Beyond the Cusp

February 24, 2015

A Fundamental Difference

 

There was an episode of Star Trek titled “The Savage Curtain” where a molten rock creature named “Yarnek” decided to learn what the difference was between the forces of good and evil. It pitted Spock, Kirk, Abraham Lincoln and Surak representing the forces of goodness against Colonel Green, the Klingon Kahless, a tribal savage woman named Zora, and evil incarnate from Earth history, Genghis Khan representing the forces of evil. After good finally triumphs over evil Yarnek argues that it sees no difference between the forces of good and evil. The difference pointed out was what each side fought for, their root cause and not their methods of achieving victory which was defined by a base and simple reality of the contest. Yarnek is satisfied that it understand and returns Spock and Kirk to the Enterprise and returns to standing motionless happy in its new found wisdom and prepares to stand motionless is some prop room until Yarnek gets a new role in some ‘B movie’ in the future.

 

The simple premise depicted in the episode was a basic principle for the studies of history and philosophy which prepares college freshmen to critical thinking on a not so critical basis in 100 level coursework. It also can be utilized to define the root differences and similarities between Islamist Fundamentalism and other driving forces throughout human history, but for simplicity sake we might wish to limit the discussion to what would fit into a single Star Trek episode. We might even simplify the discussion to Yarnek style simplicity and examine what each driving force behind other philosophical movements in the past and present.

 

Let us first look at Fundamentalist Christianity and their desire as it pertains to the goals set for Christianity. The end goal of Fundamental Christianity is to live a life which is beneficial to mankind and to spread the words of G0d as defined in the New Testament and fulfilling the new Covenant defined within. Christianity is a proselytizing religion where they are pressed to spread the world of Christ, the sacrifice which Jesus made in the name of all mankind, and to persuade all people through their actions and the introduction to the teachings of Jesus as defined by the Apostles depiction of the teachings and life of Jesus in the New Testament. Initially the Christians were a passive force spreading their newly found faith by word of mouth and by their actions and ultimately their passivity and refusal to lift up arms against their oppressors. This changed after the Roman army fought under the banner of Christendom under the Constantine. After Constantine had his vision, his revelation, the drive for conquest, which was a Roman concept, was married to the message of Jesus and Christianity. This led to the new definition of what could be called an Imperial Christianity. Christianity carried forth with it now being the accepted religion of the Roman Army and thus its new defining principle to spread Christianity over the world and convert all to Christianity. This continued until the Reformation of Christianity which introduced those forces which introduced competing definitions of Christianity. These new and supposedly more pure forms of Christianity ended up married to governments of Christian nations and then began the attempts of each strand of Christianity to become preeminent. This continued until Christianity was purged from the political attachment it held to governance until then. Once Christianity was stripped from defining governance a remarkable thing happened, no longer were wars fought between Christian nations to impose their particular brand of Christianity on the others; Christianity now allowed for the separate forms of Christianity to exist, though the version practiced by the reigning monarch did tend to receive preference. The wars continued but were now no different in their aims, to conquer the known world and rule all mankind; it just was no longer performed in the accepted name of Christianity. The splitting religion away from the state and thus from earthly politics allowed for the birth in Christianity for freedom of religion which is the present state though the attaining a complete break from imposing Christianity rather than spreading Christianity through example and teaching and a total reliance on persuasion and devoid of the means of force is a concept still being perfected. What can be said is that Christendom has made great strides towards the allowance of freedom of religion and equality of all religions before the governance.

 

If we now investigate Fundamental Judaism, a force that likely only existed for a few short periods; we find the target of this early form of Judaism which spanned from Abraham through to the conquest of the lands which made up the kingdom of the two most heralded rulers of the Jews, King David and his son, King Solomon. The initial period of Jewish Fundamentalism was during the becoming a people through realizing their goals of conquering the lands they believed were granted them by G0d. The period of Jewish History in question stretched from the start of Judaism with Abraham, their Exodus from Egypt and their forty years of purification and change from a mindset of a people under bondage to a people enjoying freedom with Moses and on until they had conquered their “Promised Lands” under the leadership and marshalling of forces initially by Joshua. Once these lands were brought under Jewish rule their designs on the world were completed and the rest of their mission, their desire to live as G0d had intended, was to be a force for good as defined within Torah, and to study Torah and divine from Torah what being a people of goodness actually required from them and by living a life defined by Torah, the Jews were to be a light unto the nations of the world, an example of living a holy and blessed life. There were no designs or desires to rule the world or over any peoples once the Jewish state was established. The second period of Jewish Fundamentalism could be defined as the modern Zionist movement which has defined their purpose is to reestablish Jewish rule and autonomy over those same lands as are defined in Torah as the ancient homelands gifted them by G0d. There is no desire to conquer the world or to convert the world, but only to live in their corner of the world and be as a light unto the nations, a representation of goodness as defined in Torah. As above, there are no designs or desires to rule the world or over any peoples once the Jewish state has been established nor is there any desire to convert anybody. The region under Jewish control will have a religious theme and basis over the governance, or at least is supposed to have such, but is still instructed by Torah to not only allow freedom of worship, but equal treatment under any Torah ruled kingdom thus the concept of freedom of religion is one of the basic ideals of Judaism. There is no driving desire to convert others to Judaism unless a person chooses to seek conversion and even then there are stringent requirements of any convert but they would be welcome within any Jewish society.

