Beyond the Cusp

March 28, 2015

The Nuclear Deal About to Emerge Hot from the Oven

Filed under: 1949 Armistice Line,1967 Borders,Act of War,Administration,Alberto Nisman,Amalekites,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Appointment,Arab Authority,Argentina,Assembly of Experts,Ayatollah Khamenei,Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini,Blood Libel,Borders,Breakout Point,Calaphate,Caliphate,Catherine Ashton,Civilization,Conflict Avoidnce,Coverup,Czechoslovakia,Dhimmi,Dictator,Domestic NGOs,Ease Sanctions,Economic Sanctions,Egypt,EMP Device,Europe,European Governments,European Pressure,European Union,Executive Order,Foreign Funding,Foreign NGOs,German Pressure,Germany,Government,Greece,Green Line,Hamas,Hassan Rowhani,Hate,History,Internal Pressures,International Politics,Intifada,Iran,Iranian Pressure,Iraq,Islam,Islam,Islamic Pressure,Israel,Israeli Interests,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Leadership,Jewish State,Jihad,John Kerry,Leftist Pressures,Middle East,Mohammad Javad Zarif,Mongol Hordes,Munich Accord of 1938,Muslim Expansionism,Muslim Invade Europe from the East,Muslim World,Nuclear Program,Nuclear Sites,Nuclear Weapons,Nuclear Weapons,Obama,P5+1,Persians,Politicized Findings,Politics,President Obama,Prime Minister,Remove Sanctions,Russian Pressure,Sanctions,Saudi Arabia,Secretary of State,Secular Interests,Shiite,Strong Sanctions,Sunni,Supreme Leader,Tel Aviv,Threat of War,Tri Border Region,United Nations,United Nations Presures,United States,Uranium Enrichment,Weapons of Mass Destruction,Western World,WMD,World Opinion,World Pressures,World War II,World War III,World Without Zionism or America,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 2:04 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

The deal has been done for probably a week or two with the great drama being acted by some of the most consummate political dramatists on the face of the earth, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani whose fame he credits to his ability to glad-hand and smile disarmingly while negotiating earlier nuclear talks and simultaneously increasing the number of centrifuges by a factor of hundreds, Iranian Foreign Minister and lead negotiator Mohammad Javad Zarif whose charms have been regularly reflected by the dreamy looks pooling in the former European Union Foreign Minister Lady Catherine Aston, and finally United States Secretary of State John Kerry who in his foremost starring role before the United States Senate where he adamantly swore that his fellow soldiers in Viet Nam had committed crimes and swarmed across the nation and “razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan.” These men along with a stellar emphasis to everything being played by the Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei who echoed the chanting crowds in Tehran this week in their carefully choreographed performance shouting in response to his lead in their weekly performance of “Death to America.” All this theater will climax culminating next week, which would not be complete without the man who made all this possible by directing the American surrender point by point, President Barack Obama, whose entire schedule has been cleared past Monday in preparation of a signing ceremony. All this was made clear by White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest who stated, “The president’s schedule for the rest of the week actually remains pretty fluid.” When pressed for further information he coyly replied, “We’ve got some more details on the schedule that need to be hammered out.” As if this was sufficient high drama, a British diplomat told reporters on the sidelines of negotiations in Lausanne, Switzerland, “We have made substantial progress in a number of areas but there are still important issues where no agreement has so far been possible. Our task, therefore, for the next few days is to see if we can bridge the gaps and arrive at a political framework which could then be turned into an agreement.” Such high drama it makes one’s head spin almost twisting it off but simply making the reader dizzy.

