New York Times lectures Pakistan on nukes - omits Israeli nukes
by Michael Hoffman | Feb. 21, 2011
This column is online with additional research links:
tinyurl.com
Here is more of the same ? the insufferable Talmudic double-standard
which the NY Times, in its Zionist exceptionalism, regularly undertakes
when self-righteously lecturing Muslims about their alleged moral
failings and ethical lapses, in this case, in the realm of nuclear
weapons. Pay attention, little Muslims, as the Times imparts to you its
superior morality out of Animal Farm: Pakistani nukes bad, Israeli nukes
invisible!
The lead editorial in the New York Times:
"..experts say, it (Pakistan) has already manufactured enough fuel for
40 to 100 additional weapons. That means Pakistan...could soon possess
the world's fifth-largest arsenal, behind the United States, Russia,
France and China but ahead of Britain and India. Washington and Moscow,
with thousands of nuclear weapons each, still have the most weapons by
far, but at least they are making serious reductions."
?"Pakistan's Nuclear Folly," NY Times Editorial, Feb. 20, 2011 (emphasis
supplied).
The omission of "Israel" from the list is arrogant and brazen; the
unwritten undercurrent being that the Judaic possession of nuclear
weapons exists in such a vastly higher moral dimension of survival and
security concerns with regard to the welfare of superior Israeli human
beings, as to be off-limits to editorial consideration, journalistic
scrutiny or analogies to other nations' WMD. It is an axiom: God's Holy
People must possess the bomb, while, for unholy Pakistanis to do so in
anything other than token amounts, is "folly."
The Times, in finger-pointing at Pakistan's possession of weapons of
mass destruction, enumerates the world's nuclear powers (Russia, France,
China, Britain and India), while the unmentionable power in possession
of those weapons is rendered invisible. This outrageous omission, which
demonstrates the degree to which Zionist ideologues operate the Times
under a patina of liberal universalism, is in keeping with official
policy of the "State of Israel," which decrees that Israeli nuclear
possession is disputed, and should neither be confirmed nor denied by
the media.
Questions for the New York Times:
How many nuclear weapons are there in the Israeli arsenal? Have they
increased in recent years? Are the Israelis determined to gain
additional nuclear weapons? If so, is this determination any kind of
"folly" or cause for concern? What are the Israelis doing with the
advanced, nuclear-powered submarine Germany donated to them? Are the
Israelis under any obligation to reduce their nuclear stockpile, or is
the "existential threat" posed by "militant Islam" a sufficient alibi
for having no limits? How does the New York Times rank the Israeli
nuclear weapon stockpile: sixth-largest, fourth-largest, third-largest?
Under what onerous conditions of repression is Mordechai Vanunu ? the
Judaic nuclear technician and convert to Christianity, who was
imprisoned for 18 years for the "crime" of confirming the existence of
Israeli nuclear weapons -- living? Why, after all those years in prison,
does he still face police harassment and restrictions on his freedom of
expression in "the only democracy in the Middle East"?
I'll bet it is "anti-semitic" to ask these questions.
We should all just be good scouts and limit ourselves to worrying about
Pakistani nukes, while awaiting a signal from our high-caste commissars
in New York to indicate to us when (if ever) it would not be
"anti-semitic" to ask probing investigative questions about the
existential threat which the enormous Israeli and American nuclear
arsenals pose to sovereign Muslim nations, given the Israeli and
American record of invasion, and mass murder of civilians, in Lebanon,
Iraq, Afghanistan and Gaza. |