 

Islam has a more original belief on the ideals of conversion which will ultimately lead to a world where the survivors are all Muslims as there would be no room for anything else. Islam teaches its adherents that their religion had replaced Judaism and Christianity. This is the concept of supersessionism. Christianity believed they were the replacement under G0d and they had superseded the Jews thus negating the Covenant between G0d and the Jews and Islam believes they have superseded the Christians and through that, also superseded the Jews. The Muslim believes fervently that the revelation by Muhammad to be the final revelation and that no further revelation is possible as Muhammad was actually the restatement of the Covenant between mankind and G0d and that Islam is the true path while Judaism and Christianity had corrupted the words of Allah and thus perverted religion making their versions of worship an abomination and their sole hope for paradise was through Islam. This is an important part of Islam as it is necessary in order for Islam to fulfill their Covenant with Allah. Islam tasks the Muslims to fulfill Jihad which is defined as the Greater and Lesser Jihad. One form of Jihad is the perfection of oneself under the rule of Allah and the complete and utter surrender of the self to Allah producing a perfected person. The second form of Jihad is the conquest of the entirety of the world for Allah in order to bring the perfect religion of Allah before all in the world allowing them the opportunity to realize their sins and to repent and surrender to Allah and thus become a believing Muslim. Each person is to be permitted the offer of joining Islam and surrendering themselves before Allah willingly but should they continue to reject Islam then they are to be presented with one final choice, Islam or death. This is instructed in the Quran where the Muslim is instructed to spread Islam by the sword if that is what is required. The finality defined by Islam is a world where all believe in Islam and Islam rules the world according Sharia. Nothing less than the complete subjugation of the world by Allah can be accepted as Islam is currently defined and since the Quran cannot be altered there is a point of contention which is not capable of reconciliation between Islam defined by the Quran and freedom, only one can survive. Islam defines the perfection of the world as the supremacy of Islam and the sole existence of mankind is to surrender to Allah and obey the Quran as defined under the Sharia and nothing less is acceptable and the end result is you will ultimately have a world that has been conquered by Allah forever with any person expressing even the most innocent free thought not defined as acceptable under the Quran to be defined as an apostate for leaving the true faith of Islam and who must be put to death.

 

Under Judaism the world continues as it desires with the Jews only insisting on ruling their little corner of the world which is a nation not quite the size of the Philadelphia to Boston greater megalopolis, Christianity desires to teach the world the message of Jesus and hope that their actions are of sufficient influence along with the loving words of Jesus to persuade the world to follow their teachings and Islam simplifies everything and boils it down to conquer the world for Islam and convert all to surrender before Allah. Well, at least that definition just might fit into the basis of a Star Trek episode, nice, compact and simplified to the point of absurdity. I could see Spock correct Bones and Kirk who were arguing, explaining, “Simply put for your understanding, Doctor (glance emotionless at Dr. McCoy); Jews are content in telling only those who ask, while Christians burst forth telling the world, as where the Muslims are simply commanded to conquer and purify the world of nonbelievers. (look with slight smirk at Kirk, sharply turns and returns to his station on bridge)”

