed, even senior Administration officials, personally appointed by Trump, have cast grave doubts on the Iranians’ intentions to honor their MOU undertakings.
These include such consequential figures as Secretary of State and National Security Advisor, Marco Rubio, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, all of whom are, prima facie, eminently more qualified than Trump’s more pliant advisors, the Qatar-compliant realtors Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, who reportedly favor this perplexing and perturbing memorandum.
Yet, as hard as it is to understand the logic behind the professed strategic rationale underlying the MOU, it is even more difficult to fathom the personal rationale of the US figures, who promoted and permitted its formulation.
Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory
For, as on all the other fronts in this post-2023 conflagration, Trump has imposed a premature cessation of fighting. However, in this case, the stakes are much higher, and the blunder of snatching inexplicable defeat from the jaws of imminent victory much more confusing. After all, lower gas prices and mid-term elections, almost six months away, seem a flimsy excuse for a second-term President to abandon the stature of a valiant conqueror for that of a pliant supplicant.
Indeed, the deadly defects in the document relate not only to flawed and faulty strategy, but to grievous moral weakness. It reflects not only an abandonment of a loyal ally, but of the Iranian people, who must now surely despair of ridding themselves of the yoke of the theocratic and tyrannical regime under which they have suffered for decades. For not only does the MOU constitute a renunciation of virtually every previous Trumpian pledge, but perhaps most egregiously, of his wildly premature, and now permanently, unfulfilled promise to the regime’s opponents that ‘help is on the way’.
Tragically, tens of thousands of them were slaughtered while waiting vainly for the promised aid, by the very regime that Trump has now chosen to sustain, despite reports that it conspired to assassinate him!!!
A maelstrom of criticism
Indeed, one can only shake one’s head in disbelief at the possibility that the Administration could truly believe that such a renegade regime would not renege on its MOU commitments, rendering the document worthless.
In the maelstrom of criticism across the political spectrum, apologists for the MOU reject the parallel being drawn between it and Obama’s appalling 2015 JCPOA.
In one sense, they are right. The routes by which the two documents were arrived at are very different. But in another-and more important ways, they are wrong. In terms of their substantive content, they are very similar if not identical. Indeed. Even if the apologists are right, and the US can revert back to military action if Tehran violates the MOU, why resort to such a circuitous and unlikely route, allowing the enemy time to regroup and improve its capabilities, making any future victory commensurately more costly?
It is not easy to conjure up a persuasive reason for Donald Trump to dramatically morph into an Obama-like clone. In fact, all those that do come to mind-from moral bankruptcy, via craven cowardice, to unbridled avarice-have a distinctly ominous and/or odious ring to them.
‘A date which will live in infamy’
The freshly signed MOU has a lamentably familiar ring to it. It evokes sentiments expressed by FDR after the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, when he proclaimed it ‘a date which will live in infamy’.
Indeed, Trump and his Administration would do well to heed the profound words of warning of Winston Churchill in ‘The Gathering Storm’, his epic account of events that precipitated WWII: ‘… if you will not fight…when you can easily win, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure…you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you.’
Sadly, such a moment might well come.