Beyond the Cusp

May 27, 2015

Western Governments Slowly Destroy Chance for Peace

Filed under: 1949 Armistice Line,1967 Borders,1967 War,Absolutism,Administration,AFP,Al Nusra Front,Amalekites,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,AP,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Appointment,Arab Appeasement,Arab Authority,Arab League,Arab World,Arabs,Asia,BBC,Benyamin Netanyahu,Blood Libel,Borders,Boycott,British Mandate,Budget,Building Freeze,Building Freeze,Cabinet,Calaphate,Civilization,Condemning Israel,Conflict Avoidnce,Coverup,Damascus,Defend Palestinians,Demolitions,Dhimmi,Divided Jerusalem,Domestic NGOs,East Jerusalem,Economy,Ehud Barak,Emergency Aid,Employment,Europe,European Council,European Governments,European Pressure,European Union,European Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs,Executive Order,Fatah,Federica Mogherini,Forced Solution,Foreign Funding,Foreign NGOs,Gaza,Gaza Blockade,Golan Heights,Government,Green Line,Hamas,Hamas Charter,Hate,Intifada,Iron Dome,ISIS,ISIS in Gaza,ISIS in Judea and Samaria,Islam,Islam,Islamic Pressure,Islamic State,Islamist,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Israeli Interests,Jerusalem,Jerusalem Day,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Home,Jewish Leadership,Jewish State,Jews,Jihad,Jihad,Jordan River,Judea,Judean Hills,Khaled Mashaal,Khartoum Conference,Knesset,Land for Peace,Leftist Pressures,Legal Blockade,Levy Report,Mahmoud Abbas,Mainstream Media,Meaning of Peace,Media,Media Bias,Mediterranean Sea,Middle East,Misreporting,Muslim Brotherhood,Muslim World,Muslims,Nablus,Old City,One State Solution,Oslo Accords,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Palestinian Pressures,Peace Partner,Peace Process,PLO,PLO Charter,Politicized Findings,Post-Zionist,Prime Minister,Promised Land,Protective Edge,Quran,Recognize Israel,Resolution,Response to Terrorism,Right of Return,Rocket Attacks,Russian Pressure,Saeb Erekat,Samaria,San Remo Conference,Saudi Arabian Pressure,Secular Interests,Security,Separation Barrier,Settlements,Sharia,Shechem,Six Day War,Statehood,Suicide Bomber,Support Israel,Syria,Taqiyya,Taqiyya,Tel Aviv,Temple Mount,Terror,Third Intifada,Three No's,Two State Solution,United Nations Presures,United States Pressure,War of Independence,World Media,World Opinion,World Pressures,Yarmouk Refugee Camp,Yasser Arafat,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 2:27 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

Peace, peace, Western governments and leaders scream demanding peace, but there will be no peace. The recently elected government in Sweden in their first act voted to recognize the Arab state of Palestine. They made no demands that a treaty be reached between the Arabs and Israel, no requirement for the Arabs to recognize Israel, no requirement that the Arab violence and terror attacks against Israelis be ended. The Swedish government simply gave recognition to the Arabs to have formed a state named Palestine without defining borders or end to hostilities. Now the French government is preparing to also recognize an Arab state called Palestine. They are going to require that the Arabs negotiate with Israel for eighteen months and if they can manage not to reach an agreement with Israel then the French government will recognize Palestine with the 1949 Armistice Lines (also called the Green Line and the 1967 Lines which are the Armistice Lines marking the front lines at the termination of violence from the Arab World’s attempt to destroy Israel at its birth and by treaty demanded by the Arab League that the lines never be used or interpreted as being an actual border) marking their border with the possibility of exchanges of lands by mutual agreement, something the Arabs have already stated they will not accept any alteration demanding that every Jew be removed from the lands before they take control or they will remove them in whatever manner is required. So, with this news and the call from Israeli Prime Minister for a reinitiating of the negotiations starting with arranging equal land exchanges in order to facilitate Israel retaining the cities built beyond the Green Line in areas which had previously been agreed would remain within Israel. One might wonder what the reaction might be from the Arabs.

 

Well, we did not have to wait long so why make you do so. Allow me to quote Saeb Erekat, the Arab leading negotiator who stated that such an idea was “completely unacceptable” and explained “Netanyahu’s proposal to discuss the borders of settlement blocs is an attempt to legitimize the settlements. The borders that should be set are the borders of the internationally recognized state of Palestine based on 1967 borders. Settlements should be stopped instead of being legitimized.” His answer is exactly what one would expect as after all with the Swedish government recognizing the 1949 Armistice Lines as the borders despite International treaties delineating that they were never to be used in any way as borders nor were they to imply borders, terms as noted above were insisted upon by the Arab League. Add to the Swedish recognition there is the French government placing a mere stipulation that the Arabs negotiate in bad faith and refuse to even pretend to be interested in reaching any agreement in order to have the 1949 Armistice Lines recognized as their border. Why should the Arabs make any concessions when all the pressure is being placed on the Israelis to reach an agreement or else they will lose the cities in which nearly one million Israelis reside in actual cities some of which have been established for over forty years and are anything but mere settlements, they are as much a city as is Netanya, Ashod, Ashkelon or even Tel Aviv.

 

The Arabs are aware that they could cause Israel untold economic turmoil from which the Israeli economy would take at the very minimum a decade to recover. Many do not realize that of the Israelis who were forcibly removed from their communities as part of the Gaza disengagement under Prime Minister Sharon have yet to be resettled into permanent housing and many have yet to find employment. The last thing Israel would need is another situation where a large number of Israelis were immediately forced from their homes and possibly their employment due to overt demands, pressures and resultant disasters visited upon Israel even should United States President Barack Obama give assurances promising a declaration of intents that the United States is prepared to apply similar to the insane agreement received after responding to pressures from United States President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to disengage from Gaza where they also provided assurances in a letter written by President George W. Bush and taken as a guarantee of future actions by the United States. That illusion was immediately snapped back to reality when incoming United States President Barack Obama immediately let it be known that those promises were not binding on him and he would refuse to recognize the guarantees granted by now former President Bush. Sometimes one can only wonder what Israeli leaders are thinking and even more so what the world leaders are thinking.

