Beyond the Cusp

May 27, 2015

Western Governments Slowly Destroy Chance for Peace

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

May 23, 2015

The Sad Truths About American Election 2016

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

May 22, 2015

Obsessed Appeasement Expropriators Descend

Filed under: 1949 Armistice Line,1967 War,24/7 News Reporting,Absolutism,Administration,AFP,Amalekites,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,Anwar Sadat,AP,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Appointment,Arab Appeasement,Arab Authority,Arab League,Arab World,Arabs,Battle of Khaybar,BBC,Benyamin Netanyahu,Blood Libel,Cabinet,Camp David Peace Accords,Catholic,Catholic Churh,Catholic Institutions,Celebrate Terrorism,Civilization,CNN,Condemning Israel,Conflict Avoidnce,Coverup,Dhimmi,Disengagement,Divided Jerusalem,Domestic NGOs,Egypt,Ehud Barak,Europe,European Council,European Governments,European Media,European Pressure,European Union,European Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs,Executive Order,Fatwa,Federica Mogherini,Forced Solution,Foreign Funding,Foreign NGOs,Fox,Gaza,Government,Green Line,Haaretz,Hate,History,Internal Pressures,International Politics,Intifada,Intifada,Islam,Islam,Islamic Pressure,Islamist,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Israeli Interests,Israeli Media,Jerusalem,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Leadership,Jewish State,Jews,Jihad,Jordan River,Judea,Judean Hills,Khartoum Conference,Land for Peace,Leftist Pressures,Madeline Albright,Mahmoud Abbas,Mainstream Media,Meaning of Peace,Media,Mediterranean Sea,Menachem Begin,Middle East,Mubarak,Muslim World,Muslims,Naqba,Nationalist Pressures,Non Binding Resolution,Old City,One State Solution,Oslo Accords,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Palestinian Legislative Committee,Palestinian Pressures,Peace Process,PLO,Politicized Findings,Politics,Pope,Pressure by Egyptian People,Prime Minister,Promised Land,Ramallah,Resolution,Rome,Saeb Erekat,Secular Interests,Security,Sharia,Six Day War,Statehood,Taqiyya,Taqiyya,Temple Mount,Terror,Third Intifada,Three No's,Two State Solution,United Nations,United Nations Presures,United States,United States Pressure,War of Independence,West Bank,World Opinion,World Pressures,Yasser Arafat,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 2:12 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

The circus which accompanies the establishing of a new Israeli government finally formed after any elections cycle, planned or unexpected, comes this time in force beyond imagination. Usually there is coordination resulting in a single team arriving all carrying briefcases brimming with demands for new sacrifices Israel will be expected to make simply to allow these experts to meet with Mahmoud Abbas and his minions and receive another list of demands that Israel submit in order to attain a humbled attitude considered suitable for a meeting an Arab Palestinian delegations whose diplomacy is more insults and degradations than hospitable intercourse which usually accompanies normative mediations. This time the demands will be presented in surround sound as teams from the United States, the anticipatory fomenters, the United Nations, the European Union who come salivating for Israel’s destruction, and an outside agitator granting audience and treaties recognizing Mahmoud Abbas as the maker and seeker of peace granting him every comfort and recognition of his nightmarish nation without setting borders permitting Abbas to define as he desires. All these messengers bleat tired and tortured phrases which have been repeated for over twenty years to a point where they no longer have any real meaning. The most basic of these entreaties is the demand that Israel make some great offer which might ingratiate Israelis in the eyes of the leaders of the Arab Palestinians who already have proven their desire for peace as they have repeatedly asked for any and all these parties to intervene and plead their case in order that they might finally be granted the peace they so desperately desire. The problem is nobody has ever bothered to research and inquire of the Arab Palestinians exactly what their concept of an acceptable peace would require and what the Israelis might be required to sacrifice and perform in order for this peace to finally be attainable. Perhaps that might someday be the first step for these angels for peace who will be descending upon Israel to once again bless Israeli sacrifices even to the point of suicidal dispensations as a first step towards appeasement of the Arab unarticulated demands for peace.

