Beyond the Cusp

March 22, 2015

Perhaps a Trial Separation is in Order

Filed under: 1949 Armistice Line,1967 Borders,Act of War,Administration,Amalekites,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Arab Appeasement,Arab Authority,Arab League,Arab Spring,Arab Winter,Arab World,Arabs,Article 80,Bashir al-Assad,Benyamin Netanyahu,Blood Libel,Cairo Speech,Civil Disobedience,Civil War,Civilization,Condemning Israel,Conflict Avoidnce,Coverup,Defend Israel,Ditherer in Chief,Domestic NGOs,Europe,European Governments,European Pressure,European Union,Executive Order,Family Farm,Farming,Fatah,Fatah Charter,Foreign Aid,Foreign Funding,Foreign NGOs,Government,Green Line,Hamas,Hamas Charter,Hate,IDF,Internal Pressures,International Politics,Iranian Pressure,Islam,Islamic Jihad,Islamic Pressure,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Israeli Interests,Jerusalem,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Home,Jewish Leadership,Jewish State,Jewish Temple,Jihad,Jordan,Jordan River,Jordanian Pressure,Judaism,Judea,Judean Hills,Land for Peace,Leftist Pressures,Libya,Mahmoud Abbas,Mainstream Media,Meaning of Peace,Media,Media Bias,Muammar Gaddafi,Muslim World,Muslims,Netanyahu,Old City,One State Solution,Oslo Accords,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Palestinian Pressures,Peace Partner,Peace Process,Peacekeepers,Politicized Findings,Politics,President Obama,Prime Minister,Promised Land,Protests,Recognize Israel,Refugee Camp,Refugees,Response,Right of Return,Rocket Attacks,San Remo Conference,Saudi Arabian Pressure,Secular Interests,Security,Settlements,Statehood,Syria,Tel Aviv,Temple Mount,Terror,Third Intifada,Threat of War,Threat of War,Torah,Two State Solution,Tzipi Livni,United Nations Charter,United Nations Presures,United States,United States Pressure,US Army,Victims,War,World Opinion,World Pressures,Yasser Arafat,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 3:31 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

Many people believe falsely that Israel had been aided by the United States through thick and thin from her first perceptions by the World Zionist Congress right on up until the recent elections where Benyamin Netanyahu won against all odds and the extreme efforts by American organized, financed and manned opposition which many believe was ordered directly from the White House and financed directly from the United States State Department to the tune of somewhere between $200,000 to as much as $400,000. The groups were known as V15 and V2015 which was a fully financed subsidiary of OneVoice which is where the funding was funneled from the State Department to OneVoice and then passed through to V15 to cover their efforts. One of their main efforts was to find out early on Election Day who the people were living in predominantly Arab areas that had regularly not voted in elections. Then they went and provided these people with transportation to the voting places in order to facilitate there voting in this election. They also performed this service in other areas where the vast majority of the people were polled not to be supporting Bibi or any of the right wing, religious or Zionist parties. As Election Day was winding its way through the afternoon and into the evening hours these efforts were ramped up and all those in the targeted neighborhoods and cities who had yet to vote were driven en-masse to their respective polling locations. These efforts were what Prime Minister Netanyahu was referring to when he made the comment, “The right-wing government is in danger. Arab voters are going en-masse to the polls. Left-wing NGOs are bringing them on buses.” There was no animus, hatred or racial slur in Netanyahu’s statement, merely a representation of actual votes intended to fire some enthusiasm for those voters who had yet to vote and were not among those being aided, one might even say coerced or even forced, to vote knowing almost for certain that their votes would not favor another Netanyahu coalition government in Israel if their efforts were sufficient and thus succeeded.