 

Furthermore, the commentary by Saeb Erekat calling for an end to construction in the Israeli cities and communities beyond the Green Line when he stated, “Settlements should be stopped,” was completely fatuous as Netanyahu had enacted a silent building freeze since the last round of peace talks started in late 2013 which he has yet to rescind and thus there has been no building past the Green Line and Saeb Erekat is fully aware of this situation. His claim inferring maliciously that Israel was continuing to build beyond the Green Line knowing that such would enflame European leaders potentially pressing more governments to grant recognition for Palestine free of any encumbrances such as making peace, settling borders, ending violence or granting recognition of Israel, especially as the home of the Jewish People. Mahmoud Abbas has also promised to never ever grant recognition of Israel as the state for the Jewish People. Senior PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) official Hanan Ashrawi joined in on the discarding any hope for actual peace negotiations stating Netanyahu was making “a disingenuous and manipulative exercise in political and legal deception.” She continued, “All settlements are illegal and in flagrant contravention of international law and consensus, and any efforts to annex and to legalize the settlements blocs is a blatant attempt to steal more Palestinian land.” Actually, truth be told, Israel has the most well defined claim to all the lands between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea with the following provisos that Israel must provide for any residents who are not Jewish (which was predominantly the Arab and Muslim population); provide religious rights; rights of property ownership; social rights to live, work, pray and play wherever they desire; and virtually any other human rights one might define with one specific exception, the non-Jewish population does not automatically have political rights. Non-Jews would have all the freedoms except they will not automatically be granted the vote, the right to run for public office or any other political act though their freedom of speech would allow them to campaign for candidates even if they would not be permitted to vote. This omission was specifically placed into the San Remo Conference Treaty and was further enforced by United Nations Charter Article 80 which reaffirmed the findings from the San Remo Conference Treaty. These facts may not be popular and the stipulations from the San Remo Conference and the ensuing language in the United Nations Charter Article 80 which form the legal basis for the claims recognized and permitted under the treaties which establish the International Laws governing every side, part and parcel of the Arab/Israeli Conflict. These nations recognizing a state of Palestine anywhere within the lands between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea is illegal and would be dissolved upon any challenge to such an establishment without gaining Israeli permission.

 

One person who has supported Israel is Hillary Clinton whose comments about the failings at the very beginning when hosting the renewed peace talks commenting, “In retrospect, our early, hard line on settlements didn’t work.” Hillary Clinton further went on to describe how President Obama and State Department coming down on Israel immediately out of the block was the actual demand ultimately served to harden Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’s stance against Israel leading directly to the collapse of the efforts terminating the negotiations which could be better described as a waste of time as their failure was predetermined. The proof of that comes straight out of the horse’s mouth as Mahmoud Abbas stated, “It was Obama who suggested a full settlement freeze. I said OK, I accept. We both went up the tree. After that, he came down with a ladder and he removed the ladder and said to me, jump.” The end of the Abbas commentary was a well-articulated response describing the changing tactics and shifting positions of United States President Barack Obama conveyed most often by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The comments by Mahmoud Abbas was the perfect representation of the Arab view on negotiations with Israel and the advantage the Arabs have as all they would be required to perform would be to not agree with Israel in negotiations for a year and a half and refuse to compromise on anything simple waiting for the Europeans along with the United States and United Nations to simply grant them everything they could ever have negotiated for and they got it because the Europeans believe that the reason the Arab world is fighting and threatening Western nations is because of Israel. The European leadership joined by the American Administration and State Department in blaming Israel and Israel alone for the lack of progress in the peace negotiations. The elephant in the living room which is almost universally ignored has been the negotiations creep where the Arabs have steadily moved the goalposts from the initial point where Israel had initially been expected to retain all of Judea and Samaria which was the Jordanian view when they reached a peace with Israel surrendering all of Judea and Samaria just as Egypt had surrendered all of Gaza to Israel. In both of these situations the Arab states of Jordan and Egypt surrendered to Israel the parts of the lands they had occupied from 1949 through June of 1967 when Israeli troops liberated the occupied lands which were recognized as being legally belonging to Israel. When Israel returned the entirety of the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt when making peace and Jordan relented their illegal hold over Judea and Samaria many in the Western world figured that this was the end of the negotiations and that Israel would retain these areas which according to International Law were presumed to belong to Israel according to established treaty. This was not to be the end though as the Soviet Union’s KGB still had an ace up their sleeves which would place Israel in peril and threaten her very existence. The Soviet Union has fallen but their construct of the PLO is still being a thorn in the side of Israel.