 

As Israel has already offered the Arabs as much as 95% of Judea and Samaria, detached from their Jewish history by Jordan renaming the area to West Bank, all of Gaza, which is already in Arab hands since the disengagement in 2005, and all of East Jerusalem back in 2000 and again in 2002, both times with exchange of properties and lands to equate the final 5% of land and both times the Arab leadership simply walked out of the negotiations without even making a counter offer, demands for adjustment or any commentary, just refusing in the most impolite and insulting manner possible, silent dismissal as if such an offer were an insult. Perhaps the United States, United Nations, and European Union could, as long as the whole representation of the Western World and beyond are represented, take a different initial step and instead of starting with Israel take a stroll to Ramallah and simply inquire as to exactly what the Arab Palestinian leaders would demand of Israel in order to establish a fair and mutually acceptable and equally beneficial entertaining equal sacrifices and accommodations and once the great leaders who claim they are only in the Middle East to facilitate peace can finally establish the desired demands for a final settlement from Abbas and company and then perhaps there can be some fair and egalitarian resolution with both sides finally reaching a meeting of their minds. Somehow we here at Beyond the Cusp suspect that such a meeting would be revealing as the Arab leadership would either refuse to speak in specifics and decline to even approach a map, let alone speak of borders or perhaps they might surprise the world and actually state their actual demand, all of Israel with the Jews removed by any means necessary including another holocaust. Should the delegations from the United Nations, European Union and United States actually manage to gain a potentially acceptable offer from Mahmoud Abbas and the rest of the leadership which might be in any way presentable to the Israelis, then finally the crux of the real problem might finally be brought into the light. The reason that all the demands are always placed on Israel and never on the Arabs is because of a basic truth, the Israelis have proven their desire for peace while the Arabs have only proven their desire to destroy Israel by any means possible. History has shown this truth to the point that it is beyond the ability of any fair and honest observer to avoid, but these presumed messengers for peace are anything but fair or honest, they are coconspirators in the Arab conspiracy to destroy Israel and, if possible, the entirety of the Jewish People. The one thing which has become obvious is that should Israel fail and its population destroyed, then the potential future of the Jewish faith would be relegated to a near oblivion with small cores of religious Jews holding on to what would otherwise be a dead faith.

 

This was an integral and clearly stated goal by the Arab League and in the Khartoum Resolution of September 1, 1967 where the three no’s became the resolute avenue in the pursuit of the destruction of the Jewish State. The actual resolution which can be read here set forth what became known as the three no’s which stated that the Arab states would observe no formal peace treaty and no direct negotiations and no recognition of Israel. This agreement was broken only once when President Anwar Sadat of Egypt negotiated and reached a peace accord with Israel’s President Menachem Begin in what was the Camp David Accords ending the state of war between Egypt and Israel as of September 17, 1978. For breaking the three no’s Anwar Sadat paid with his life as he was assassinated on October 6, 1981, just over three years after reaching a peace with Israel when during the annual victory celebration he was shot along with a vast number of people in the formal reviewing stands including eleven others killed outright or suffered fatal wounds, including the Cuban ambassador to Egypt, an Omani general, and a Coptic Orthodox bishop and twenty-eight were wounded, including Vice President Hosni Mubarak, Irish Defense Minister James Tully, and four US military liaison officers. These three no’s have been observed via a specific series of accommodations and variations allowing for skirting the letter while accommodating the spirit of the Khartoum Resolution. The compliance to the three no’s of the Khartoum Resolution and the rest of its stipulations is behind the complete refusal of the Arabs to reach a peace despite the Israelis having at least twice meeting or exceeding the demands relayed by Yasser Arafat to President William Jefferson Clinton during the negotiations in Paris where Israeli President Ehud Barak which upon being told that the Israeli President had agreed to meet the conditions for peace even to splitting Jerusalem right along the Green Line boundary from before the 1967 Six Day War where Israel had liberated Jerusalem along with Judea and Samaria from Jordanian occupation he simply walked out refusing to even make a responding additional demand straight to his awaiting car which he had arranged to make ready just in the case that the Israelis might actually make the sacrifices he had thought beyond acceptable. Arafat showed no surprise likely because he realized that President Clinton might actually convince Israeli President Barak that this was the best chance for peace and the Israelis would make the necessary sacrifice for peace and so he knew he would need to beat a hasty prearranged retreat so as not to be caught in a compromised position and have to actually sign an agreement. It was the awaiting vehicle with the motor running and the driver at the wheel allowing Yasser Arafat to make his get-away before Secretary of State Madeline Albright could catch up with him and corner him demanding an explanation. Arafat was on his jet back to Jordan within an hour avoiding any potential interception by President Clinton and never did Arafat ever make an explanation to the American President. So, let these angels of peace alight on their gentle wings and draw from Mahmoud Abbas a specific description of what he would demand in order to make peace. When he refuses to make the same potentially problematic misstep made by Yasser Arafat and actually deceive these merchants of peace and give a response which he is assured in his mind the Israelis would never make such sacrifice for peace because he learned from the Arafat embarrassment of turning down the exact stipulations laid out for peace because the Israeli desire for peace actually made them stretch to their breaking-point in order to have peace, so Abbas will never present what he demands for peace because to do so would reveal that the Arabs do not want peace, they desire Israel’s extermination and nothing less.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

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