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

February 21, 2015

The Hate Israel Anti-Semites Boycott Israel Club

Filed under: 1949 Armistice Line,1967 Borders,Absolutism,Act of War,Administration,Africa,al-Qaeda in Gaza,Amalekites,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Arab Appeasement,Arab Authority,Arab Israeli Citizen,Arab League,Arab World,Arabist,Arabs,Austerity Measures,Ayatollah,Ayatollah Khamenei,Balfour Declaration,Banking Failure,Baseline Budget,Bashir al-Assad,Basic Laws,Battle of Khaybar,Bayit Yehudi Party,Bedouin Tribes,Belgium,Bible,Black September,Blood Libel,Bnei Menashe,Bombing,Boycott,Britain,British,Brussels,Budget,Calaphate,Camp David Peace Accords,Capitalism,Checkpoints,Churchill White Paper,Civilization,Colonial Possession,Condemning Israel,Conflict Avoidnce,Cyprus,Debt,Debt Ceiling,Default on Debt,Deportation,Deuteronomy,Disengagement,Divestment,Divided Jerusalem,Domestic NGOs,Druze,East Jerusalem,Economic Fascism,Economic Independence,Economy,Egypt,Elections,Enforcement,England,Equal Opportunity,Equal Outcome,Equal Responsibility,Equal Rights,Equal Treatment,Equality,Eritria,Euro,Euro Zone,Europe,European Council,European Governments,European Pressure,European Union,Executive Order,Exodus,Failed State,Finance Committee,Finance Minister,Financial Crisis,Fiscal Cliff,Forced Solution,Foreign Funding,Foreign NGOs,France,Funding,Gaza,Genesis,Germany,Golan Heights,Government,Government Control,Government Shutdown,Government Waste,Great Britain,Great Britain,Greece,Green Line,Guard Border,Hamas,Hamas Charter,Hanin Zoabi,Haniyeh of Hamas,Hate,History,Holocaust,Holy Cities,Holy Sites,Hudna,Hyper-Inflation,IDF,Illegal Immigration,Income,Increased Spending,India,Inflated Spending,Inflation,Inquisition,Interest on Debt,Interment Camps,Internal Pressures,International Politics,Intifada,Intifada,Iran,Iranian Pressure,Iraq,ISIS,ISIS in Gaza,ISIS in Judea and Samaria,Islam,Islam,Islamic Jihad,Islamic Jihad,Islamic Pressure,Islamic State,Islamist,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Israeli Interests,Italy,Jabhat al Nusra,Jerusalem,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Home,Jewish Leadership,Jewish State,Jews,Jihad,Jordan,Jordan River,Jordan Valley,Jordanian Pressure,Judea,Judean Hills,Keynesian Economics,Khaled Mashaal,Land for Peace,Leftist Pressures,Livable Wage,Mahmoud Abbas,Meaning of Peace,Mecca,Medina,Mediterranean Sea,Middle East,Ministers,Mongol Hordes,Moscow,Murder Israelis,Muslim Expansionism,Muslim World,Muslims,National Debt,Nazi,Old City,Oppression,Organization of the Islamic Conference,Oslo Accords,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Palestinian Pressures,Panic Policies,Parliament,Passover,Peace Process,Persians,PFLP,PLO,Pogroms,Politicized Findings,Politics,PRC,Promised Land,Quantitative Easing,Quran,Ramallah,Rebel Forces,Repatriation,Response to Muslim Takeover,Roman Empire,Russia,Russian Pressure,Samaria,Sanctions,Sanctions (BDS),Saudi Arabian Pressure,Secular Interests,Seder,Shared Currency,Shiite,Shoah,Sinai,Sinai Peninsula,Socialism,South Sudan,Spending Cuts,Statehood,Sunni,Support Israel,Syria,Taxes,Temple Mount,Terror,Threat of War,Torah,Ukraine,United Nations,United Nations Presures,United States,United States Pressure,Vote,Voting,World Opinion,World Pressures,Yemen,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 3:18 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

We all have read about the supposed evils of Israel because the media lists them almost daily. We have the leader of the musicians recently gathering the signatures of numerous British artists all swearing they will never play a concert in Israel simply because Roger Waters says Israel is hateful. How Mr. Waters knows this is beyond any first hand evidence, he just woke up one morning and joined the well-financed and well-organized boycott Israel club. He never bothered to verify any of the charges against Israel, he simply bought the propaganda that Israel hates the Arabs and refuses to allow them to vote. He took the bait that the Arabs living under the semi-autonomous self-rule in areas of Judea, Samaria and Gaza are not permitted to vote in Israeli elections. That is absolutely true, as is the fact that Israelis are not permitted to vote in elections for the Palestinian Arab Authority. Oddly enough, Israeli Arabs are not permitted to vote in Palestinian Arab Authority elections so should Mr. Waters also protest the Palestinian Arab Authority, who refuses to allow Israeli Arabs from voting in their elections, making them just as guilty of Apartheid. Perhaps we need to find some example closer to home for Mr. Waters and see if perhaps he can become enlightened.

 

We can use the United Kingdom where there are various semi-autonomous nation states of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Each of these four nation states has their own governing boards and other functions which are elected from within their regions. A citizen of Northern Ireland cannot vote in Scotland and a citizen from Scotland cannot vote in Wales and so forth. Does this make each of the nations which make up the United Kingdom apartheid states because they have independent elections within each nation? We have all read that Scotland held a recent vote to remove themselves once again from under the British Crown and return to complete independence. They did not decide to do so in a close election which very well may have hinged on the threats coming from others within the United Kingdom and some of the scare tactics coming from London could have been interpreted as threats against the Scottish should they decide to return to being independent. Does this mean that the rest of the United Kingdom is using their vast influence and power to intimidate the Scottish from complete independence thus acting in a manner of racial hate towards the Scottish for their self-identity as a separate peoples? This could be twisted to show all kinds of reasons to boycott goods, academics and musicians from playing anywhere within the United Kingdom outside of Scotland with whom we the citizens of the world feel a need to unify behind in their quest to return to independence from under the colonial power of the United Kingdom and its British colonial oppressive tactics to continue their rule over what is left of their once mighty empire upon which they used to brag that the sun never set on all of the British Empire. The mighty may have fallen but they still rule with complete control and arrogance from London. After all, did the United Kingdom allow Mr. Waters to vote in the Scottish vote for independence, of course not?

 

A similar example could be made for the separate nations within the European Union who each elect their own governments which in turn make their own policies as long as they do not interfere with each other’s internal affairs. As part of the European Union each nation must accept the Euro coinage for payment of goods making travel between the several nations of the European Union much easier. This facilitates the freedom of movement within the European Union as there are no requirements for passport and visas to travel and the Euro is universally accepted. But then there are the British with their Pound Sterling which the Iron Lady former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher refused to give up and replace with the Euro. I believe her argument was that the British were better served to be in charge of their own monetary policies and their economic and other independent actions required Britain not to accept the Euro as the coin of the Realm. Could this British self-glorification, self-admiration and stubborn egoism not bring upon them the wrath of the rest of the European Union? Currently there are a few little budgetary and economic troubles within the European union of which this British elitism prevents the British Isles from being fully able and responsible to aid Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal and other struggling nations leaving the burden to be pressed almost entirely on Germany with some lesser assistance from France and others, but the British remain outside the ill effects of this on the Euro as the British refuse to surrender the coin of the Realm, probably one of the most egregious symbols of British colonialism and conquest which spread the world over, the Pound Sterling. Perhaps the rest of the European Union should demand that the British give up their separate and unequal currency and accept the Euro completely and without any further reservations thus truly incorporating themselves within the European Union, after all that English Channel no longer separated you from the rest of Europe, there is the Chunnel connecting you directly to France and the Continent. If the British would just use the Euro it would better enable the European Union in assisting those members in need of a hand up which the Euro is supposed to supply.