 

All this drama has had a price, a price which was paid by one side taking a grand and novel approach to negotiations which was explained not long ago as the instructions given to the United States negotiating team that when meeting Iranian resistance to any proposal to simply agree to put that item aside and pursue the next point all in order to emphasize those things the two sides were in agreement on so as to have a favorable report of accomplishments which could be presented to the media and to move the talks forward. This plan was to set the stage for final negotiations on the remaining subjects which were considered important enough to readdress. This leads one to question as to what percentage of the bypassed subjects where Iran showed any amount of opposition were left bypassed and what percentage were considered worth readdressing and pressing for a workable compromise short of a complete surrender. Another point which is as preposterous an idea as any I have heard is the ten year expiration date on the agreement after which the Iranians would no longer have any restrictions they would have to abide and could move full speed towards the manufacture of as many nuclear warheads of any designs including multiple warhead, thermonuclear warheads, Super EMP warheads which the Russians have informed they gave to the Iranians, tactical nuclear warheads deliverable by moderate range ballistic missiles or even artillery or any other designs they may have developed with no restrictions on total numbers. One can only guess how many warheads the Iranians might produce in the first few years after the agreement expires after a decade. What is surprising is that the length of the agreement was not closer to four or five years thus just long enough that the next President would be facing a very brief period in which to press for a new treaty but would be restricted on the means to pressure Iran as economic sanctions would be off the table until the treaty expired and then would not be sufficiently successful in pressing Iran to negotiate for probably three to five years during which they would be producing as many warheads as they were capable. No matter which way one looks at the coming agreement, there is no way to give it a favorable reality.

 

Still, President Obama has assured us that there is no way we can know what will come to pass in the decade respecting the governance of Iran. He offered the supposition that within the decade there was a good possibility that Iran would become a functioning government which would eschew nuclear weapons and decide that being accepted within the community of nations and having favorable standing while pursuing trade relations with the western nations as well as in Asia and the rest of the world giving up on their desire for nuclear weapons. While in a decade’s time the United States may have elected their second or even third President succeeding President Obama and who knows how much they may change the nation but we can probably safely bet that Iran will have a very similar governance as they currently possess with the only likely change being their President and their parliament while they might also have some new faces on the Assembly of Experts of the Leadership and a new set of leaders sitting on the twelve member Guardian Council of the Constitution but they are also very likely to still have as their Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei. In the event of his death, then we will see a similar new Supreme Leader where the greatest change will not be in his views and policies he will execute but maybe his name will show a greater degree of change than Khamenei differed from his predecessor Khomeini. The continuity of the policies under Khomeini and then followed by Khamenei differed not much more than their names sounded different, in other words they were equally obsessed with exporting the Shiite form of Islam, gaining superiority over the rest of the Muslim world, especially over Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the rest of the oil producing Gulf states, the death and destruction of Israel as well as the United States, leading the Muslim world and sweep across Europe and seeking hegemonic preeminence over as much of the world as they prove capable with some claiming that there might even be a special desire to swarm marauding over the Greek Islands as revenge for Alexander the Great’s crushing victory over the Persian Army at the Battle of Gaugamela, some national pride demands holding grudges a little longer than others, but all the way from 331 B.C. seems a bit much. The best bet is that Iranian governance will not be changed in the near or foreseeable future which makes the making an agreement with a sunset clause all the more problematic, yet the Iranians are threatening to sink the negotiations as even that decade is too long for them to wait to claim their ultimate weapons.

 

There have been reports that the French, yes, the French, are the most skeptical of the terms of the agreement and as we mentioned just a few days ago, the French may be the world’s last hope of forcing the negotiations to produce a better deal or possibly blowing up the negotiations completely if the Iranians demand that the deal they have accepted be signed or they will take their ball and go home without any deal. That there might be no deal, though I would bet that President Obama would sign any deal with Iran all by himself even if all the other P5+1 nations, France, Britain, Germany and even unbelievable as it is, Russia and China, all refused the deal brokered each for their own reasons. President Obama has proven to the Iranian leadership through actions and even inactions, words and silence, and in every way possible and even some thought impossible, that he desperately not only wants but must have a deal with the Iranian signature next to his signature just as badly as did British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain desired a treaty signed by he along with a reluctant French Prime Minister Édouard Daladier and principally German Chancellor Adolf Hitler along with Italian Prime Minister Benito Mussolini who was of lesser importance in Munich with the completion of the Munich Agreement of 1938 which sacrificed Czechoslovakia and led near directly to World War II. Let us pray that the agreement with Iran does not similarly lead to Iran swarming across the Gulf oil kingdoms and then on to the Sudan and into Egypt and Libya as well as Jordan and even Turkey.