 

That is the extent to which the worldview has changed where after the 1967 Six Day War it was expected that Israel would probably retain half of the Sinai Peninsula dividing it along the central mountains with Israel retaining the entirety of the lands bordering the Gulf of Aqaba thus safeguarding their southern port and its access to the Red Sea and on to all of Asia. The Israeli conceding the entirety of the Sinai Peninsula was seen as a surprise by most but was also seen as an opportunity to the KGB and its PLO terrorist entity. It was the ease with which the Israelis gave up the opportunity to rightfully claim part if not all of the Sinai Peninsula as necessary for strategic depth by extending their borders that led Yasser Arafat and his Soviet masters to believe they could steal Gaza and Judea and Samaria if they simply made Israel bleed sufficiently. This belief led to the first intifada which resulted in the Israelis taking full control over Judea and Samaria forcing the leadership of the PLO to flee into Jordan. When the PLO launched an attempted coup, Jordanian King Hussein unleashed the Jordanian Army on the PLO terrorists driving them into Lebanon where they were subsequently forced out taking refuge in Tunisia. This might have been the end of the foreign claims on Israeli lands and Israel was fully expected to retain all of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. And that was the case after the treaty with Jordan and Israel had annexed all of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights which should have been the end of all claims against Israel. But that was not to be as the PLO had gained some traction and wrangled a deal for their return to the lands they now claim was stolen from them and was their possession and not Jordan’s to give away.

 

Groups working under complete silence negotiated a return for Arab governance permitting Yasser Arafat and his officers to return and setup their base of operations in Ramallah and legitimized Arafat as the Arab peace-maker with the Oslo Accords. The presumed negotiations which were to have reached a final settlement within the first five years did not live up to this hype and instead led to the storming out of the Paris talks when Israel agreed to the terms Arafat had set as his demand of Israel in meetings with United States President Clinton. This was followed by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak being backed by President Clinton and given several guarantees, finally met all of Yasser Arafat’s demands for all of Gaza and 95% of Judea and Samaria and all of Eastern Jerusalem. With no objections left on which to avoid actual statehood, Yasser Arafat had only one viable choice, he was cornered and had to escape the trap he had so carefully set backfired and now he was the one in a cage trapped by his own demands. This led to his hasty departure after which he returned to Ramallah and soon thereafter initiated the Oslo Wars, a series of deadly terror attacks upon Israel, terror attacks which would continue and reach such a level that Israel put in the Separation Barrier, a structure which was largely a fence with some cement walls used to separate the two sides in built up urban settings. The route of the fence was challenged in court where some of the time led to an alteration of the barrier such that farmers still had access to their fields. All of this has led to today where the Arab demand now is for all of Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem, all of the lands beyond the Green Line.

 

That leads us to where things stand currently. It became obvious when President Obama recognized and fully supported the Arab claims to all the lands beyond the Green Line early on in his administration and President Obama clearly stated that the borders were to be formed using the Green Line, 1967 boundaries, as the basis for the formation of Palestine, the Arab state. Well, Mahmoud Abbas, Yasser Arafat’s second in command who assumed command upon the death of Arafat, was in a trap which he reveled in as he could never be seen to be demanding less than the President of the United States or the leaders of several European nations as well as the European Union. When Israel did not immediately fall all over themselves giving away even more lands after the edict being stated by President Obama which completely ignored all previous agreements, both written and verbal, the United States State Department, a department which has been infiltrated by pro-Arab continents at the highest levels, came down blaming Israel for there being no peace agreement when the expected final borders are well recognized by everybody in the world and questioned why Israel was stalling and avoiding the obvious. Israel was complying with the obvious, just a different set of obvious facts. The first fact was that they knew that Abbas would not now settle just for a State with the Green Line as its border but would demand much more. Abbas proved the Israelis correct when he demanded to be permitted to hold military training with troops from other nations as well as starting to demand the Israeli cities built some forty years ago be vacated as well as any factories and government buildings. They were also demanding the right to import heavy weapons, continuing to refuse to recognize Israel as the Jewish State and refused to end the ‘struggle’ (read terrorist attacks) until all of Palestine has been liberated and the Jewish infestation disposed of. Abbas also has one ace he can always play though many of the Arab refugees have been dispossessed of their homes, their apartments due to the violence of the Syrian civil war, particularly the refugees who lived in the Yarmouk Refugee Camp near Damascus which once again is under assault by ISIS.

 

There are tactical and security reasons which prevent Israel simply handing over the lands of Judea and Samaria as they handed over Gaza which fell almost immediately into the hands of Hamas and Islamic Jihad. These terror entities have rained down an unbelievable number of rockets onto Israeli civilian targets and have attained better rockets which can reach almost all of Israel and carry larger payloads thanks to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). The fear used to be that Hamas would supplant Fatah and Mahmoud Abbas either by force or in any election but that fear has been superseded by the fear that Judea and Samaria would fall into the hands of ISIS. The clues are obvious as ISIS has been determined trying to defeat Hamas, Islamic Jihad and take control of Gaza. Such an eventuality would also present a clear and frightening new front for ISIS to threaten Jordan who is already facing ISIS on their eastern and northern borders and this would surround them by closing out the western border of Jordan which has only the smallest of southern facing borders. Israel would possibly be facing a similar threat should ISIS gain control of Gaza and then Judea and Samaria defeating Fatah. It is remarkable that just as one was getting used to the Arab threats on one’s borders and slowly being able to feel safer, then a new and far more radical Islamic entity with greater ferocity which is such a threat that the Arab Islamist groups which had been fighting simply folds up and flees surrendering everything usually without a fight. Even then, when ISIS forces finally catch up with these former terror threats, they give them a choice of joining ISIS or death and then test their purity and knowledge of the person if they choose to join ISIS. Should one prove to be of insufficient knowledge of Islam or lacking in the expected levels of fervor, one finds themselves on the wrong end of a beheading. There used to be the misconception that Israel was facing completely different terrorists than the Western world faced. The terrorists faced by Israel have proven more and more to be the same people, especially as ISIS and the al-Nusra Front gain more traction and possession of the lands near the Golan Heights where there have been a number of rounds fired often at the IDF positions some requiring return fire to silence the menacing threats posed by such rounds. One might have thought this would have been made obvious by the Hezballah bombing of the United States Marines billets in Lebanon by Hezballah as well as the assassination of the American Ambassador Cleo Allen Noel, Jr. and Chargé d’Affaires George Curtis Moore in the Sudan by the PLO with Yasser Arafat giving the go code to murder these men along with a Belgian, a Jordanian, and a Saudi. They then demanded the release of numerous terrorists held in Jordan including the Black September Commander Abu Daoud and assassin of Robert Kennedy, Sirhan Sirhan from the United States penal system along with the freeing of all Palestinian women in prison in Israel.