 

Needless to point out, but the Lady Thatcher was dead on correct to not place Britain into the European cauldron of troubles by acceding to use the Euro and instead to remain in direct control of the coinage of the Realm and to be economically self-dependent and self-reliant using the Pound Sterling. Yes, I realize it is actually referred to a simply the Pound or ₤. The entire disaster which is the Euro derives from exactly the argument that Lady Thatcher made in her argument to retain the Pound and simply accept the Euro at its rate against the Pound at the time of the transaction. The threats that by retaining the Pound the British would be forever forced to check the going exchange rates of the Euro against the Pound or the € against the ₤. She flat stated, and was pilloried for it, that the Euro was untenable as long as each nation retained their ability to set their own economic policies, their own productivity targets and just about anything linked to their economy, work force policies, guaranteed employee benefits or anything else which would affect their use of the Euro. The sole manner that would make the Euro truly the coinage of the European Union would be a central planner who was responsible for setting all rules of the entirety of the European Union pertaining to the economy in any fashion, form or obligations. Every country would need to require their employees to have identical work weeks, vacation and sick leave, salary structure and economic targets. This would require the European Union to merge virtually every government function into the central authority of the European Union and it was this eventuality which the Lady Thatcher wished most to avoid.

 

So, do we now boycott all of the European Union who are insisting that the government of Greece accept to having their economic and other policies dictated to them from Brussels or possible Berlin as these are the origins of the Euros being loaned to Greece to keep the nation solvent and from economic collapse as their economic engines do not achieve a similar RPMs (Real Productivity per Man-hour) to the German and other economic engines within the European Union. Thus, because the Greeks use the Euro their government is being persuaded to adopt austerity measures which the people are so reluctant to implement after experiencing such restriction that they elected a government which will return them to their former economic policies and should the European Union object or demand further austerity measures, they promise a return to the Drachma, the ₯, the original Greek coinage which is one of the oldest coins in all of Europe and the world. Sitting on the cusp and watching as Greece is the first to actually fall beyond the cusp and become insolvent solely due to using the Euro and thus not being allowed to set their own monetary value which would better represent the economic productivity of Greece instead of accepting the Euro whose unified monetary policy in nonexistent and instead attempts to straddle an all inclusive area, an area which Greece did not quite attain, nor did Spain, Italy, Portugal and others potentially even France. So, Roger Waters, tell me, who do we protest by boycott now, Greece or Germany and Britain? Somebody is forcing the Greek governance how to write their economic policy and how to set their pension plans and everything else and the Greek people are refusing to elect any government which will bow to the central planners in Brussels. Who are the bad guys so I know whether to purchase a German vehicle, a French vehicle, an Italian vehicle (my first choice), or a Greek vehicle?

 

I figure who else should I ask other than Roger Waters who claims to be such an authority on who is acceptable amongst the nations of the world, so where do I spend my money, who do you approve as I would hate to get any bad social media attention because I did not do my civic duty and check to see if my purchases pass Roger Waters’s approved list of nations which qualify as politically acceptable. I mean, after all, with all the tours with Pink Floyd he must have full and first-hand knowledge which nations are kosher, if I can use that term or is it also too Israeli or too Jewish, please let me know on that one too while we are at it. What other words might be too supportive of the only nation thus far worldwide you have decided deserves our ire, which is correct Mr. Waters, just Israel deserves out boycott. Just to make sure, Russia is fine or the Ukraine, which one is righteous among the nations as judged by Roger Waters? Then do we not purchase anything made in China until they end their occupation of Tibet where they have also forced many Tibetans to be relocated in other far removed provinces and have replaced these native Tibetans with Chinese people who were mostly homeless and extremely poor and were bussed into Tibet and given the homes of the Tibetans who had been forced to leave. So, what about China and their subjugation of Tibet, a nation which never in recent history attacked or even bothered anybody but China just swallowed up Tibet. So, boycott China as well or just Israel Mr. Waters? What about the United States which swallowed up all of the Native American nations, do we demand that the United States return all the lands they did not legally purchase to their original Native American nations or just boycott Israel? What about Iran which sponsors the most terrorist actions and groups worldwide or Saudi Arabia which denies women of equality before the law or in society, or Australia which still has not returned the lands to the Aborigines from whom they stole it by force, or just Israel, which Mr. Waters?