 

That brings us to the recent war of words with Turkey recently complaining that Iran was attempting to dominate the Middle East which drew a response from Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Zarif accusing Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan of fomenting all of the strife in the Middle East likely referring to the rumors that Turkey is financing ISIS and permitting infiltrators desiring to join ISIS to access Syria by crossing the Turkish-Syrian border unopposed. Add to this the Saudi airstrikes on the presumed Iranian supplied and tactically aided with intelligence Houthis who have taken control of the capital in Yemen and are attempting to push further across Yemen unseating al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and giving Iran a southern border threat against Saudi Arabia. As to this the active support Iran provides for Syrian dictator al-Assad, their supplying both Hamas and Hezballah presumably to threaten Israel and prevent the Israelis from striking the Iranian nuclear sites and potentially beyond that and striking their command and control, military bases and even the halls of power attempting to decapitate the Iranian leadership and finally aiding Iraq fighting ISIS to the point that Iran now appears to be taking the lead in this defense of Iraq and may be a card played by Iran at the nuclear talks. There have been indications, though no actual smoking gun proof, that Iran, possibly through Hezballah from the tri-border area camps, may have ordered or even actually committed the murder of Argentine Prosecutor Alberto Nisman. Sometimes it is almost like one needs a program with maps and a decoder ring just to get through any of the goings on originating just from the nations in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). All of this and we did not even go into the Israeli-Arab (Palestinian) tangled imbroglio. Perhaps that can wait until tomorrow if events prove such necessary. Meanwhile, who’s on first and what’s the name of the second baseman, I give up; he’s our shortstop.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

February 1, 2015

Political Styles of Fancy, Function, Fantasy, and Far Futures

 

In case you just awoke with a ringing headache and returned from the woods to find your sleepy little town had grown exponentially and your house replaced by a strip mall and everyone when you told them your name queries where have you been, you were reported missing years ago and your tail includes dwarves bowling in the woodlands, the Republican money machine just won the midterm elections again. If such news is distressing, simply remember back to the last Presidential elections when it was rumored that the Democrat machine and money bought another Presidency for Barack Obama. Simply put, whichever side wins the election was the one which was bought by their big money contributors and political machinery. Have you ever bothered to stop and wonder what happened to the other side’s machine and money when they lost the latest round of elections? Do you really think that one side spent all the money one election cycle and in return allowed the other side to spend in the next election, something that an alien watching elections news coverage might be honestly trying to figure out. The truth is that they both spend about the same every election and the sore losers have to find some small factoid on which to blame their loss; as anybody who is, thinks, in the know, or however one defined reasoned and rational, which makes their political views the sole and superior choice, would most certainly have voted for their candidate allowing them to have won except for the illegal money spent by the other side, thanks to some loophole which must be closed immediately, and paid them to vote against their better knowledge or whatever. What is remarkable is that this line of thought is universal wherever people are fortunate enough to actually have governments chosen through proper elections where one’s votes are capable of affecting change in the government through legal elections; so be glad if after every election cycle there are those complaining that the other side bought the elections.

 

But what do we really mean when we claim the elections were bought? The phrase originates in times when buying an election actually meant buying an election by paying people to vote for a particular candidate. This was not a regular occurrence and was only feasible before there was the existence of a freestanding media which was not dependent upon the whims of the local governments. This slowly became the reality as the media started merging and coverages reached beyond a single city or borough thus beyond being owned by an interesting party or collection who were capable of owning the media in the same manner as they owned the politics as represented in old westerns where the people finally found an honest sheriff or entity who ended the evil cattle baron and his ranch hands who were all second rate gunslingers, most of which ended up dead by the end of the movie or left town after the Lone Ranger and Tonto road into town. There are stories whose validity is often questionable of elections where political bosses, whatever or whoever those amorphous entities might be, would give people a hundred dollars to vote for their candidate. There may even be people claiming such in elections today though such would be even more difficult to believe as even the most politically driven media would expose such. The truth is that even if you believe that FOX or SKY news is biased or that CNN or BBC are biased in the opposite direction, both sides are held to task and kept honest as whichever side which employed such boorish tactics would be revealed by the other side’s media thus the free press has ended any possibility of money for votes frauds. Despite this there are still claims that elections are bought, be it by the Koch brothers, George Soros or Sheldon Adelson. How is it possible for such claims to still exist?