 

That is the reality of the electioneering and acts to influence the Israeli election which has all the signs of originating from the White House. Why would we believe that? First, there is the hostility shown by President Obama and the fact that he had taken efforts from his very first day in office to force a solution on Israel as he had initially attempted any number of changes in the world situations, both within the United States and around the world. There was his speech in Cairo which initiated the acts which were named the Arab Spring as hope springs eternal and these changes could only produce positive results, after all, he was the one who had also claimed, “We are the people we have been waiting for. We are the change that we seek,” during his Super Tuesday speech in Chicago as he took the lead and was now the obvious Democrat candidate for President with everything done but the crowning at the Democrat Convention in Colorado. That the Arab Spring could have been traced to President Obama’s Cairo speech or to Tarek al-Tayeb Mohamed Bouazizi (محمد البوعزيزي‎), a vegetable vendor in Sidi Bouzid, Tunisia, who in protest of the official and her aids from the local government’s harassment and humiliation suffered as his wares and means of support were confiscated leaving him without any options or hope, self-immolated on December 17, 2010 spanning the Tunisian uprising which forced out the dictatorial government, can be debated but what was important to President Obama was that he was credited as the source in many news stories as the uprisings spread beyond Tunisia. The initial hopes for massive change and the lifting of oppressive governance replacing it with democratic principles and the human rights which accompany such governance continued apace with the overthrow, assisted by President Obama, of President Mubarak in Egypt. The Arab Spring and its accompanying hopes were quickly dashed as Syrian protests were violently opposed by Syrian dictator Bashir al-Assad and Libya fell into tribal warfare with the central government not ruling beyond the Capital or even beyond the central government buildings and having to hold its positions through use of force making it even less a real governing body than the terrorist ruling in Benghazi or anywhere else in Libya. These two violent failures, which were commented in our article The Only Real Difference Between Libya and Syria, A Look Back, were the death of the Arab Spring and the birth of an Arab Winter, birthing a seemingly unending conflagration in both Syria and Libya. Of course President Obama only remembers those positive results of his active interferences with other nations, which of course are repeated and reinforced by his staff and closest advisors. This echo-chamber reinforcement set the stage for the interference in the Israeli elections which would also necessarily produce the best of results.

 

This was the point where the Israeli voters had their own definition of what would be the best of results, then believing them unattainable as other party leaders were never thought to be capable of replacing Benyamin Netanyahu, so they went forth to their polling stations, cast their votes and returned Netanyahu to power with numbers leaving absolutely nothing in doubt. Now that the efforts by President Obama to influence and change the Israeli government are apparently thought to have failed by White House standards, the next obvious step is to ridicule the Israeli elected leader and assign some form of scornful actions to Netanyahu which can be displayed as a disqualifying rap against him. There was this factual comment made by Netanyahu which in Israel was considered a revealing of the truth but in the White House it was surprise, surprise, racist. Imagine that, the White House uncovered racism in the Israeli voters and their Prime Minister. The fact that Yitzhak Hertzog and Tzipi Livni were not elected by a groundswell of support from the voters even after the numbers of Arab and other targeted groups were driven to the polls in an effort to have full representation of the Israeli electorate was all the proof necessary. Their transporting people to vote based this altruistic and honorable act as being performed in order to assure that the highest percentage of Arab voters voted in the elections. The effort and the forces from the White House would have extended this service to the voters in the rest of Israel and even the “settlements” (neighborhoods the world believe is occupied by Israel) but they ran out of time and there is only so much one can do with the mere hundreds of thousands of Dollars and Euros donated from the White House through Europe and even to some Arab nations. So the Israelis foolishly chose to elect Bibi and now the President of the United States is furious with their choice.

 

The question now is how much damage President Obama will inflict upon Israel and her people before his unseemly rage passes and he returns to his more normal state of white hot displeasure and raw anger with Israel. The initial threat which has appeared consists of forcing a solution on Israel and birthing into existence an Arab state carved out of Israel’s body shrinking Israel back to the Green Line which are considered by all as indefensible. Forcing Israel to concede to the Euro-Arab defined solution which grants the to be established Arab entity, at best it would be a dysfunctional state and at worst a terrorist haven with no accountable government, would place Ben Gurion Airport within shoulder launched MANPADS anti-aircraft missiles and also place the Tel Aviv coastal shores a mere nine miles away, laid out on a plane literally choking with targets including the central towers which makeup the heart of Tel Aviv, easily within the range of even the most primitive of the Hamas, Islamic Jihad and potentially also Fatah and all in Judea and Samaria (West Bank), the Grad and Katyusha rockets which have sufficient range to strike all of Tel Aviv. As the rockets could be fired from the higher grounds of the Judean ridge, the Judean hills, the rockets can be watched by the team launching them seeing exactly where it strikes and adjusting their aiming accordingly. Within a few shots the rockets could be effectively aimed producing a fire for effect scenario where the rockets are simply fired from their launchers as rapidly as is possible. A well-trained crew could easily fire four rockets each minute placing all of the projectiles exploding within close proximity causing multiple strikes on the largest of targets, the central Tel Aviv towers. Should five or six or potentially more than a dozen of the tallest structures in Tel Aviv at the height of a business day be struck down into a burning heap of twisted steel, shattered glass, shredded sheetrock and hundreds or thousands of bodies with many burned beyond recognition, what would Israeli response look like? Does anybody in their right mind believe that Israel would settle for a brokered ceasefire from the terrorist entities or the governing body and stand down accepting the losses because Europe, the United States and the United Nations demanded such? There would be no question what the Israeli response to such an assault would be; it would be an all-out war and potentially a genocidal war ending any dreams of an Arab state cut from the Biblical heart of Israel.