 

Perhaps you should visit Israel and look around. You would be amazed as you would find a nation that is as free of racial afflictions as any I have ever witnessed. Israel, who went to rescue the Jews in Ethiopia who were being herded into a camp, you know what a camp means when you herd the Jews there, right Mr. Waters? They have arranged to bring the Bnei Menashe from India home as they are also of the house of Jacob. Many of the tribes who were scattered throughout the globe are being brought home to Eretz Yisroel. Not all were oppressed at this time but all have faced desperate periods where they were set upon by the other native populations, expelled from their homes and businesses, murdered outright, pogroms, made to pay an additional tax because they were Jews, and worst of, mass slaughter. Mr. Waters, the Jewish People are perhaps the most persecuted race of all time. When Israel was formed she received numerous Jews from Europe, as you are aware. Did you realize that they were prevented from simply coming to live in Israel by the British because the British had signed an agreement with the Arabs to never allow the Jews to become of a sufficient number as to be capable of forming a nation. Once Israel was barely recognized by a very tight vote in the United Nations, the Arab nations evicted approximately 850,000 Jews often with just one suitcase per family member and some with even less. Many Jews around the Arab world and across Europe were dispossessed of their homes and often Jews who survived the Nazi camps returned to their former homes only to find another family residing there, and their former neighbors joining together to force them out of their hamlet or village and then when they attempted to make their way to Israel they were prevented and placed in camps. Some Jews were taken from one Nazi concentration camp and when there was little room in the camps on Cyprus, they were shipped to Germany and placed back into one of the Nazi concentration camps. Read the story about the ship the St. Louis Mr. Waters and tell me who were persecuted. There were many Jews, millions of them, who had an even bigger problem than British making their return to Zion near impossible, these Jews found themselves behind the Iron Curtain, as Winston Churchill referred to Soviet domination. Many face years in the gulags simply for wanting to go to Israel, some just because they were a Jew and their loving neighbors complained to the authorities that they were unpatriotic and not a real member of the society and needed special treatment. Do you understand special treatment Mr. Waters?

 

On another note, did you know that Arabs serve in the Israeli Knesset Mr. Waters? Did you know that Arab Israelis do vote in Israel as do Druze and Bedouins as well as Christians, Buddhists, and every other religion which an Israeli may practice? There has been an Arab who sat and I believe one currently sitting on the bench of the Supreme Court of Israel. Arab doctors and nurses work side-by-side with Jews as both are Israeli citizens and fully incorporated in Israeli society and we would not have it any different way. Look around the Muslim controlled world and tell me how many of these nations allow Jews equal rights? Are there more than four or five out of the fifty-seven Muslim nations Mr. Waters? Why do people seeking a job and a better way of life who leave places such as Somalia, South Sudan, Eretria and others walk through numerous nations and cross Egypt which might simply shoot them on the spot if they were caught and across the Sinai Peninsula which is fraught with danger from terrorist gangs and still the increased possibility to be seen and shot by Egyptian border guards and finally make it to Israel. These are not political refugees but people seeking employment who are in Israel illegally and will end up returned to their homelands as soon as it is possible, but why would they come to Israel if it were such a horrid place as you claim it is? You probably know nothing about Israel. You probably believe the security fence which is over three-quarters fence and the rest wall usually within urban areas, and you call it an Apartheid Wall. Before that fencing was put in place it was impossible to prevent terrorists from entering Israel and thousands of Israelis were blown up simply living their lives, riding buses, eating in a pizzeria, shopping in a mall or just about anything else you could imagine. One such incident was the Passover Bombing of the Park Hotel Seder where a Hamas assassination bomber exploded its bomb murdering thirty mostly elderly Jews who had no family with whom to share their Passover Seder so they joined each other for this potentially joyous occasion turned tragedy. There were an additional almost 150 severely injured and amongst the victims were numerous Holocaust (Shoah) survivors. This was the sort of action the fence was erected to prevent and it was a total success as it decreased bombings and other terrorist acts significantly within the Green Line, the false armistice line which you mistakenly claim is the end of the lands granted Israel and the Jews by international law. Regarding that, simply read the notes from the San Remo Conference for the truth. As to the original claim to the lands of Israel, allow me to direct you to a book you know about but likely believe it is just a bunch of fairy tales, the book is called the Old Testament, and to make it simple so as not to tax you too much, just read Genesis and Exodus and if you still have questions, read Deuteronomy. Within you might see a few promises made and as was the way of the times, yes, we took the land by force, much like Egypt, Greece, Rome, Persia, Babylonia, the Mongols and the Arabs have done since. And just so you do not get confused, the Canaanites were not the Arabs who are claiming their ancestral origins to have been, their ancestral origins were from Saudi Arabia and Yemen of today, not anywhere near the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea. Then, Mr. Waters, visit Israel and even go to Ramallah and witness that there is an Arab Palestinian Authority government there, the government the Arabs do vote for, providing Mahmoud Abbas ever allows elections, elections which he has postponed since 2006 for his position and for the Parliament he has, they were not all elected, some were appointed and others reside in Gaza which is mostly controlled by Hamas and Abbas is pretty much unwelcomed there. These feuds have nothing at all to do with Israel other than the fact that both Fatah and Hamas as well as Islamic Jihad and the rest of the alphabet terror entities desire all of Israel destroyed and every Jew dead, which is where they claim separate ideas, Fatah just wants the Israeli Jews dead for now, Hamas and friends want every Jew dead worldwide. There is your truth Mr. Waters.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