 

This ill-conceived concept is once again apparent with the Obama White House where Israel is depicted as fighting the bad war and the rest of those battling Islamic Jihadist are fighting the good fight. This misperception has led to much of the troubles, especially in Europe where even Hamas is welcomed in polite circles as they are seen as freedom fighters and not terrorists. The European elites have just as significant percentage of anti-Semites who have transferred their hatreds for the Jews and now spill their bile against Israel. Many European leaders would only approve of any act by Israel only if they slit their own throats, which is why they support the surrender of all of Judea and Samaria and continue the tired falsehood that Gaza is still occupied due to the legal and United Nations sanctioned blockade to prevent weapons smuggling into Gaza and treat Hamas as freedom fighters and treat Mahmoud Abbas as if he were the second coming while often heaping scorn and insult upon Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and other Israeli politicians. It is not an easy explanation for why it appears the world is transfixed on Israel and attempting to aid in resetting the borders to where they existed before the 1967 Six Day War thus allowing for the most advantageous borders to facilitate another war for the eradication of Israel. Additionally, what do the Europeans and Americans and United Nations and their assorted NGOs plan on doing should another Arab/Israeli war be initiated against Israel? Such an eventuality would require a little more than a postcard expressing your regrets over the resurgence of hostilities and carrying a warning that the IDF should not operate beyond the borders of Israel as doing so would be considered a war crime by the overly-cultured and ever-so-erudite and properly all-knowing leaders of world opinion and the makers of the rules of war especially constructed to prevent Israeli transgressions such as winning another war with her overtly-aggressive Arab neighbors. Such embarrassments must not be permitted to be visited once more on these proud and wonderful peoples. We the leaders of the politically correct, socially-permissive, world’s conscience have decided that the nation of Israel must be forced within indefensible borders for as many times as it may take for Israel to be overrun by Arab Muslim armies and the lands cleansed of the mistake made in a moment of actual justice due to the Mediterranean breezes and the good spirits such engenders.

 

Now the Europeans are returning to their default setting of leftist hatred for all things Jewish starting with the largest thing Jewish, Israel. In order to cripple Israel in a vengeful attempt to destroy her and all she offers and creates for the good of the world because she actually willingly gives comfort and perceptions of safety for any Jews in the world to make Aliyah and enjoy. Proof was the fact that almost no civilian died as a result of being struck by a Hamas fired rocket during Operation Protective Edge. The reason for such an accomplishment was the years and treasures put into designing and creating such a system as the Iron Dome which protected innocent Israeli peoples including Israeli Arabs both Muslim and Christian. Israel saw the spending of over a hundred-thousand Israeli Shekels to intercept a rocket costing possibly as much as a thousand dollars but most likely only fifty to a hundred dollars. Why would Israel put so much effort and treasure to save lives? They do because every single life is far more precious than any amount of money or riches. Israel treasures life while our enemies taunt us for what they see as wasteful as they claim to treasure death. That is why they casually throw away the lives of the Arabs who live under their oppressions as they see the death of a Gazan civilian as another accusatory headline in the New York Times and newsprint across the Western World as well as electronic media picking up their slanted stories on the deaths of their civilians which were due to their firing rockets from the roof of a shelter, but what matter of difficulty does that pose as the rocket was aimed at the accursed Israel. That is what is defined as capable of bringing joy to the European elites, the destruction of Israel simply because Israel is a productive and healthy society and that riles the elites and leaders of a Europe predictably descending.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

May 23, 2015

The Sad Truths About American Election 2016

Filed under: 24/7 News Reporting,Abortion,Afordable Healthcare Act,al-Qaeda,Amalekites,Amnesty,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Arab Appeasement,Arabs,Associated Press,Balanced Budget,Ballot Access,Benyamin Netanyahu,Biological Weapons,Blood Libel,Blue Water Navy,Boko Haram,Borders,Boycott,Breakout Point,Budget,Campaign Contributions,Cap and Trade,Capitalism,Carbon Credits,Chemical Weapons,China,Chinese Pressure,Civil Unions,Civilization,Class Warfare,Conflict Avoidnce,Congress,Congress,Constitutional Government,Corruption,Covert Surveillance,Coverup,Debt,Debt Ceiling,Default on Debt,Defend Israel,Disengagement,Divestment,Divided Jerusalem,Dr Margaret Higgins Sanger,Drones,East Jerusalem,Ecology,Ecology Lobby,Economic Growth,Economy,Education,Elections,EMP Device,Employment,Enforcement,Enlightenment,Equal Opportunity,Equal Outcome,Eugenics,Europe,European Union,Executive Order,Facial Recognition Software,Farming,Fayyad,Firearms,Forced Solution,Foreign Funding,Gay Marriage,Gaza,Gaza Blockade,Gender Issues Lobby,Global Climate Change,Golan Heights,Government,Government Health Care,Government Waste,Green Energy,Guard Border,Gun Control,Guns,Hamas,Health Care,Hispanic Appeasement,History,Holy Sites,Illegal Immigration,Immigration,Individual Right to Privacy,Internal Pressures,International Politics,Iran,Iranian Pressure,Iron Dome,IRS,ISIS,Islam,Islamic Pressure,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Israeli Interests,Jerusalem,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Leadership,Jewish State,Jihad,Jonathan Pollard,Jordanian Pressure,Judea,Judean Hills,Kurds,Law Enforcement,Leftist Pressures,Mahmoud Abbas,Mainland China,Mainstream Media,Media,Media Bias,Military on Borders,Military Option,Murder Americans,Muslims,Naqba,NASA,Nationalist Pressures,North Korean Pressure,Nuclear Weapons,Nuclear Weapons,Obama Care,Old City,One State Solution,Oslo Accords,P5+1,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Palestinian Pressures,Panic Policies,Partition Plan,Peace Process,Political Identity,Politicized Findings,President Assad,Prime Minister,Promised Land,Promised Land,Recognize Israel,Refugee Camp,Refugees,Register to Vote,Repatriation,Response to Terrorism,Right of Return,Russian Pressure,Saeb Erekat,Samaria,Same Sex Marriage,Saudi Arabian Pressure,Secular Interests,Separation Barrier,Settlements,Single Payer Plan,Statehood,Syria,Terror,Third Intifada,Union Interests,Upgraded Military Capabilities,Uranium Enrichment,Validate Elections,Voting,Warrantless Searches,Weapons of Mass Destruction,West Bank,Window for Peace,WMD,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 2:44 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