 

The prelude to the inevitable troubles and potential horrors would be the Palestinian state receiving hundreds of thousands if not millions of refugees as the neighboring Arab nations emptied their refugee camps and simply marched them en-masse across their borders and into the new entity carved from Israel upon its being founded. Any conflagration which may be placed into motion by the terrorist bombardment of Tel Aviv causing untold destruction, inestimable fatalities and serious grievance by the Israeli people and the IDF which would result in a systematic driving of the Palestinians across the Jordan River as they would be left only one other alternative, death. This is a reality that Israelis hope with all their might and souls will never come to be. Contrary to the belief that the Israelis refuse to allow their leaders to make the sacrifices necessary for peace, the Arabs have refused every offer always demanding one additional concession, that Israel accept into their borders and awarded citizenship on arrival the close to or over five million refugees from the refugee camps which have been holding Muslim Arabs since the initial Arab Israeli War in 1948 and have also condemned their children and their children in some instances to the fourth or fifth generation all so they can be returned into Israel making Israel a predominantly Arab and Muslim state, denying them any rights such as to own land, to hold any but the most degrading or manual work, absolutely no citizenship, limited education other than UNRWA provided education, and other demeaning limitations plus being kept in the camps in perpetuity as if they were lepers or criminals. These victims suffering a near hopeless state would be forced into even worse conditions as they would be forced into the nascent Palestinian state where the one comfort they had, a roof over their heads and meals for them to eat sending them to a state of victimization as there would be almost no manner or way for accepting such an influx of people. Even should every Palestinian family take a refugee family into their homes, even that would but give some form of normalcy for less than half, way less than half. Forcing such a solution would have numerous other problems such as the hundreds of thousands of settlers who would need assistance as they would also be forced from their homes.

 

The difference being that the Israelis have taken in refugees of a sort before when the people in the extremities, the definition of the areas outside of Tel Aviv metropolis, came under sustained rocker fire be it from Gaza and Hamas and others in the south or from Hezballah in the north and the people were taken in largely by these very same settlers, it would be ironically tragic. Any manner of looking at the long range results of forcing such a solution will result in an even more dire emergency situation of even greater magnitude and less options. Allowing the Arabs to form their state by threat of force and without a formal treaty would be taken as support for their further actions against Israel. One must remember that Abbas is just as much an insatiable terrorist bent on the destruction of the Jewish state by any means possible. That is why the aerial assault on Tel Aviv is as predictable as is the sun rising in the east. It is simply what many of the Arabs living under Abbas, and formerly Arafat, are, terrorists and nothing else in their entire life. As children they were taught to throw rocks at IDF soldiers whenever they saw them. Rocks became Molotov firebombs as they grew and eventually became rockets and bullets. What many do not realize, largely because they could not care less, is that being a terrorist pays quite well once you reach a certain level. At the very top it makes billionaires and lower down it still pays better than farming and is a far easier a job, and that is what terrorism has become, an industry. Until the Western world wakes to the reality that the Arab Palestinians are in reality simply a terrorist training camp, nothing more, and the more area and funding provided, the more terrorism will be produced. Perhaps the time has come to end this farcical cavalcade of terror.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

March 7, 2015

The United States Lost Republic to Democracy

 