November 23, 2014

How Obama has Forced the World to Change for the Better

Filed under: 1949 Armistice Line,Absolutism,Administration,Afordable Healthcare Act,al-Aqsa Mosque,Al-Quds Force,Amalekites,American People Voice Opinion,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Arab Appeasement,Arab League,Arab Spring,Arab Winter,Arab World,Arabs,Armed Services,Army Chief Abdel Fattah al-Sisi,Asia,Ayatollah Khamenei,Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini,Blood Libel,Blue Water Navy,Border Patrol,Borders,Boycott,Breakout Point,Building Freeze,Cabinet,Calaphate,Canada,Catherine Ashton,Chemical Weapons,China,Chinese Pressure,Civil War,Civilization,Commander in Cheif,Condemning Israel,Conflict Avoidnce,Congress,Constitutional Government,Defend Israel,Demolitions,Deportation,Dhimmi,Disengagement,Ditherer in Chief,Divestment,Divided Jerusalem,Domestic NGOs,Ease Sanctions,Ecology Lobby,Economy,Egypt,Egyptian Military,EMP Device,Enforcement,Equal Responsibility,Equal Rights,Equal Treatment,Equality,Europe,European Council,European Governments,European Pressure,European Union,Executive Order,Fatah,Fatah Charter,Federica Mogherini,Forced Solution,Foreign Funding,Foreign NGOs,Galilee,Gaza,Gaza Blockade,Gender Issues Lobby,German Pressure,Golan Heights,Government,Government Health Care,Green Line,Guard Border,Hamas,Hamas Charter,Hassan Rowhani,Hate,Health Care,Hispanic Appeasement,History,Holy Sites,House of Representatives,IDF,Illegal Immigration,Internal Pressures,International Politics,Iran,Iranian Pressure,Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps,Iraq,IRGC,Iron Dome,Islam,Islam,Islamic Pressure,Islamic State,Islamist,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Israeli Interests,Jerusalem,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Home,Jewish Leadership,Jewish State,Jews,Jihad,Jihad,John Kerry,Jordan,Jordan River,Jordanian Pressure,Judea,Kim Jong Un,Kurdish Militias,Leftist Pressures,Mahmoud Abbas,Mainland China,Mainstream Media,Media,Mediterranean Sea,Middle East,Military Council,Missile Test Launch,Mohammed,Mubarak,Muslim Brotherhood,Muslim World,Muslims,NATO,Netanyahu,North Korea,Nuclear Option,Nuclear Program,Nuclear Scientist,Nuclear Sites,Nuclear Weapons,Nuclear Weapons,Nuclear Weapons Test,Obama Care,Old City,One State Solution,Oslo Accords,P5+1,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Palestinian Pressures,Peace Partner,Peace Process,Peacekeepers,Pentagon,Peshmerga Militias,Plutonium Production,Poland,Polish Military,Politicized Findings,Politics,President Morsi,President Obama,President Sisi,Pressure by Egyptian People,Prime Minister,Promised Land,Protective Edge,Quantitative Easing,Quran,R2P Right to Protect,Rebel Forces,Recognize Israel,Red Lines,Refugee Camp,Refugees,Regulations,Repatriation,Response to Muslim Takeover,Russian Military,Russian Pressure,Salafists,Samaria,Sanctions,Saudi Arabian Pressure,Secretary of State,Secular Interests,Security,Senate,Separation Barrier,Settlements,Sharia,Sharia Law,Shiite,Sinai,Sinai Peninsula,Soldiers,Statehood,Sunni,Supreme Leader,Syria,Syrian Military,Taqiyya,Temple Mount,Terror,Third Intifada,Threat of War,Troop Withdrawal,Ukrainian Military,Union Interests,United Nations,United Nations Presures,United States,United States Pressure,Uranium Enrichment,Waqf,War Threat,Weapons of Mass Destruction,Western Wall,WMD,World Opinion,World Pressures,World Without Zionism or America,Yusuf al-Qaradawi,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 3:21 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

There are those who claim that President Obama has been a disaster both at home and in foreign policy. Let us look at domestic policy and accomplishments and resolve those first. The largest area of agreements are President Obama’s signature policy accomplishment according to most, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), aka Obama Care, and the Presidents most recent controversy with his announced intended amnesty of illegal immigrants should they be able to prove they meet requirements generally described criteria which will be defined through not Presidential Executive Actions but through merely ‘memos’ sent to Cabinet Secretaries to implement these changed definitions of policies and not changes of actual policies. The much maligned ACA may be established law as its defenders claim makes it sacrosanct and thus untouchable. Actually, it is as touchable as was the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution which was later repealed by the Twenty-First Amendment to that very same Constitution. So, there is precedent of the highest order that laws can be overturned, amended, redefined or altered in ways approaching uncountable and the ACA is not an exception. If the American people express an overwhelming and honest majority demanding the ACA be repealed, it will eventually be repealed, but only by such pressures being maintained until the repeal or redefinition of the changes within meet the people’s expectations. The immigration amnesty can be altered simply by finding a middle ground with legislation and holding President Obama to his promise to revoke his immigration ‘memos’ and sign the Congressional immigration reform legislation once it reaches his office. Further, if the President refuses to sign a truly compromise and rational approach which the American people have heard explained and support, then that veto can be overruled through constitutionally defined votes of both houses of Congress. Finally, the Congress can also prevent the implementation of President Obama’s immigration ‘memos’ by simply interceding and cutting off any federal funding of those changes and allowing them to die on the vine. So, anything that President Obama has done in domestic policies can be altered, repealed, amended, defunded or otherwise neutered by the Congress or potentially by the courts even if it needs to be taken to the Supreme Court making those alterations to the American legal fabric more compatible with the desires of the American people.