The one constant around the world is that everywhere one hears discussions about the upcoming 2016 American elections and the talk immediately turns to the potential Presidential results and how they will either improve or ruin the plans of our leaders, nations, areas, threats, trade or economies. The truth is that trying to divine the thoughts of the American public and how they will vote for in the Presidential elections is complete folly, especially if one is using the relations between in foreign affairs as their criteria. While across the globe the United States foreign policy or lack thereof is of vital importance and in many instances potentially critical and even deadly, the American public usually cannot see any further than their wallet. Yes, there are numerous Americans who understand and even use a fair degree of foreign policy knowledge and positions of Presidential candidates, I must sadly report that when we left the United States that number decreased and even with our presence in the voting booths the people voting their wallets probably outnumbered foreign policy wonks by a thousand to one if not a hundred-thousand to one. This is why the Presidential debates only have one which presumably is advertised as pertaining to foreign policy. The truth is that most of the questions end up actually being turned inside-out, upside-down and twisted all around until it actually sets the candidates attentions to foreign situations as it pertains to the effects it might have on the budget or social programs at home. Still, the choice of who will be the next President of the United States will have a determining effect on every part of the globe; it will just be whether it will be for better or worse. So, what should we seek as far as the most preferentially positive effect generally around the globe?

 

The usual rule of thumb is that a Republican President will be more involved in foreign policy than a Democrat President. This does not necessarily mean this is preferential as it also depends on whether the Republican President has advisors and other assets which drive a thoughtful and thoroughly researched foreign policy or if they have a more seat of the pants reactionary policy. An example of the former would be President Dwight David Eisenhower who though often derogatorily called a do nothing President actually was responsible for the reconstruction of Europe and the Far East policy after the fall of Japan and much of the American ascendance after World War II all while the United States enjoyed some of its best economic growth years in its history. Another President who also did well largely due to advisors was John Fitzgerald Kennedy whose advisors were very knowledgeable and who when tested by Russian President Khrushchev over the Cuban Missile Crisis set a strong and potentially dangerous posture of no nonsense strong response that eventually led to the Soviet Union to retreat from Cuba removing their missiles. Kennedy also answered the Soviet initial success and leads in the start of the space race to set the goal as the Moon and challenged the American space industries and NASA with, “We choose to go to the Moon! … We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard.” On the other hand, the United States has had Presidents from both parties who were unmitigated disasters when it came to foreign policy though I will not shame any by naming them and instead allow each to choose their own examples. From the juncture where many currently observe the two Administrations under President Obama, these could easily be defined by numerous presumably traditional friends of the United States, who would, if choosing to be totally candid, would describe these as total disasters with potentially the worst yet to come. Then there are some of the worst mischief makers and oppressors or would be conquerors who likely would heap praise on President Obama’s choice to not challenge anything which might prove challenging or potentially difficult and demanding taking a principled stand.

 

So, first off, let me assure those who might be misled into believing that the Americans generally have begun to awaken and see what a disaster President Obama has been for the world as a whole, if it were somehow made possible for President Obama to run for a third term, the American public would likely reelect him and even the Jewish voters who might claim that Israel is one of their top concerns would still vote for President Obama by an easy majority likely near to sixty-five percent against thirty-five percent voting Republican. Actually, there would be a sizeable percentage of the Jewish voting public who would refuse to vote Republican and simply stay at home which is the same as voting for whichever candidate proves victorious. With this established, this fact does not bode well for the Republican Party if the American public, which is made predominantly of ‘low-information voters’ who vote pretty much as they are advised by such criteria as, my family have always voted Democrat/Republican/Whig (OK, most families who had voted for the Whig Party have moved on since then), what’s his name on Comedy Central/Saturday Night Live/the Late Show/Family Guy/South Park character, Media such as ABC/CBS/NBC/FOX/CNN/PBS/MSNBC, print media, favorite personality/close friend/boss at work/union boss or whatever ridiculous source even to include Tarot Card reader’s advice, are the mainstay of the voting public which as time has passed has become more the norm. This is partly why the politicians fight over voting rules such as removing people from voter rolls through validation techniques to remove those who have moved, died or not voted in decades or the need for picture identifications, motor voter laws, and even register to vote outside the polling place and then enter and vote or permitting prisoners to vote even from death row as there is no area not pursued as a voting base that the party who thinks something is to their advantage will not use to the utmost of their ability. So, we have established that the American voting public is not necessarily the pure cerebral and reasoned public which Thomas Jefferson, Sam Adams, or James Madison envisioned, though probably Benjamin Franklin may have had the right attitude and worldly experience to realize how far the electorate would eventually slip. So, now what?