While a complete democracy is neither desirable nor practical, yet the United States has irrevocably moved steadily closer and closer to outright democracy since the first days of her founding under the present Constitution. The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments which were debated and selected from an original thirteen and sliced down to a nice round number, ten, gave the first step in that direction by delineating the rights which were included in those guaranteed the people as they were gifts from the creator mentioned so specifically in the Declaration of Independence which many of the Founding Fathers believed was a part of the founding documents which defined the society and its governance just as much as the Constitution. As time progressed the Federal Government gathered unto itself more and more powers stealing them either from the States respectively, or from the people. This was from the government which supposedly was restricted by Amendment X which read, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The Founding Fathers were divided into two groups, the Federalists and, of course, the anti-Federalists with one group desiring to balance the governance in favor of the most local governance as possible while the others believed that centralized powers were required in order for the governance to rule the entire nation. The first attempt to fashion a weak central governance over the newly liberated English colonies, the Federated States of America, was a dismal failure as without any powers to raise money and left at the mercies of the charity of the individual States the government very soon ran aground and became high, dry and out of funds. So, the United States of America’s Constitution was America 2.0 and made with powers given the central government unconscionable the first time around. Had the Federal Government continued to be restrained and restricted to its original powers then the United States would probably be in better shape and the European powers would still have militaries of sufficient size and capabilities that they would not be dependent upon the United States to be the sole determining force of NATO and the European Union would have died long before the Euro became the bane of Greece and the lucrative coinage for Germany. But the changes that put the final knife into the Constitution slashing it and tearing it and signaling the end of that Amendment X and the State’s rights it presumably protected came in along with the end of many individual rights for the individual American just before World War I began on July 28, 1914.

 

Earlier in that fateful year Amendment XVI established the income tax with the promise from the politicians that it would only tax the most wealthy one percent of the population and would never be permitted to become a burden on the average person and on that promise likely being the clinching argument allowed it to be ratified into law on February 3, 1913. As any American will attest, the income tax became far more than burdensome on the average person but also grew to such a point and the IRS which it founded gathered such information that the government through provisions and added regulations eventually could tell the average person their expenditures throughout the year and was rumored jokingly that the IRS could look up the color of the guest towels hanging in your bathroom. Now the Federal Government can tell you a whole lot more than the colors of items you have purchased, the extent and particulars of your every investment and virtually anything anyone might care to know about your life, your purchasing habits, your diet where you go on weekends for fun, where you vacationed the last ten years, the make and mileage on your vehicles and just about any other detail imaginable, and people worry about their privacy. Privacy in this world died a long time ago somewhere right before data mining and agreements between governments arranging for each to spy on the other’s citizens and then provide the information upon anybody that the other requested which eventually led to the decisions to forget the middle-man and simply for each nation to spy on their own citizens making everything so much easier and less complicated.

 

A short time later the Amendment XVII was ratified on April 8, 1913 establishing for the direct election of each State’s Senators instead of allowing each State to decide the methods their Senators were chosen. Previous to this Amendment to the Constitution most States chose their Senators in a various number of procedures with the two most used being the Governor choosing the Senator as each came up for election and possibly having to present them to the State’s legislature or higher branch of the legislative branches to have them approve the selection with some States requiring a larger vote for approval than a simple majority. The other method was for the Senator to be selected by the legislative branch of the State government and in most cases have them approved by the Governor under the same rules as legislation was passed or vetoed by the Governor. This Amendment took away the individual State’s ability to have their voices heard in the Federal Government making the Senate simply a less populous House of Representatives having both wings of the bicameral legislative governance chosen directly by the people. The reasoning presented was that the people were more knowledgeable as a group or mass intelligence than any combination of State Governors or legislatures in choosing the Senators. There was also the claim that State level politicians were too corrupt which was laughable as the majority of Federal legislative politicians were simply the most competent of the people in State governance. This was amidst the populace movement where the average citizen was presumed to have better sense when the whole was allowed to speak as through elections. What was completely ignored was that the Founding Fathers had planned for the Senate to be the legislative branch representing the States’ governance such that the Senate would guard over State’s rights and protect the powers of the State and limit the influence the Federal Government could have over them. This change brought on the slaughtering of the States individually and collectively such that they have long ago seen their powers slowly but inexorably misappropriated, stolen even, by the Federal Government which now faced no opposition from the individual States. This also allowed the Federal Government to control the individual States by demanding that the State acquiesce to the demands and whims of the Federal Government in order to receive funding such as requiring that the States meet caloric and vitamin requirements and curtail the choices offered the children otherwise not receive a large amount of Federal school funding which is earmarked for the lunch and other food programs. Further, the Federal Government has come up with this wonderful manner in which to place onerous demands on the States through unfunded mandates. These are programs that each and every State is required to carry out according to Federal regulations or even actual laws but for which the Federal Government no longer funds the program dumping the entire mess upon the States to finance. The numbers of these programs increases every year and this is partially due to the Federal government attempting to release itself from onerous financial obligations which were laid out in legislation for some program every State is required to carry out and funds were set aside for the first so many number of years and were presumed to be funded further by the Federal Government but somehow down the road the Federal funding ceased but the mandate continued and the States found themselves on the hook to finance program after program as the Federal Government cut off the flow but did not cut out the requirements.