 

Elections are bought the same exact way that everyday products sell their wares, an attractive advertising campaign. Basically the golden nugget in any campaign, political or otherwise, is a catchy phrase or concept which captivates the attentions of the public. In the 1950s the golden political nugget in Presidential campaigns was a catchy little slogan of “I Like Ike.” Call it the “Where’s the Beef” or the “Pause that Refreshes” of the political era. Of course it did also help that Eisenhower was also the man who defeated Hitler. Still, had General Douglas MacArthur run for political office, something feared by those thinking he might run on the other party’s ticket, there would have been a need for a different slogan though it would have fell to minds more inventive than mine to concoct such a slogan. Basically politics is the ability to influence people to support your candidate by making them appear to be the person of the hour or the solution to all society’s ills. In the United States the slogan of “Hope and Change” titillated the minds of the American public, especially the younger voters who turned out like never before. This was despite the fact that very few actually understood what the Hope was and what Changes it would incur. The secret was that “Hope and Change” allowed each individual to substitute whatever they desired for hope and thus define what the hope would change. If many of candidate Obama’s speeches are analyzed his definitions for hopes and changes were often amorphous and undefined allowing for those listening to still be able to define these terms to fit their desired outcome. Eventually such undefined terms become defined, and when they are defined through the actions and policies enacted by the politician who gets elected by such terminology, that becomes history which makes them rather difficult to alter going forward, something President Obama’s opposition is finding out as time passes in the United States.

 

Sometimes the election revolves around the personality where the candidate becomes the definition of the campaign and thus causing a cult of personality. This situation often results in a warping of the electoral processes and even an end to the electoral processes altogether. One example of such would have been Hitler who once he became Chancellor of Germany proceeded to consolidate all political power and became a dictatorial ruler ending the necessity for future elections. Another example of a cult of personality has been Russian leader Putin who has been Prime Minister or President of Russia where the real power of governance followed him from one office to the other and back again without anybody challenging his absorbing the right to rule no matter the office he held. With Russia hitting some difficult periods economically his future holding of power may hit a crucial test. It will remain to be seen how long Putin will remain in power and exactly how far he might be willing to go to retain power no matter the consequences.

 

Then there are the different forms of elected governments, the forms of democratic governance. There are Presidential systems where the President is chosen directly and the parliament or congress is elected separately. There are Parliamentary systems where the parliament is directly elected by voting for parties which present lists of candidates in lists to fill the slots depending on the numbers of positions they are awarded as their percentage of votes received and then the parliament has some system by which the Prime Minister is chosen to lead the coalition. There are also different forms of the elected house or houses of power. The United States has the House of Representatives and the Senate where the House of Representatives are elected with each state given their share of the four-hundred-thirty-five seats according to their population and the Senate is comprised of two positions per state. Then there is the parliament in many nations where the entire nation elects representation by voting for parties or there may be parliamentarian seats assigned to districts where individuals are elected. Parliaments can be unicameral, bicameral or possibility of any numbers of entities. Some parliamentary systems have two houses, one elected by individuals and the other by party lists. As for which form of democratic representation is superior is probably still being determined. The only thing we have established is a truth best put into words by Winston Churchill, a somewhat common situation here, where Winnie said, “Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” Who can argue with that?

 

