Is Netanyahu saving or gaslighting the world? (P#44)
This is a fantastic motivational speech from Israel’s leader garnering support for its war effort. It contains very simple and effective messages, tugs at heart strings, shames the enemy and tells us the altruistic Israelis will save the world for us, if we will all just give them more arms. It’s a 10 out of 10! It’s a great salesman’s pitch, doing the seemingly impossible – getting the world to support horrific things it otherwise wouldn’t contemplate.
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1DeQoaRhCj/
But war is about power and deception to conserve that power. So, truth is the first casualty of war, which means neither side can afford to tell it.
The broader context of this speech is that this war aligns with the third in Pike’s 1871 blueprint for fomenting world wars (see my previous post #43). His openly stated purpose was for four supposedly false religions (Judaism, Islam, Christianity and atheism (communism)) to mutually slaughter each other, so that whoever is left can experience true Luciferian enlightenment!
It’s worth analysing this magnificent speech to see the difference between persuasion and logic and to recognise our need to be constantly looking for what we aren’t being told before we just respond emotionally and trustingly. No matter who is talking, everybody wants something, even us. We’ll end up paying for it one way or another if we don’t first look to understand the other person’s context. From that, we can work out what they might not want to tell us.
Netanyahu says:
“Israel is defending itself against the ‘enemies of civilisation’ on seven fronts.”
[Could this be even just a little bit like the supposed war on terror, or on Saddam’s supposed WMDs? Are all these Arabs really uncivilised? This is a huge, unsupported assertion. Remember Hitler’s ‘big lie’ where the more ridiculous the assertion the more credible it seems to be when coming from ‘an authority’ figure.]
“We are fighting against Hamas,”
[Wasn’t Hamas created by Israel? What could possibly have gone wrong?]
“those savages who murdered, raped, beheaded and burned our people on October 7th …”
[He omitted “Which I got our armed services to stand down for and let happen and I’ve never explained why”. Hmmm. Could this have been a false flag to foment/ trigger Pike’s third world war? Who was actually controlling this stand-down?]
“As Israel fights the forces of barbarism led by Iran, all civilised countries should be standing firmly by Israel’s side… (rather than) calling for arms embargoes against Israel. Shame on them! … Is Iran imposing an arms embargo on Hezbollah… Houthis… Hamas and its other proxies? (No) The Axis of Terror stands together…”
[How strange that the Iranian people I know have great disregard for both fundamentalism and authority and tell me that’s also widespread back home! Of course, Israel couldn’t possibly have taken any precipitate and unnecessary action in killing civilians and traumatising millions in Gaza, shunting them back and forth with whatever of their possessions were still left that they could salvage! Is this the only possible civilised response to the threat to civilisation! Isn’t that a bit contradictory or even hypocritical? Oh! It’s because they hide under hospitals! But could this also possibly have anything to do with (the usual military method of) land resumption for the long-desired Ben Gurion canal?]
“In defending ourselves against this barbarism, Israel is defending civilisation against those who seek to impose a dark age of fanaticism on all of us.”
[The only way to fight fire is with fire? Match fanaticism with fanaticism? Perhaps so in a world that doesn’t know how to coordinate action any way other than coercive control?]
“Israel will fight until the battle is won for the sake of the peace and security of the entire world.”
[Which battle, Bibi? Are you for Judaism or Luciferianism? Is peace and security what happens when the biggest bully wins?]
There are so many omissions or oversights in the logic of this speech, but as an emotional motivator, it’s top notch. Of course, all people on earth deserve to live in peace without the threat of bombs raining down on them, including every single Israeli and every single Palestinian. But doing more of the same won’t get us there.
The real problem seems to be people fomenting wars by dividing us and trying to force us to take sides against each other. As soon as we take sides and think we can solve problems by doing so, or that one side is right, or that some person we support will save us, we’ve already lost and have completely mis-identified our real enemy. The only winners in Pike’s game can be the arms dealers, bankers and Luciferians. They are all just misleading, defrauding and stealing the individual and common property of everyone else on earth, and getting away with it by leaving confusion and disagreement in their wake.
Unfortunately, as can be seen from Pike’s thinking, religion is the key tool for doing this. So it would seem evident that those religions and their followers need to critically examine the aspects of their beliefs, teachings, dogma and operations that lead them into conflict with other belief systems. They could identify and dump those aspects that are concerned with domination or subversion, then focus on the remainder that deals with living harmonious and fulfilling lives. If any religion won’t do that, then it isn’t serious about achieving world peace and should stop pretending.