 

Both of these Amendments to the United States Constitution were ratified but under suspicions of fraud. One was found to have received the final ratification a few weeks or a couple of months beyond the set time allotted for ratification to be permitted, Congress claimed that somehow this had been covered by some extension despite no such allowance stipulated as possible by the Constitution and the other was not ratified by sufficient States falling a couple short. Well, World War I struck on July 28, 1914 and the RMS Lusitania on May 7, 1915 was sunk by a German U-boat and American lives were lost as a result. There has been debate ever since the sinking as to whether the RMS Lusitania carried weapons or explosives for use in the war which was vehemently denied by Britain and the United States as well as the other allied powers and the debate has persisted and apparently will continue forward. Meanwhile, President Wilson argued against joining the war while simultaneously demanding that the U-boat attacks not target indiscriminately and especially avoid any further attacks upon civilian craft like the RMS Lusitania. Wilson was already stoking the public to allow an American effort join the efforts while also campaigning on a platform that he kept the United States out of the war. United States President Woodrow Wilson finally demanded a Declaration of War and the Congress responded giving him his desired declaration of war on April 6, 1917. As the initial Declaration of War identified only Germany as the nation the United States had declared war upon, this proved to be untenable; so after President Wilson again requested a Declaration of War and Congress did comply as they declared war on Austria-Hungary on December 17, 1917. The United States never actually declared war against all of the forces fighting against the allies who also consisted of the Central Powers, Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire. World War I came to an end on November 11, 1918 and by this date the horrific pandemic known as the Spanish Flu had broken out and some of the troops brought the virus home with them which caused the pandemic to break out and spread across the United States. By this time the two Constitutional Amendments numbers sixteen and seventeen were faint memories pretty much lost in the fog of the decade which followed them with the war and the flu who had time to be concerned about the potential of inconvenience of two little Amendments. Unfortunately, as was learned many years later these two little Amendments proved to be anything but minor little legislative additions to the Constitution but rather major changes in the breadth of Government powers and the depth of their effect to be felt years later. These two Amendments may have been the most influential pair of legislative action ever passed and ratified since the Bill of Rights was passed. These Amendments laid the framework by which power became centralized in the Federal Government and provided the funding through direct taxation of the people and stripping the States of choosing their own representatives within the central government thus liberating the Federal Government from any limitations by the States nor could they protest directly the absorption of the powers which had previously been within the control of the individual States and subjugating the States beneath the Federal Government’s heel without recourse.

 