 

This leaves us with the effects and affects President Obama and his policies and actions have had on our world. The biggest problem caused by President Obama on the world’s stage was the damages he caused to the trust that both America’s allies and enemies could have in the promises made by any individual President because of the many standing policies which President Obama either ignored or worked with a great animosity and actually reversing previous American constants in foreign policy. Because many NATO countries came to fear that the United States no longer was there to protect them, they began to arm themselves and take on defense for themselves and many met the demanded minimal investments as required as a percentage of their budgets and national wealth on those defenses. Other nations such as Japan, Philippines, Israel, Taiwan and South Korea also realized that the promises made by previous administrations and even treaties may not be fulfilled to the extents they had always been guaranteed in word and actions including cancellation of joint exercises, the withholding of arms, changing promised arms sales replacing the weapons systems like aircraft and submarines with similar but lesser capable systems as well as actually cancelling some already planned and promised radar systems which were replaced with promises to have similar capabilities in place using naval systems or orbital surveillance satellites. No matter what good may come as nations react to a new reality where the United States can no longer be relied upon to keep its word and live up to promises to protect them from deadly threats or simply meet promised sales or stationing of resources, but they now know that promises from any President of the United States becomes null and void as soon as he leaves office and it depends upon the whims and fancies of his successors on into perpetuity. This alone will damage the United States and its foreign policy for decades, even centuries and potentially forever if the Obama perfidy is recalled into the distant future.

 

Now perhaps a closer look at the individual crises which have resulted to date and will likely play a large part of the historical legacy of President Obama’s two terms and its foreign policy and the ripples they have caused. First to examine Japan, Philippines and South Korea and their similar reactions and new realities they face due to President Obama’s foreign policy changes. The primary adversaries these three nations face is obviously China who has been developing advanced weapons systems, upgrading their military capabilities on the land, the sea and in the skies. Their other main adversary who is extremely unpredictable and potentially dangerous is North Korea with its new leader, Kim Jung Un who murdered his own Uncle for reasons which are unknown. With both of these adversaries possessing nuclear weapons, and with China developing a deep sea capable navy, what is often referred to as a blue water navy, these nations used to depend upon the United States and her nuclear threat to balance the nuclear potential threat from China and North Korea. With their faith and assurances broken, at the very least both South Korea and Japan have started to consider whether developing their own nuclear arsenals might be an idea whose time has come. Furthermore, both the Philippines and Japanese have conflicting claims for Islands located between them and China that China also makes claims to. This has caused a great potential for conflict to break out should the Chinese decide to exercise her ownership while the Philippines or Japan also have troops on exercises on the disputed Islands. The conflict potentially brewing for Japan is over the Senkaku Islands which the Chinese claim calling them the Diaoyu Islands. The Philippines dispute is over the Spratly Islands which the questions of ownership is also contested with Brunei, China, Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam. And finally there is the problem caused by China claiming the entirety of the South China Sea which is heavily navigated water as it is the central leg of almost every trade route from Southern Asia to Western Asia, Hawaii, the Americas and the Panama Canal. Should either South Korea or Japan decide to go nuclear and develop nuclear arsenals, then the world will then contain two more nuclear armed nations and might spawn North Korea to expand their nuclear capabilities which would make the unpredictability of North Korean young, homicidal, vicious dictator Kim Jung Un even more threatening and of much greater concern for both Japan and the Philippines.

 

Taiwan has all of the same concerns as do Japan and the Philippines. The difference is that unlike the Philippines and Japan, Taiwan ranks mainland China as their greatest concern and threat. This is most likely due to the fact that China has already declared that Taiwan is simply another province of China which they intend to restore and place under Beijing’s control. One of the items which Taiwan was depending on was for the United States selling them a number of highly advanced submarines. Former President George W. Bush April 2001 offered Taiwan a substantial arms package which included eight diesel-electric submarines. Facing the problem that the United States has not designed or built diesel-electric submarines they faced a design problem which they were unable to solve simply by purchasing the plans and schematics of a European ally’s submarine but were turned down. After an exhaustive and determined search, come late 2004 the United States presented plans which included consideration for building the diesel-electric submarines for Taiwan from scratch. In early January of 2010, President Obama had his Defense Department announced a new offer of an arms package for Taiwan which did not include any submarines of any sort. This about-face greatly shocked and distressed the Taiwan defense officials. Taiwan’s reaction was to begin their own ability for building the most modern and advanced diesel-electric submarines on their own and have set out in that direction. The difficulty most nations reported in providing any military aid to Taiwan was their fear of provoking Chinese ire which has been growing in its potential recently.