Actually, that is where mankind has shown the prerogative to constantly believe that their new idea has to be better than the previous as it comes reflecting on all the errors and difficulties previous attempts by man had failed with their efforts. But the latest is not always the greatest and the old tried and true may prove to have been false in all manners except that as the old and true it was what had become comforting as it was known and accepted. The British once thought they had attained the ultimate in governance with the enacting of the Magna Carta as now the King’s power was no longer absolute and deigned as coming from G0d but to be bent by the advisings by the other men of position and stature, the barons from whence the power of the military was formed when the crown required defending against foreign foe. The United States believes they have struck the perfect balance between popularist governance and select governance of a wise body of the chosen; and they may have been correct but that will never be known as they perverted their governance with the passing of the Seventeenth Amendment (Amendment XVII) to the United States Constitution and established direct election of United States Senators by popular vote. This removed the representation of the States themselves who had previously chosen their Senators through appointment by their elected bodies, some appointed by the governor and approved by the legislators while others were elected by the legislators. What was unnecessary about the Seventeenth Amendment was that the states were already empowered to choose their Senators by whatever means they saw as preferable which did not rule out their using direct elections had they believed such was to their advantage. But instead the Federal Government instigated the new requirement for Senators to be elected in a similar method as were the Representatives in the House. Some historians have posited that the Seventeenth Amendment was not properly ratified by sufficient numbers of states but was rushed and enacted despite this small problem as eventually sufficient states did ratify the amendment, just not within the time period set forth in the Constitution. Whatever the best form of governance, perhaps someday it will be found and when it is, my bet is the United Nations will be left to be wanting and hopefully dissolved and replaced with a body noble enough to realize its power should be wielded only responding to lengthy and tempered debate which has exhausted all avenues of investigation of alternatives and ramifications and then allowed for adjustments inspired by admissions of former inadequate thought which had seemed prudent at the initial time.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

January 26, 2015

Immediate Ramification of the Death of King Abdallah

 

Saudi Arabian King Abdallah died this weekend placing his half-brother Crown Prince Salman into the position as Saudi Arabia’s new King Salman and elevated his brother to the role of Crown Prince Muqrin. The new King Salman was born on December 31, 1935 making his age to be seventy-nine with less than optimal conditions of health as are all those who are in the immediate line to the throne. The new Saudi Crown Prince Muqrin was born September 15, 1945 making his age to be sixty-nine. Reports on both of the Saudi Royals’ health are poor or worse making one of their chief immediate duties to soberly choose from amongst the children and grandchildren and seek out which ones are to be groomed further and placed, once their attributes and attitudes have been referenced, cross-referenced, thoroughly parsed, dissected, itemized, examined and everything verified are they to be placed in line for grooming to be the next rulers of the kingdom. This will take a matter of years despite the evident necessity to find the likely path the leadership will take so as to make such explained and verified by the religious hierarchy and all others whose input will have been sought and those whose positions make their acceptance more important and necessary. The next generations of monarchs will need training in governing, budgeting, foreign policy, Koranic knowledge and the other necessities of ruling. They will be required to prove their worth and will likely be thrown into position to rule provinces or cities, be placed in liaison positions with the religious leaders of Saudi Arabia with an emphasis on the leading Wahhabi Imams, proper military training and service, and knowledge of the ins and outs of the oil industry and its use in international diplomacy. All of these are items which will have many in the nation concerned and a select few outside of Saudi Arabia. Still, there will be some ramifications which many will find affecting their daily lives and others which Middle East experts will dwell upon for hours if permitted the time during interviews. We will try to hit some of the immediate ramifications and hope we are sufficiently accurate or at the least no more inaccurate than the average expert despite being amateurs by comparison.

 

We can expect to expect little if any changes initially, especially the price per barrel of oil as the new monarchs were likely included in many of the planning, diplomatic events, implementation and OPEC preparations as well as the reasoning and diplomatic and foreign reasoning for keeping their production at such a high rate driving the price down below fifty dollars a barrel. We will probably witness a more conservative series of actions initially as the change in the Saudi Arabian leadership will force the new leadership to be security conscious and very concerned with intra-national as well as extra-national security with both having heavy dependence on the military. There will be the potential that Saudi Arabia will intervene should the continuing situation in Yemen threatens their southern border or should Iran move to impose their influence or should either the al-Qaeda or the Houthis take control and threaten the shipping lanes to and from the Red Sea and threaten the shipping lanes into and out of the Red Sea as well as the Suez Canal and its access with the Mediterranean Sea, Europe and the Atlantic Ocean. Thus, Saudi Arabia will become more introverted and keep much of the rulings of the new Royal Family members addressing exactly what their expectations within their lands, especially concerning women and other matters which can be tied to Islam and the interpretations of the Quran and how it will affect their rule. So, what can be expected is for those outside of Saudi Arabia are similar to what the world has witnessed for the past year or so when Saudi Arabia was ruled by King Abdallah as the new monarch will not be straying far from his policies and giving some time to pass before stepping out on their own paths.