The change in how Senators were to be elected directly by the people simply made the Senators nothing more than super representatives with two permitted per state. Now the United States had entered the point of no return sliding almost completely into democracy and definitively no longer a republic. Benjamin Franklin was queried as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation, “Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?” and Benjamin Franklin answered bluntly and directly to the heart of the query stating, “A Republic, if you can keep it.” Never in the history of founding of nations has the situation been so accurately assessed nor has the problem been predicted as how the Governance will be altered eventually unraveling the delicate balance between the individual States and the Federal Government. It is said that one can assess any Governance by a simple measure; just determine which side is the more fearful of the other and should the Government be more fearful of the people than are they of the Government, then you have freedom but if the people are fearful of their government than the government is of them, then you have tyranny. With all the branches which are appointed to make the general rules and stipulations and requirements from the people now directly elected with the exception of the President, the United States is teetering on the edge and about to fall beyond the cusp and into the electing of the President directly ending any vestige of a republic. The direct election of Presidents has been proposed and one of the most dangerous legislative suggestions which recently was rejected for yet another time by the Oklahoma Legislature which would have demanded that the Electoral representatives for the State vote for the winner of the popular vote by the entire nation while ignoring the will and votes of the citizens in their own state. Should that legislative effort win in sufficient states which would provide an electoral victory then all any candidate would need do is campaign in the cities and areas with the greatest concentration of people to assure himself victory in the popular vote and completely ignore the less populated areas such as Alaska, Hawaii, Wyoming, Maine and all of the rural areas in every state. This idea is simply the latest manner to circumvent the Constitution and make the Electoral College an abstract and ancient methodology to be forgotten except by those few who major in ancient manners for electing leaders in city-states and nations; a major just slightly more useful than Indo-Chinese Love Sonnets of the Ming Dynasty.

 

So, as we can see the United States has slowly but inescapably moved towards a total democracy. There have been calls in the last couple of decades as computers have made this possible for the United States government, as a final act, provide everybody over the age of eighteen a voting tablet which is dedicated to one function and only one function, listing the legislative issues and bills currently up for voting and tallying every citizen’s vote. Each citizen of voting age would be permitted to cast their vote on anything plus they could present legislation they desired to see placed before the people and seek a qualifying number within a reasonable time to continue to be eligible to remain on the list of proposed legislation. This number would slowly rise over at most two months and at that predetermined time, if the proposed legislation has attained the highest level of approvals it would qualify as a piece of general interest and the suggestion would be listed as a Bill and then have two weeks for everyone to vote. Should a Bill be passed it wound be passed on to the President much as things work today. Do not expect such to occur soon as it would require career politicians to vote such into law and thus make their chosen profession obsolete.

 

Still, the United States today is much closer to being a democracy than it is to the republic envisioned by the Founding Fathers and once those populists on the extreme left or the Federalists on the extreme right get their way, then even the President will be selected by straight majority voting. All it would probably take is for a popular candidate which one side felt was undeniably the best choice to win the popular vote but lose the election. Then another ridiculous exhibition of populist insanity would boil over and press through some version of directly electing the President and the United States will have completely been transformed into a democracy. Nothing happens in a bubble and everything has its originating source. The movement to a democracy rather than a republic is that with a democracy it is possible and made more likely for government to become a case for mob rule in which the mob would be the more populous states which is those with the most cities, the most megalopolises. When the cities are given the rule, then what happens to the needs of rural America? We are seeing the effect of cities ruling as the most dominant force in government in California where the water allotments were made over the years to favor the cities over the farmers. Now there are stretches of farmlands which are just acre upon acre of brown dusty soil with dead crops which simply were not provided with the necessary irrigation water at the most critical growing part of the season and these crops and lands are now almost worthless. The family farms will cease to exist due to not being able to pay for their last seeds which never had a chance to grow and will be forced fiscally to sell their lands to the mega-farm industry. This all because the people in the city pressed their allotment of water over that of the less populous farmers were able to and the farmers simply lost their last crop and now are finished. This was a sad example of how straight democracies can destroy an entire segment of the population simply by pressing the mob’s desire for green lawns, full swimming pools, green parks and water amusement parks and a myriad of other needs for water in the big city. The farmers had a similar need but lacked the muscle to lobby the government either at the State or Federal levels and thus lost their crops and many will lose their farms. Once the industrial farm corporations gain ownership of enough of the farmlands, then they will have the lobbyists and they will have the clout to get the irrigations water turned back on and limit the lawn watering city dweller to only be permitted to water their precious lawns on Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. They may scream bloody murder but at least the farms will return to producing food and not just dusty soil. This entire water battle has and will play out across the United States over time and perhaps teach some of us the values of indirect governance over straight mob rule democracy.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

January 31, 2015

An Article Reflecting on Anti-Semitism and Isolationism

 