 

The next is choosing who will most likely be the candidate for each of the two major parties. Let us start with the Republican Party and the myriad of candidates there seeking to be the candidate chosen to represent the party in the elections in November 2016. The one thing we are assured is that the Republican candidates will mostly be breaking what President Ronald Reagan called the Eleventh Commandment, do not speak ill of thy fellow Republicans. The Republican candidates will refuse to bow out until it becomes mathematically impossible for them to win the nominations and some even then will continue just in case they can make a surge from out of the blue once the delegates are freed to vote however they choose, usually around the fifth ballot or later. With all the candidates, and a fair number of top ties candidates, it is quite likely that the Republican Party may reach its convention without any one candidate with sufficient numbers of delegates to win on the first or second ballot and there may be five candidates who are all actually closely matched in candidate count with none even remotely close to a majority or even a resounding plurality. This might lead to a lengthy and harshly fought convention which will go into the fourth day or beyond without reaching some resolution or producing a candidate. There appears now that Jeb Bush will have a loyal set of establishment delegates and the ‘movers and shakers and moneyed establishment supporting him while the Tea Party and Christian Right will be divided amongst a core of select candidates including but not limited to Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, Dr. Ben Carson and Scott Walker; with the likes of Marco Rubio, Rand Paul and Bobby Jindal will all have a base of support which may be sufficient to retain their hopes and finally there is Carly Fiorina who as the sole woman, might receive additional support as she is the only candidate against whom Hilary Clinton would not have the advantage of gender running to be the first American female President. The end result is whoever eventually survives the scathing attacks and fevered battle with the nomination may find themselves limping into the actual Presidential election race as damaged goods sorely injured by their own party. Oddly enough the one person who might mostly escape such infighting and scorn from their fellow Republicans might be Carly Fiorina simply because should she avoid falling prey to the gotcha media assaults most Republicans face, she could be the one without any damaged armor and slide between the barbs and arrows and prove the strongest candidate of them all and take the nomination with minimal damage and able to rally the Republican base and establishment as she belongs to neither but can make overtures to both.

 

That brings us to the Democrat Convention and the presumed coronation of Hillary Clinton as the ‘deserved one,’ the ‘chosen one.’ From the very beginning I have not believed that Hilary Clinton would survive to become the Democrat Party Presidential candidate in 2016 or ever as if she is cast aside this time it will be for good. Hillary Clinton’s most formidable and undefeatable opponent is Hillary Clinton of campaigns and offices past which will eventually make her untenable as a candidate. Her time as Secretary of State will tie her inexorably to President Obama’s disastrous foreign policy and much of the blame for President Obama’s failures will be heaped upon Hillary and she will be unable to escape this baggage. Additionally there will be the baggage from the entire Benghazi debacle, and even worse, her hearings before the Congress where the immortal words were uttered never to stop echoing in many ears where Hillary, referring to four dead Americans including two men whose heroic efforts became known making the inaction simply unacceptable and un-American and now forever tied to her stating, “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make?” The absolute cynicism of her caustic remarks and the bald faced attempt to brush off any responsibility and to make any questions in this area as improper as that the reason for the hearings was not about those who gave their lives presumably in service of their country and for a mission which originated within the State Department, but to allow Hillary Clinton to be cleansed of any wrong-doing and to be vindicated and be lauded for striving to assure that such a situation never again presented such a deadly situation. The line of questions seeking to pinpoint blame was, in Hillary’s mind, completely out of bounds. Between Benghazi, the e-mail scandals, the missing records, scrubbed and sanitized memos and communications, Clinton Foundation contributions and influence peddling from her position as Secretary of State, foreign monies which likely were derived as payments for favors, the rise of Blumenthal communications concerning Libya where he had business interests while advising Hillary Clinton during her time as Secretary of State as well as numerous other scandals yet to surface, and Hillary Clinton is damaged even beyond the capability for the Democrat Party to attempt to repair her to make her presentable to the public. All the baggage which has been in the mainstream news about Hillary Clinton was originally being exposed now early in the process and before she announced her intentions to run for President such that it could be labelled old news already beaten to death if brought up during the campaign by the Republican side. The problem is that there seemingly is no end to the scandals as they just keep jumping out from everywhere. As the media and Democrat operatives keep attempting to put these scandals to rest and tie up all the loose ends they run into another problem and then a scandal which follows as night follows day and there is no putting this to bed as more and more loose ends keep appearing and the Hillary apologists are beginning to become somewhat short tempered as their patience dies. In the end Hillary Clinton and former President William Jefferson Clinton will be required to hang up their hopes of returning to the White House until Chelsey is old enough which will be fairly soon, so they should get her elected to some office, governor of the state of their choosing, Maryland sounds easy as does Massachusetts.

 

So, with no Hillary as their candidate, who can the Democrats turn to as their best bet? There are a number of people which have been mentioned as potential replacements should Hillary self-destruct. Former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley though his having also been Mayor of Baltimore might be a slight drawback, Vice President Biden who has a history of foot-in-mouth disease but actually would be solid in foreign policy as even if a threat he made in a speech by his going off-script the adversary would never know for sure whether or not Old Joe might actually follow through. Bernie Sanders has also declared his interest and though we agree on very little I admire his forthrightness and honesty which are very admirable qualities and he can be counted on to do what he says and say what he means. Then we have Andrew Cuomo and Howard Dean who both are known for mouths beyond their control, Al Franken also has given a definite maybe which is quite comical as well as noncommittal though he and Biden debating would make for great comedy, and finally Ms. Elizabeth Warren whose credentials, or lack thereof, are equal to those of President Obama when he took up the mantle of Democrat candidate for President with a few critical differences making her worthy of a deeper look.

