One of the reasons why America got involved in WW2, was because Jewish Media magnates had succeeded in convincing the majority of Americans that Germans were nothing but brutes, who took a particular pleasure in torturing innocent civilians.
During the course of this historical period, not a single day would go by, without American newspapers (owned by representatives of “chosen people”) placing stories about Nazis subjecting people in occupied countries to horrible tortures, which resulted in more and more Americans coming to conclusion that U.S. had no option but to declare war on Germany, so that freedom would eventually triumph in Europe.
Nowadays, the majority of hook-nosed “experts on tolerance” sing absolutely different song – they actually promote the idea that there is nothing wrong with torturing people (suspected of being affiliated with terrorists), to increase the levels of safety, within American society.
In his article “The Case for Torture”, Michael Levin provides us with the insight onto the sick mentality of self-appointed spokesmen for multiculturalism, by suggesting that application of tortures against suspected terrorists is morally justifiable: “It is generally assumed that torture is impermissible, a throwback to a more brutal age… I believe this attitude is unwise.
There are situations in which torture is not merely permissible but morally mandatory (!).Torturing the terrorist is unconstitutional? Probably. But millions of lives surely outweigh constitutionality” (Levin). Is it really so?
Apparently, the possession of American passport, on the part of Levin, did not turn him into a true American, because he appears to be an individual who is clearly incapable of perceiving consideration of freedom as such that outweighs any other considerations.
One of our founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin, once stated – “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety”. This directly applies to contemporary Americans, even though that mainstream Media try to convince us that this statement had lost its actuality, because of the realities of 21st century.
This could not be further from the truth, of course. Such concepts as freedom, progress, degradation, and corruption are not being affected by the flow time. Therefore, any normal individual cannot feel anything but disgust when he hears politicians making ridiculous statements that it is permissible to tab people’s phones, that it is OK to detain them for as long as it is “necessary”, without charging them with any particular crime, and that it is “morally mandatory” to use tortures to extract confessions out of suspects.
Whereas students in American public schools are being taught to believe that the only reason why American soldiers continue to be present in Iraq is to protect Iraqis’ democracy, the political opportunists like Levin try their best to convince American adults that the concept of freedom is nothing but illusion.
Apparently, it is not enough for newly arrived immigrants to simply know few words in English and to be able to tell the names of American states, in order to be allowed to settle – if they are incapable of thinking about freedom as such that represents a foremost value (such as Levin’s hook-nosed brethrens), they should be thrown out of this country.
In his article “Multicultural Justice”, Dr. Willian Pierce utilizes his acute sense of sarcasm, while referring to another Jewish proponent of torture, Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz, who just like Levin, is known for his ardent support of torture as the legitimate instrument of criminal investigation: “Dershowitz’s argument is that when torture may save lives it is justified: for example, when the government is holding someone who may have knowledge of a bomb that is set to go off at an undisclosed location.
Tear his fingernails out to find out whether or not he really does know something about a bomb. If he admits that he does, then use a red-hot poker to find out where the bomb is and when it is set to go off. Hundreds of lives may be saved. If the poor bastard really didn’t know anything about a bomb – if the secret police had the wrong man – well, hey, all he’s lost are his fingernails!” (Pierce, 2002).
The most horrible thing is not that people like Levin and Dershowitz are able to promote such their views openly (in time free from fighting anti-Semitism), but that more and more Americans grow to be increasingly incapable of understanding that the use of torture cannot be permitted, under any circumstances, as the result of them being spiritually corrupted by their preoccupation with accumulation of material riches.
As Dr. William Pierce rightly points out in the same article: “The people who founded this country and wrote our Constitution thought the government should be prohibited from torturing prisoners under any circumstances. They forbade it absolutely. They were willing to sacrifice lives, including their own, to uphold that and the other provisions of the Constitution.
They believed that certain principles are even more important than saving lives” (Pierce, 2002). We can only agree with this point of view. It is exactly the fact that Americans never doubted the validity of the notions, upon which our Constitution is based, which was one of the most important reasons why U.S. became the world’s most powerful nation.
This was also the reason why, up until recently, many people, throughout the world, thought of America with utter admiration, as such where ordinary citizens’ were at liberty to fully enjoy their civil rights and freedoms. Therefore, we cannot discuss the sick ideas, expressed in Levin’s article, other then with utter contempt.
It is perfectly understandable that in Israel, the practice of torturing prisoners to extract confessions is absolutely legal, just as it is the case in such countries as North Korea, Iran and China. But America is not Israel – obviously enough, Levin is simply incapable of realizing this simple fact, just as the majority of “chosen people” in this country, who never get tired of whining about their ancestors being forced to do some physical work, for a change, by Germans, during the course of WW2 (Holohoax), while coming up with ridiculous suggestions that torturing people is not simply permissible but “morally mandatory”(!).
The degree of Levin’s moral deprivation becomes especially apparent in the closing statement of his article: “There is little danger that the Western democracies will lose their way if they choose to inflict pain as one way of preserving order.
Paralysis in the face of evil is the greater danger. Some day soon a terrorist will threaten tens of thousands of lives, and torture will be the only way to save them” (Levin) – there is little danger to the democracy in this country, when hook-nosed “experts”, like Levin, are being stripped of their image of “figures of morality” and revealed who they really are – social parasites and the agents of foreign influence.
In fact, the American democracy would only win, if Hollywood homosexual producers, Manhattan shysters, and yarmulka wearing “progressive” politicians, associated with promotion of neo-Liberal agenda, are being issued with shovels and told to do something useful for a change, like helping farmers to scoop cow’s manure, while enjoying the scenery in the countryside; because, ordinary Americans could never come to the idea that the use of torture is OK, on their own.
If Levin was genuinely concerned about the dangers of terrorism in America, it should have been clear to him that the only reason why America became a subject of terrorist attacks, in the first place, is because of this country’s unquestionable support of Israel, which in its turn, can be explained by the fact that Jewish lobby in U.S. exercises a disproportional influence on America’s politics.
According to Levin’s article, in today’s America, just about anyone may turn out as being affiliated with terrorism (therefore deserving to be tortured), except for Jews, who are beyond any criticism, whatsoever, despite many “chosen people” with American citizenship having been caught while spying for Israel, and despite the fact that Jewish Anti-Defamation League has been proven by FBI as being behind the terrorist attacks on Muslim mosques and on those Americans who dare to think of Jews other then the “holy cows”.
We can only imagine the public outcry, which would have been issued, as a result of tortures being applied to hook-nosed proponents of tortures themselves. It would be interesting to look at Levin, strapped into a torture chair, while being asked of whether he has been spying for Israel or not, or whether he has been trying to undermine the integrity of this nation in any other way (like writing his despicable articles).
If it would turn out that he was innocent of any charges (which is highly doubtful) – then he would have been allowed to walk free. But there can be little doubt as to the fact that, after having his fingernails torn off, Levin would have radically revised his opinions, in regards to the application of tortures on others.
Apparently, despite of his claims to be an “expert” on the subject of hatemongering, Levin failed to understand that his popularization of tortures actually constitutes the act of hatemongering, because only a person who innately despises the value of other people’s lives in a priory, can think of application of tortures as the appropriate method of extracting information out of suspects. Therefore, Levine’s arguments need to be brushed aside as ridiculous.
Levin, Michael “The Case for Torture”. 1982. College of the Canyons.
Pierce, William “Multicultural Justice”. 2002. The National Alliance.