NOVANEWS
by Ariadna Theokopoulos
(The video shows Haim Saban proudly describing what amounts to his financing a fresh crop of future sayanim.)
A recently coined expression likely to be gaining currency among analysts and commentators in the alternative media, “jew peak,” and meant to signify that jewish power (jp) has crested in the US, is a speculation based primarily on Obama’s refusal to set a “red line” in the timetable of attacking Iran.
Today’s “event” at the UN, where the Israeli delegation did its usual walkout when Ahmadinejad was speaking but the US delegation did not follow suit as usual will also be read as further symbolism of Jewdammerung.
Kevin McDonald, to whom the paternity of the phrase “jew peak” might be attributed, argues in his article elaborating on jew peak that the relatively weak response to Maureen Dawd’s recent criticism of neocons directing American foreign policy (with Senor as prime example) is another proof:
“Simply saying that a Jew has such influence crosses the line—even though Dowd never mentions that Senor is a Jew.
But there is something else in Dowd’s column that one would think would send the ADL into a tizzy. Describing the foreign policy advocated by Senor, she writes:
‘A moral, muscular foreign policy; a disdain for weakness and diplomacy; a duty to invade and bomb Israel’s neighbors; a divine right to pre-emption — it’s all ominously familiar.’
So an American Jew is demanding a foreign policy where the U.S. has “a duty to invade and bomb Israel’s neighbors.”
‘What happened to all the blather about promoting democracy and freedom that has been the staple of neocon rationales for rearranging the politics of the Middle East in Israel’s favor? You know the line: It’s not about the interests of Israel. It’s about doing good for all humanity.’
McDonald further observes:
“Dowd clearly crossed a line here, not even mentioning how Senor himself would propagandize his policy recommendations. Instead she implies that Senor is simply trying to advance Israel’s interests. This is a flagrant example of the loyalty issue—that Senor’s main loyalty is to Israel even though he has a powerful position in American politics.
This is exactly the sort of thing that the ADL goes after tooth and nail.”
Yet they did not. Perhaps they are just reloading?
This is McDonald’s conclusion:
“But it may be that the ADL is hoping the entire thing will just go away. Sometimes the ignoring strategy is best. Since everyone who is paying attention knows full well that in fact Senor and other prominent Jewish neocons are promoting foreign policy that is in their ethnic interest, at some point they lose credibility. And the incredible chutzpah of Netanyahu in more or less demanding that the U.S. go to war with Iran makes it pretty difficult to maintain that Israel has nothing to do with it. Plus the fact that Dowd is notoriously liberal and thus generally on the same side as the Jewish community on domestic issues.
And some people are just too big to bring down easily, so there is a certain risk in attacking Dowd—that such attacks will result in a loss of credibility. There’s definitely an art to continually lying through your teeth that black is white and expecting people to fall in line when the results are completely contrary to their interests. You have to pick your battles and hope that things don’t get too out of control.
But having said that, the fact that they avoided this battle may be a sign that the organized Jewish community is on the defensive on the role of Jews in U.S. foreign policy. It’s about time.” [emphasis added].
One may also read too much in the recently published articlein the Washington Post seeming to acknowledge Israel’s nuclear weapons.
The premise of the jew peak diagnosis – I assume – is that the jp went too far, their machinations (banking meltdown, wars for Israel) are no longer hidden from plain view as they once were, so the belatedly percipient natives are restive, that some journalists are brazenly brave, and even the hired help (the White House) have become uppity enough to say “no” (or at least “not yet”), and that, finally, the jp’s domination of American policy is on the wane – is debatable.
The natives are not restive against jp, at least not in the US. You have to go as far as Hungary to see some audacity of revolt against jp, i.e., Hungary demanding reimbursement for Holocaust reparations paid, for which Israel refuses to provide accounting.
Holocaust reparations do seem to be a peaked resource, a fact which, combined with the likely intent of muting any reference to the exiled Palestinian rights to reparations, may explain the incredible chutzpah of Israel declaring the Arab countries their new reparations market.
But what does “jew peak” mean anyway? Perhaps it means that, just as might be the case with reparations, the US resources have been tapped and the rigs may have to stop drilling here.
Madoff may have been an emblematic case. His $50 billion fraud lasting for decades, sheltered from scrutiny by SEC itself, unraveled eventually for lack of “hosts” and shocked the jewish world mostly because towards the end he had been stealing from jews as well. No shock has been registered with Goldman Sachs’, or JP Morgan Chase’s depredations. Maddof may have gone cannibalistic because he had no choice and felt, like Willie Sutton that “that’s where the money is.”
A pessimistic alternative is that there is no “jew peak” and what we are witnessing is merely an internal jewish squabble between two competing strategies and tactics and that jp is safe and working on a change of cast and a new script for Israel.
After all, what is the difference between “Democrat” billionaire Haim Saban and “Republican” billionaire Sheldon Adelson? Tactics only.
What is interesting is the state of mind and attitude revealed by the concept of “jew peak.” It suggests huddles masses waiting for the tsunami waters to recede, peering cautiously out and wondering “Has it crested yet?”
It is a sad testimony to the success of long decades of brain washing, deliberate fragmentation in fake specialty interests and “multiculturalism” to prevent cohesion, and intimidation, that the fear of naming the culpable group out loud is almost akin to the medieval superstitious fear of saying Satan’s name out loud.
Kevin McDonald has been branded an “anti-semite” and “white ethnocentric” for studies like this one and for being one of the voices to utter it out loud:
“The rise of a Jewish elite in the US is problematic for a great many reasons — most obviously because the Jewish elite remains motivated by ethnic paranoia and hostility toward Western cultural traditions, particularly Christianity. [emphasis added] However, the behavior of the financial elite in the case of the recent meltdown is not something one would expect to see in a healthy society. Quite a few of the details remain unknown, so that it is difficult to get a clear image of how individual Jews and Jewish networking contributed to the meltdown. (By all accounts …Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, and Alan Greenspan were instrumental in getting rid of regulations on trading derivatives that would have prevented the meltdown.) The indications that Goldman Sachs was at the center of the meltdown strongly suggests that the Jewish role was important. GS has not commented on Issa’s document or the Bloomberg article.
Nevertheless, at this point there is a strong suggestion that the financial elite behaved much more like an organized crime syndicate than as an elite with a sense of civic responsibility or commitment to the long term viability of the society. Whereas organized crime stems from the lower levels of society, this meltdown was accomplished at the very pinnacle of society — the Ivy League grads mentioned by Brooks, the wealthy financial firms and investment rating agencies, the strong connections with government that facilitated the bailout and failed to provide scrutiny while it was happening. It seems highly doubtful that all this would have happened with the former elite — the people whom Brooks disdainfully describes as “well-connected blue bloods who drank at lunch and played golf in the afternoons.”
That is the problem going ahead. The US has sacrificed wealth-production in favor of finance, and this has doubtless resulted in huge financial rewards to a few people at the very top. But it’s really hard to see how most of us are going to benefit from this transformation in the long run. A society without a healthy, civic-minded elite is doomed.” [emphasis added]