 

Formerly King Abdallah had taken a path not previously traveled and was very slowly but inexorably liberalizing the Islamic strict restrictions against women. He permitted women to leave the house and shop unescorted and to vote in some local elections provided they were escorted by a male family member. These relaxed societal laws may not be considered to be lessening restrictions for women under Western societal standards but they were very extreme for anywhere under the strict Sharia interpretations by the Saudi government. We can pretty much forget the idea of permitting women to drive in Saudi Arabia in the foreseeable future. New King Salman is considered to be quite more security conscious and libel to use force of arms rather than the subtle force of diplomacy or the using of the price of oil to bring adversaries to their knees or even play a part if bringing the Soviet Union to its timely end and thus assist in liberating all of Western Europe. Using a similar low pricing of a barrel of oil is strangling Russia and bringing many of the fracking and other costly methods from pumping because it has temporarily become unprofitable in the United States. Still, there is one more target which is being affected by this low oil price, and that entity is Iran as it is being forced to sell oil at next to no profit over taking it out of the oil fields, whether refining it or shipping it out as crude. This lowering of the price for oil by Saudi Arabia has been their only real weapon they have by which they are able to drive any competition out of business or deny an adversarial threat such as Iran of the funds to continue any development of arms or to end any adventures such a threat may have planned. This use of driving the price of oil down through production at capacity by Saudi Arabia was necessitated by the lack of resolve by the Europeans and the United States to prevent Iran from attaining nuclear weapons or stepping up efforts to curtail ISIS as well as al-Qaeda on their northern and southern borders respectively. It will remain to be seen if the new leadership will continue this assault by way of oil prices as it also has required the Saudi Royal Family to utilize their reserves of funds to sustain efforts within Saudi Arabia to maintain funding which prevents the population from becoming unstable as well as funding the Wahhabi institutions worldwide.

 

The change of leadership through succession has been fortuitous as Iranian adventurism has not been stamped out as of yet by the Saudi Arabian oil war which has been their use of monetary sanctions by another means which they have utilized to replace the sanctions lifted by United States President Barack Obama. Iran was still capable of arming the Houthis in Yemen which just this week completed their push to topple the government. One might have expected that the United States would have been more proactive in preventing this blatant coup by the Iranian armed rebels as Yemen is one of the United States allies and refueling ports for the United States Navy despite the incident of the attack by al-Qaeda on the USS Cole in October 2000. Yemen has now become another failed state where the main governing forces are rebel groups or terrorist entities. This adds Yemen to the list of Lebanon, Somalia, and Libya.

 

Additionally there are the nations in north and central Africa which are currently fighting for their survival against terrorist entities which include but not limited to Nigeria, Mali, Kenya, South Sudan, Chad, Cameroon and Central African Republic. A number of these nations are facing threats from Boko Haram which is an entity similar to ISIS and one that had identified with al-Qaeda but has recently claimed allegiance with ISIS. ISIS is another threat which has Saudi Arabia concerned especially since recently there have been fighting between ISIS forces and the military of Saudi Arabia in the northwestern province. These assaults have been more of a test of resolve and with the recent death of King Abdallah and the ascension of Crown Prince Salman into the ruling role, his somewhat more militant attitude could be exactly what may be necessary in Saudi Arabia considering the threats on its northern and southern borders as well as the reassertion of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Sinai Peninsula and their threat against Egypt, a crucial and necessary ally of the Saudis and a traditional supporter of the Royal Family. The changes in Saudi rulers will still require a period of time to fully understand the coming changes and will need to be watched before coming to any lasting and necessary changes in policies. This was something which was expected though it still happened fairly rapidly which often makes such changes problematic but the Saudis have handled such changes in their ruling structure better than others. For the meantime any of the changes which may have been in the planning will likely be terminated until the changeover is complete and then all will see. Until then the world will need to necessarily simply wait and see and be lenient though in trying times as the present lenience is a luxury which one may not have the necessary time to wait.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

The Rubric Theme. Blog at WordPress.com.