 

Though Senator Elizabeth Warren has claimed she is not running, this may not be left as her choice as she has a sizable supportive following without ever overtly seeking such. She is a far superior believer in the true Progressive way of which President Obama campaigned upon in his initial 2008 campaign. She is well spoken and needs little prompting from any crutches such as a teleprompter. Senator Elizabeth Warren is quick on her feet, knows what she believes and is very comfortable in stating her views unequivocally and with great passion. She is a strong supporter for individual rights though she does appear to place too much emphasis and burden upon government for protecting individuals from failure by providing a broad and sweeping system of safety nets and she does not appear to be adverse to a guaranteed minimal wage for everybody whether they be employed or not. She favors Obamacare with some modifications making it more workable, not less dependent on government as her adjustments would bring Obamacare closer to a single payer health plan than as it currently sits. Senator Elizabeth Warren is a believer in Keynesian economics where the government is the principle engine behind the economy. She also is opposed to free trade much of the time claiming instead to stand for fair trade which she has not fully explained. She is a through and through socialist progressive and like Bernie Sanders says what she means and means what she says and always sticking to that exact path. At least she would not produce any big surprises as the Democrat candidate or a President if successfully elected. Her largest area which is unfortunately untested and unknown is foreign policy. Here she would be untested and undefined and until such could be filled in she should not be taken as a serious candidate. But as I explained, foreign policy is the last and least of things on the average American’s mind so it is quite likely that with her populist political talking points and her appeal to those dependent upon government Senator Elizabeth Warren would likely gain a large popular appeal and could breeze to the Democrat nomination once Hillary Clinton realizes she had already failed and failed miserably, but it remains to be seen if she will even be willing to be dragged thus appearing to have the nomination and run in the primaries thrust upon her rather than actively sought. Though I have little in common with Senator Elizabeth Warren’s viewpoints and fear her lack of foreign policy experience or even exposure, I find that she would have little problem being elected as the next United States President, her biggest obstacle would be attaining the Democrat nomination and that is something remaining to be seen. The final note is that the next President of the United States will be the one who emerges as the victor in the Democrat nomination and only give the Republican candidate a one in three chance at winning the general election. But there is still a race to be run and we have to have the race just to prove every prognosticator to be so wrong it is embarrassing.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

May 7, 2015

Hillary Clinton on Freedom {of} From Religion

Filed under: Economy,Israel,President Obama,Administration,Iran,Gay Rights,Politics,Main Stream Media,United States,Budget,Libya,Congress,Europe,European Union,Media,Jerusalem,Democrat,Extreme Leftist,President,Islam,History,Equal Opportunity,Equal Outcome,Government,Progressives,Iraq,Elections,Ecology,Power Generation,Health Care,Obama Care,Single Payer Plan,Government Health Care,Civilization,Senate,NATO,Politicized Findings,International Socialism,Wealth Redistribution,Democracy,Congress,Leftist Propaganda,Elections,Illegal Immigration,Secular Humanist,Iowa,Caucus,Iowa Caucus,Electability,Secularist Socialism,Contraceptives,Absolutism,Economic Growth,Democrat National Convention,Class Warfare,Civil Unions,Same Sex Marriage,War on Women,War on Religion,Debt,Pro Choice,Jobs,Israeli Capital City,Joe Biden,Death Penalty,Inflation,Benghazi,Foreign Policy,Federal Government,2016 Elections,Technology,Economic Independence,Appeasement,World Opinion,International Politics,Adoption,Abortion,Equality,Equal Rights,Equal Treatment,Equal Responsibility,GDP,United States Pressure,Senator,Maryland,Power Grid,Stem Cell Research,Conflict Avoidnce,Internal Pressures,Keynesian Economics,Livable Wage,Union Interests,Campaign Contributions,Secular Interests,Leftist Pressures,Elizabeth Warren,Education,Hillary Clinton,Baltimore — qwertster @ 2:15 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

Democrat front-runner candidate for President Hillary Clinton made some frightening comments in a speech she gave addressing the Women in the World Summit in New York City where she stated the following:
“Far too many women are denied access to reproductive health care and safe childbirth, and laws don’t count for much if they’re not enforced. Rights have to exist in practice — not just on paper. Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will and deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed. As I have said and as I believe, the advancement of the full participation of women and girls in every aspect of their societies is the great unfinished business of the 21st century and not just for women but for everyone — and not just in far-away countries but right here in the United States.”
The entire twenty-three-plus minute speech is embedded below at the end of the paragraph. What Hillary Clinton expressed here is almost exactly the same as what President Obama meant when he railed against those people stating, “And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

 

 

 

 

He as well believed that those who held traditional American beliefs were the main impediment to Western societies being capable of moving forward. He and Hillary both believed that religion, Judeo-Christian religious beliefs were the central force against permitting the necessary changes they both see as required in order for the twenty-first-century progress to move ahead. Of course their definitions of what must be eradicated from the society are the support given to the fetus and its physical well-being and right to life over the mother’s mental wellbeing and right to an uninterrupted social life. In all of their references they paint the religious as standing in the way and impeding moving forward most often by the religious oppositions to abortion as the biggest hurdle which society must overcome in order to continue onto the path to a future filled with promise even if it is devoid of children. Simply look to Europe and witness the reality they desire for the rest of the Western world, a slow, inexorable marching into oblivion. They have cast the religious amongst us as societal Luddites impeding the progressive political agenda and its advancement. Of course advancement only as it has been defined by the Progressives and echoed as so precisely by a complicit media as it is the apparent marriage of convenience between the Progressives on the extreme left and their sycophants in the media which are responsible for the marriage of convenience between leftist culture and leftist government.