This past week much of the world memorialized the Shoah, the Holocaust, by recognizing the seventieth anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau, the dual slavish labor camp and industrial scale murder camp which combined murdered approximately ten percent of the estimated twelve to fourteen million souls exterminated in all of the Concentration Camps. People often hear only about the Jewish lives lost in the Concentration Camps and the others are often glossed over, an unfortunate side-effect of the Jews having great cause as two-thirds of European Jewry and approaching half of the world’s Jews (many set the number around forty percent) perished in the Concentration Camps thus giving the Jews a heavier burden through affect and such they have been the guarantors of preventing such from happening again; thus their cry of ‘Never Again!’ Also targeted for extermination by the Nazi death machines, the Nazi Concentration Camps, were the Roma (Gypsies), homosexuals, mentally challenged, the insane, people with other birth defect, the unemployed, physically handicapped, Serbians in the Balkan regions, Polish leadership, Christian leadership who opposed their plans, many of the Russian prisoners of war and anyone considered a threat or problem to Nazi rule. Another reason the Jewish deaths matter in the present is the rising once again of anti-Semitism throughout Europe partially due to Islamic immigrations and partially due to economic and fiscal difficulties which have caused some to demand austerity which has even further angered many Europeans who turned again to their oldest target for all that ails their society, anti-Semitism. There has also been Islamic anti-Semitism which many contend comes with the following of the teachings and sermons of radical leaders who use quotations from the Quran mixed with plain old anti-Semitism. Still there are those who will assure the Jews that another Holocaust will happen where they are rounded up and murdered systematically with industrialized efficiency.

 

The blight which is anti-Semitism returning to Europe has many familiar scents and attributes with one major difference, the Jews have an escape valve, if they choose to utilize it, named Israel waiting anxiously for their return, for the Jews in the West to return home. The Jewish state is also the target of much of this new virulent anti-Semitism which allows for those anti-Semites who desire to hide behind something in order to be capable of claiming that they are not anti-Semites, they just hate the policies, the overt force, the disproportional force, the collateral damage, the denial of statehood and/or the aggression by Israel against the Palestinians. Where their denials about their being anti-Semitic falls apart is in their accusations which if followed to their conclusive ends would deny Israel existing as the Jewish homeland. By denying Israel her right for existing, those who make claims that Israel should never have been formed and must now be dissolved are also making the case that the Jews amongst the peoples are to be denied keeping the state formed and subsequently founded by a number of international treaties and instituted under international law should now be denied them and instead gifted to their enemies simply because the world has decided that the Jews are unworthy of their own state. The most popular myth is that the peoples claiming to be Jews did not originate in the lands of Israel but instead the Ashkenazi or Eastern European Jews are the descendants of Khazars. A large percentage of Jews who settled in Israel came to the promised lands as the result of pogroms, oppressions and ethnic cleansing in their home nations which were intentionally attempting to force them from amongst them once and for all. These Jewish families were forced from their homes, many stripped of their possessions, robbed of their bank accounts, their homes and businesses simply taken from them without any reparations, their vehicles taken by their neighbors, often nations permitted these Jews one or two suitcases per person, all of this taking place in broad daylight during the middle of the Twentieth Century, largely between 1948 and 1960, and these Jews came to Israel to restart their lives and now their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren are living in Israel and make up half the nation’s population. These Jews were not victims of the Holocaust and had not left their homes and businesses in Europe but came from the Middle East and Northern Africa (MENA) and are Sephardic Jews. Further, many of the Ashkenazi Jews have had their genomes researched by researchers and independently and in the vast majority of cases these people had so many identifiers which are also found in Sephardim. The facts that these Jews were banished from what had been their families’ homes and businesses for the last two centuries for both the European Jews and those living in North Africa and throughout the Middle East and all came to Israel because Israel meant their salvation and their return to their ancestral home.

