I'm looking at an advertisement in the Financial Times; specifically, an advertisement on the back page of the House and Home section, in last weekend's edition (August 23-24).
The FT is not a newspaper that's intended for the likes of me, and the advertisement follows that trend. It offers investment opportunities in The Trump Ocean Club, a luxury development in "Punta Pacifica, the most exclusive location in Panama City". However, nearly half of the spread is given over to singing the praises of Panama itself. An info box itemises the plus points of the place where the hats come from (although they don't, apparently), including:
• Political and economic stability, over 13% GDP growth in 2007;
• 20 years property tax exemption;
• Expansion of International Airport and improved roads;
• Panama hosts a large, powerful jewish community
Er... pardon? Leaving aside that peculiar lower-case 'j' (Mixed-marriage? Non-observant? Short, which surely contradicts large and powerful?), a large, powerful Jewish community would not appear to be an unqualified selling point. Of course, it would attract some people: Jews; people who like Jews, in particular large, powerful Jews; people who like chicken soup with matzo kleis. But it would also scare off a sizeable segment of potential investors: chiefly, anti-Semites (for whom the alignment of "powerful" with "Jewish" must trigger all sorts of Pavlovian paranoia) and people who get a toothache when they hear klezmer music. The majority of people, meanwhile, wouldn't really give a damn one way or the other. Donald Trump (for it is he, of course) might as well shout about the fact that Panama has 15 indigenous species of tulip, or that the policemen wear rather fetching maroon trousers.
Sorry, I don't have a conclusion to this one, facetious or otherwise. It's just a very peculiar thing to put in a property advertisement. If anyone can concoct a sensible explanation, the floor's yours.