 

Meanwhile, we have watched the decline of Western societal structure as a sizable number from each generation have been literally cut from the society even before they were born. Further, those who were the underpinning of the society find themselves in decline which has led to an extreme increase in seeking of immigrants, both legal and undocumented, as solutions to initial errors in judgement or errant lifestyle that has led to an half of each generation left missing from society since the onset of abortion as nothing more than a simple procedure with no moral or otherwise negative influence. Still the Progressive extremists and their views of life have been cast and accepted as middle of the road, thus making extreme Progressives to be defined as the moderates while centrist individualists being made into right-wing-crazies and Constitutionalists are painted as so far to the right that their views must be guarded against just in case they might win a simple argument and start the snowball down the hillside.

 

To witness how such radical views became defined as the centrist view, one need only witness a panel discussion where there are three or four from the progressive side while as well as more often than not the moderator while only one and on rare occasions two chosen and permitted to express the conservative argument; this is called balanced. There is little to any debate about what Hillary expressed at that particular venue, she simply laid claim that religious doctrines will require changes in order to make them compatible with her and the other Progressives’ agenda. It is this low grade war being fought between the religious and secular interests that will eventually be decided in the courts. It is only fair that this finalizing in the abortion debate end from whence it came with the initial Roe vs. Wade decision in 1973, and the Americans have continued debating that decision ever since. This was one of the final deliberations where the court took it upon itself to forego waiting for the people and their elected governments to make legal and to protect abortive rights bringing the argument to the fore enacting the sentence such that they would fit it within the protections within the Constitution. Thus the Supreme Court took it upon itself to make it illegal to refuse a woman her right to have an abortion and challenged those who disagreed with their going rogue presuming to make law rather than interpret law from the bench. This will become the point where the Democrat Party made the Obama Administration’s core beliefs the central plank in their 2016 Platform placing it dead center. Soon after the Roe vs. Wade decision the makeup of the court changed and has contained an odd balance with usually two or three justices, who can best described as truly moderate, determining the balance of the Supreme Court on any given day.

 

These floated trial balloons being loosed by the Democrats and Hillary along with the rapid-fire discovery or addressing of controversies and questionable acts have a simple explanation, best to get them behind them and decide what positions to retain and which to discard. By the time next year rolls around and actual primary election season is upon the Americans these will all be discarded as old news, been there covered that and simply proven irrelevant already so let’s forget it and not waste precious time and talk about now. Should this plank against Judeo-Christian religious based society raise sufficient clamor, then it will never be brought to the fore again but it will still remain as a central pillar, a silent, central pillar. For those who doubt this, perhaps a little revisit to the 2012 Democrat National Convention move to restore to the platform a reference to “G0d” and recognition of “Jerusalem as the Israeli Capital City” is in order. The response by the Democrat Delegates on the floor and the response of the chair are their epic insanity and can be viewed at the Globe and Mail here; you can always count on the British to retain things well past their use-by-date and for Beyond the Cusp to recall and use such trivialities. It appears that the Democrats and Team Hillary have learned that it is paramount to get through all of the ugly and difficult to handle items which might reveal the difficulties and other unintended consequences up front and early on so that the Democrat National Convention can be choreographed to run smooth as a Patrick Swayze fight or dance scene. The one question which remains is whether the American public reaches a point where they have a really severe case of Hillary fatigue from which her campaign is incapable of surviving. With the remaining time and the earlier than usual kickoff, we may be about to watch a Hillary burnout where she does not get past and escape all the questions from her past and instead she simply gathers more questions and doubts and eventually is forced from the campaign simply as too much ends up being revealed. The question remains if not Hillary Clinton, then who? There are those calling for Elizabeth Warren and others now claiming that Bernie Sanders would make a formidable campaigner. There are other candidates out there such as Martin O’Malley, Maryland Governor and former Mayor of Baltimore; Joe Biden, current Vice President and perpetual comic relief; Andrew Cuomo was former New York Attorney General and U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under the Clinton administration is the eldest son of the legendary ex-Governor of New York and Democratic Party heavyweight, Mario Cuomo; Howard Dean as long as he remains calm and not scream eerily; Rahm Emanuel was part of the power behind President Obama’s first term; and Al Franken who is a humorous joke which would make a mockery of the office and a few others. There are a few who are above the fold candidates who have the backing of some of the Democrat elite and thus will be the ones who will be the top contenders. Hillary Clinton is the most obvious with Elizabeth Warren the favorite of the leadership of the not Hillary establishment and lastly there is Michelle Obama who would have a formidable cash producing machine of her husband behind her. The odds between these candidates and the others make for an interesting mix with Hillary probably being nudged out due to her baggage being simply overwhelming and her inability to avoid making incredulous miscues and just plain saying the dumbest thing at the worst possible moment. This plus the fact that her voice is simply grating on the nerves which also makes her miscues even more horrific and damning. Michelle Obama has improved her presence and has learned from her mistakes made during her husband’s campaigning. Still, Michelle Obama also has grated on the nerves of too many people including many in the liberal media which will work against her. Add to that the statements she had made about the electing of her husband as the moment which made her feel proud about her country and other haunting statements which will be used against her. The worst thing thus far which can be used against Elizabeth Warren would be her reference to having been partly Native American which she can easily dismiss and give a heartfelt, or at least appearing to be heartfelt apology and she would probably be permitted to march on unscathed as that would become old news almost immediately and she has no other thus far obvious mea culpas to trip her candidacy over. This latest Hillary statement may simply become something which could balloon and become literally overwhelming as it will play very poorly in Iowa, South Carolina, parts of Florida and possibly New Hampshire. If Hillary Clinton is going to implode it will become evident very quickly and then it will blow the door wide open and let the torrential flood of candidates begin.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

The Rubric Theme. Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.