 

After the world had spit out their Jews sending them to their ancestral homeland, much of the world sighed in relief as they had solved their Jewish problem. One might think that this would suffice, banning of Jews across much of MENA and many Jews repulsed from their homes when they returned from the death camps only to find their properties stolen and no future for them, only further hostilities. Now, after sixty-seven years living in their homeland the peoples of the world appear to be bent on the destruction of that nation and the slaughter of its people. The initial attempt to annihilate the nascent State of Israel came early on at the founding when over six armies collapsed on the newly founded state of Israel the morning of her founding rallying to the cry of drowning the Jews into the Mediterranean Sea. This genocidal assault failed as did the subsequent attempt in 1967 where Israel captured the Sinai Dessert and liberated Gaza, Judea, Samaria and the Golan Heights. Then there was the nearly successful attempt to take back the lost lands and potentially drive the Jews into the Sea but this assault was eventually halted and the gains reversed. After these attempts proved futile, their tactics altered and the terror warfare became the sole pry-bar. This led to the use of the word Palestinian Arab to describe an imaginary people fabricated with the aid of the KGB and organized around Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas as it top leaders. They formed the Palestinian Authority when they gained the backing from some early European journalists and editorialists. NGOs were formed and the lobbying began in parallel to the terrorism and the subverting Western Universities largely by purchasing their Middle Eastern Studies Departments simply by purchasing them through erecting an impressive building to house the staff, parts of which were provided by the foreign Arab nations using CAIR, MAS or other Muslim NGO. This led to the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement (BDS) which would malign Israel and the Jews which led to many college students coming from universities and hating the Israeli Jews but presumably not the Jews in general, or at least the Israelis.

 

These purchasing of inroads through academics gained many friends and turned more than a few other departments within many universities against Israel. Each year it becomes necessary to increase the list of universities and colleges which hold Israel Apartheid Week where Israel is vilified and often there are mock-ups of checkpoints which Israel is forced to utilize in order to guarantee the safety of her citizens but are cast as evil encroachments onto Arab lands. There are numerous terrorist groups which specialize in Israel and are thus granted protection within the university systems. Jewish students are often not safe on campus when these events are taking place as they are accosted and assaulted often injuring them requiring hospitalization. These demonstrations often broaden their targets from just Israel to all Jews whether they have ties to Israel or not. These efforts have gotten to the point where wearing any items which may be interpreted as Jewish can and often will result in your person being assaulted and when such an assault is reported the university often claims it does not have the resources to investigate and capture the culprit. The problem with protecting Jews in some places while not in others is that the authorities thus begin to denote certain places as ‘no go zones’ which are beyond the law enforcement as police officers have become so unwelcome that they no longer enter these regions. That does not mean that such places are beyond law, it simply means that these places do not follow the laws of their host country, the law within these places is Sharia which makes the value of a woman’s testimony count considerably less than a man’s testimony and a non-Muslim (Kafir) is next to worthless. Some places and even nations in Europe have gone so far as to enforce Sharia and adopt some of the particular statutes and sentences. These accommodations are dangerous as they aid in not requiring these MENA immigrants to assimilate and thus become a true member of the society. Making the area where certain people live into a place which resembles the laws and society which they presumably left behind can make their ability to adjust, reside and become gainfully employed that much more difficult.

 

Allowing the hatreds and societal stigmas to be maintained in Western civilizations should simply be unacceptable as the inclusion, not exclusion, of immigrants should be the end goal for any society. If a number of Westerners immigrated to a Middle Eastern or North African nation they would be required to learn the language, customs, and obey the laws the same as any native. There would not be agencies and NGOs whose sole purpose would be to gain for the immigrants the power and ability to flaunt the laws of their new land. They would face the challenge of learning the language and adjusting to the diet. There would not be special areas set aside for immigrants from the Western nations where they could live their entire lives feeling as if they never left their homelands. No matter how much they might see their culture and rule of law to be superior, it would not be permitted to replace the laws of the land in which they now resided. This begs the question as to why do these immigrants refuse to adjust to the nation which they willingly chose to reside. What was their motivation to make a long and possibly arduous trip to reside in their new land? Certainly their goal was not to refuse to assimilate and to simply live the exact same life, speak the exact same language, reside under the same laws and be deprived of the opportunities which would now exist right outside their neighborhood. Granted there is comfort in having the same traditions and same societal laws and the same customs when one has moved but that would not provide the advances in the society of which each immigrant came seeking to take the advantage of the potentially upward mobility thus improve their life or at least grant such for their children. Sitting in a no go zone under sharia and forced to live apart from endless possibilities sitting just out of reach, this is the situation in Paris and other cities with much of their Muslim population stuck in their island amidst lands of endless opportunity just an arm’s length away if one could only break from their comfort and grasp the golden ring.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

« Previous PageNext Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.