 

Then there was the ready to be installed and promised placement of a radar and anti-missile battery system already agreed upon and the places were set aside in both Czech Republic and Poland. The reasons explained and guarantees given to Russia and the other nations in the area, that they were not the targeted areas, which would have been their primary concerns, but that the system was being placed in these two countries was for defense of any missiles launched from Iran towards Europe or even the United States and Canada. Russia was nervous but ready to accept the missile interceptors as the mere ten interceptors would be next to useless if they were to attempt to prevent an all-out Russian missile launch. By the end of President George W. Bush leaving office the only step left was to pack up the systems and ship them to be set up by American troops with aid from the two nations of Poland and the Czech Republic. President Obama took office and initially did not act or even press any steps to transit the systems to Europe. President Obama along with then Secretary of State Clinton were busy initially with the reset they were planning to reach with Russia. Finally, in September 2009, newly elected and still within his first year as President, Obama cancelled the entire system and promised to leave an AEGIS Destroyer in the eastern half of the Mediterranean Sea. This cancellation of the radar and anti-missile system was not taken well and considered to be a huge betrayal of their trust and as accepted allies. The promise of keeping a naval vessel to replace an entire system was seen an inadequate and less reliable as the ship, even one of the advanced and new AEGIS Destroyers, would not be capable of having its rockets placed in central Europe as there was no accessible body of water. This was also a broken trust and further proof that the United States has been basically changed and could no long trust the promises from one administration to the next administration as they could only take the promises of the President of the United States to have their weight and veracity disappear with the swearing-in ceremony of the next President.

 

And finally there is Israel where the changes signal an alignment change which they had best internalize if Israel has any plans for permanence. The changes in the United States relations with Israel were startling and shocked many an Israeli. The withholding of critical resupply of weapons and ammunition during the Gaza operation Defensive Shield was reminiscent of the delay in permitting resupply during the Yom Kippur War in October 1976 by President Nixon under the advice of Secretary of State Kissinger. The difference this time was the fact that President Obama added an additional review stage where it must be approved by the State Department after the Pentagon had cleared any supplies, provisions, replacement parts, weapon systems and even aircraft. Forcing any provisions of a military nature to also be granted the approval of the State Department places all military to military agreements and assurances given Israel all voided and allows for the Arabists who have infiltrated deeply into the State Department to interdict any resupply or even initial supply of armaments being shipped to Israel. Add into the mix the open hostility and animus shown to the Prime Minister of Israel as well as many Israeli politicians was another sign that all was not well between Jerusalem and Washington. Then there have been the silent demands on the leadership of Israel which has forced a silent building freeze, refraining security police and the IDF by insisting on Israeli rules of engagement, demanded that the Israeli government back away from any restrictions to Muslim access to the Temple Mount or in resolving the continuous rioting by Muslims while all the time refusing Jewish prayer and even access to the Temple Mount which is the most sacred place for Jews in the world and further demanded that Israel make concession in order to meet all of the demands of Mahmoud Abbas. These overt and far reaching plans by the United States to hamstring Israel and force them to all but surrender completely to the Palestinians demands and allow Muslims to act and enjoy every conceivable freedom even from the law while the Jews are to be treated as if they were Dhimmis within an Islamic state have even turned much of the Israeli public to question whether America is still an ally or has the good and solid relations become a memory from the distant past. There are those in Israel who now believe that the United States has turned on their homeland accusing them of taking the side of Israel’s enemies and joined their efforts to destroy Israel. The one place that thus far the United States has not betrayed the trust of Israel is the United Nations Security Council where the veto of the United States has very often been the savior required while much of the rest of the nations represented on the Security Council vote almost religiously to condemn Israel no matter what the charges or evidence. Should the United States ever break this trust, then the Israelis will know that there has been such a change that they can no longer count on anybody in the United Nations Security Council to mount sufficient, if any, opposition to the assaults upon Israel within that body just as nobody can save Israel from endless condemnations from every element of the United Nations. Potentially the worst entity when it comes to Israel would have to be the United Nations Human Rights Council which has as part of its operations a stipulation for them to issue a condemnation of Israel at the beginning of every session before they even conduct the reading of the minutes from the previous meeting. The one truth which is easily witnessed from as far as Jerusalem is the support and warmth of the feelings of the American people for Israel. This devotion and support for Israel is one of the things which has appeared to only grow as the Administration has slid further and further from Israel. Their support and devotion are highly treasured across all the lands and peoples of Israel.

 

The question in all of these nations’ minds is will the United States they knew return once it comes into new management with the next President. Then what jumps to the front of their minds is what are the possibilities that there may be President after President where the United States runs hot and cold in their treatment of each nation. Their greatest fear would be the United States not bouncing back to the familiar relations and traditional allies. The one probably permanent change caused to be implemented by the drastic changes experienced over the past six years has been the realization that even the most powerful nation which had been the greatest protector of freedoms, democracy, human rights and progress can falter and vanish for all intents and purposes leaving the world scrambling to cope with the collapse of what had appeared to be the natural order in the world. Now we do not have to imagine a world without the United States as we have been living in such a world where the United States was leading from behind rather than boldly going forth to support truth and justice, or at least profits, commerce and unfettered trade routes.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

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

%d bloggers like this: