It doesn't take a licensed or unlicensed physician to expose a propagandist for a regime-slash-society of thieves and homicidal liars.
Israel is digging its own grave with its brazen criminality. The Ashkenazis are arrogant and triumphal. The Jacobs, and Nathans, and Benjamins and Abrahams are all very self-satisfied and disdainful.
So were the Nazis when they marched into Paris. But where are the Nazis now? They were very good at beating up on backward eastern European weakling countries, (as the Ashkenazis are now with the imprisoned Palestinians).
But the Russians were just as smart and -- more to the point -- made of tougher stuff than the strutting Aryan "supermen" (as they are made of tougher stuff than the strutting Askenazi "chosen").
The Russians snuffed out the Nazis, as they had snuffed out Napoleon, and as they had snuffed out the Khazars a thousand years earlier. [From Wikipedia: Between 965 and 969, the Kievan Rus' ruler Sviatoslav I of Kiev conquered the capital Atil and destroyed the Khazar state.]
You may have noticed the fierce Neocon animus toward the Russians. Could this be evidence of an implacable blood feud dating back a thousand years? If the Askenazi "chosen" in their arrogance take on the Russians, will they suffer the same fate as their Khazarian progenitors, and Napoleon, and the Nazis? Criminal pride and arrogance foster over-confidence. History is filled with the ghosts of those who confused their moment in the sun with invulnerability.
Russia has more land, more people, more nukes, better anti-missile defenses and considerably more toughness than the Askenazi criminals and their geopolitical crime-in-progress, Israel.
From The Next Big Future, which I believe is Brian Wang's website/blog (I'm new at this stuff) , I find a piece entitled Terrorism is a subset of Murder http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/terrorism-is-subset-of-murder.html (asserting, if I get it right, that Terrorism is illegitimate by virtue of being criminal). One commenter, Gigi, responded: As I have already tried to say before, I consider any use of the word “terrorism” more or less pointless. In fact, reading much of the western media about “terrorism” there is almost nowhere any clear definition of the word “terrorism”, for the simple reason that for any kind of such definition many of the military actions taken by the West against unarmed civilians in, say, Iraq or Vietnam may well fall in this definition. Is this an action of terrorism? http://boingboing.net/2010/04/... Simply put it, if Hamas kills one Israeli civilian it is terrorism, if the US or Israel directly kill 10 or more Palestinian it is ...
Comments