Beyond the Cusp

June 17, 2018

Netanyahu Success in Revealing Establishment Europe

 

Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu returned from his European trip with a few nice souvenirs from the gift shop, a hefty trip ticket, receipts, a few renewed memories and little else. His intended trip to Gay Paris, Merry olde London town and unified Berlin was to attempt to pry these leaders into joining United States President Trump by pulling their support from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). This was going to be a tough sell as these nations are enriching their otherwise sagging economic outlook with what they believe will be substantial economic trade with Iran. Tiny little Israel, despite the fact of her economy being far greater than her size, does not have the purchasing power presently coming from Iran. The problem is that some of these trade items come under dual use equipment as they are utilized in the nuclear industry as well as in medical and other industries. Special blends of steel and aluminum, magnets and capacitors, strobes and filaments, microprocessors and integrated electronics can be used in various industries such as medical lasers, X-ray machines, MRIs and all forms of special equipment used across numerous industries as well as used in the nuclear industry for everything from reactors for power to nuclear warheads for power projection. This is what makes many forms of trade with Iran so potentially precarious.

 

The promise of good relations and a new market was the sole concern for the three M’s, Merkel, Macron and May. The rulers of France, Germany and Britain gave Netanyahu a warm and fuzzy cold shoulder. They refused to advise any changes to the JCPOA and definitely refused to withdraw from the agreement. Their claim was that their nations had given their word in good faith and to break their word was unthinkable. Really? Telling Israel that France, Germany and Britain were seriously concerned about their word being their bond was brazen audacity. We would try to count the times and ways that these three nations have reneged on promises to Israel and to the Jewish People but doubt such is really necessary. But Prime Minister Netanyahu should have known this before leaving which leaves one wondering why he even bothered to try other than to placate the left and be able to at least claim he gave it an effort. The trip may have been to inoculate himself from just another pointless politically motivated attack for pushing Europe away when, according to the critics, the European acceptance is necessary if Israel expects to have a future. Well, that is a nice concept providing you are backwards looking. The truth is that the future for Israel economically, politically, and societally is not looking to Europe and the past but to the future and upcoming nations such as India, China and the working democratic, free-enterprise nations in Africa and South America. But when there are those seeking to attack you, they will blame Netanyahu for the rejection by France, Germany and Britain but had he not approached them he would have been criticized for not going. It is the old you can fail by trying or fail by not trying, either way your failure will be attacked.

 

Israel Willingly Reaching Out to the World

Israel Willingly Reaching Out to the World

 

The reality is that politically France, Germany and Britain wish Israel, and by Israel the Jewish People, would simply be overrun and removed from their consciences. They blame the Jews for surviving the persecution heaped upon them by Christians and the Greeks and Romans before Nazi Germany almost succeeded in Europe. These leaders will make nice statements and even provide security after each attack, but they believe that their future is to adapt and make their Islamic immigrants become good Europeans. The more likely result will be the Europeans with become nice Dhimmis in an Islamic centric society likely within the first half of this century or by the end at the longest. Imagine Britain under Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn, France under Union for a Popular Movement leader Jean-François Copé or Germany under Alliance 90/The Greens Party leader Annalena Baerbock, all heavily pro-immigrant parties and candidates who see the future of Europe as reaching a working alliance with a large percentage of Muslim immigrants welcomed into the nation to replace the numbers of youth not being birthed by native Europeans. Germany (below 1.5 children per woman), France (hovering around 2.0 children per woman) and Britain (approximately 1.9 children per woman) all have reproductive rates below the 2.2 children per woman required to simply have replacement rate. This has been the plaguing problem, with the only reason that these rates are increasing is due to the high birth rates by incoming immigrants, thus since the early 1970’s Europe has been looking at a disappearing native population. This changing demographic has brought on a backlash of anti-immigrant political demographic which has been latched onto by the far right parties. The futures of the nations of Western Europe are being wagered on building their new nation largely upon immigrant populations. This will take them politically further and further from Israel politically and in policy. Israel need accept this reality and come to the realization that though Europe provides markets in the here and now, the future will not be in Europe, at least not in Western Europe. Israel would be better served to work with the former Warsaw Pact nations, assisting them in modernization and build relations with that sphere.

 

Israel has much to offer any nation in developments and new discoveries. These will produce trade relations with every nation willing to trade. As for political alliances, Israel should not be the beggar but rather offer free trade with those nations which whom we can have strong political relations and a shared political outlook. Israel should build relations with nations who are willing to be cooperative and not constantly joining those in the United Nations General Assembly and other institutions of the United Nations condemning Israel in a near constant basis. Israel should announce that her trade barriers would be lowered for those who support Israel and would be raised on those who choose not to defend Israel from undue slanders and denunciations within world bodies. Israel need stop going from nation to nation with their hands out begging for favors. Israel need simply take care of Israel and deal with favor with those who decide they wish to join Israel into the future. Those who desire or act to the detriment of Israel, well, who needs those who show Israel no favor. Every nation has the right to deal with those who befriend them and to avoid interactions with those who do not. Israel, as most nations will do, should trade with those willing to trade unless a nation is amongst those who denounce Israel at every turn. Israel need go forward by building alliances with nations willing to stand with Israel and move slowly but surely away from any which repeatedly join in denouncing Israel. Israel should not expect any nation to bend or act against their economic future to please Israel but on the other hand, Israel need not assist those nations who choose to work with those who threaten Israel as nations we cannot count amongst our allies. Israel should work with allies made and leave the others as neutral unless they prove otherwise, and then they should be shunned.

 

Israel cannot expect anybody to respect Israel more than Israel does herself. This is another lesson which the political class need learn and learn fast. If Israel acts as if she is unsure of what is rightfully hers, then how can Israel expect others to be more assured of such than is she? That is illogical at the start. The initial step in this strengthening of Israel and her stand within the community of nations is to act with assured firmness. Step one is to annex all of Area C from the Oslo Accords in which Area C was left under total Israeli control. The existing Palestinian Arabs who are residing within Area C are doing so illegally under the Oslo Accords. They should be required to sign a non-belligerence agreement signifying that they hold no support for terrorism and no ill will towards Israel and accept residing under Israeli Law. In exchange, they will be permitted to remain as legal alien residents. Those who refuse should be offered reasonable remuneration for their property and allowed to move into Area A or Area B. Once the screaming has dimmed to a dull roar, Israel should invite Mahmoud Abbas to sit down a make peace or lose Area B. We expect that he would balk and instead run immediately to the European Union and United Nations and get as many denunciations of Israel for seeking such a meeting under dire threat. Following such a response by political attack and attempted political ostracization, Israel should simply annex Area B and offer the Palestinian Arabs residing there the same option as those from Area C. Finally, the same procedure should be exercised with Area A, the world should expect the same result, and in the end, we could send Mahmoud Abbas to live in Paris with as many of the leadership as possible with the rest being allowed to leave for whichever Muslim nations will have them. Once Israel has established her eastern border as the firmly and originally promised Jordan River, she can move forward acting as if the world has finally come to grips with its original promises. Yes, there will be a period of adjustment and France, Germany and Britain will be generally put out, but sometimes nations need to do what they need to do. Israel does not exist to make the French, German or British people and governments happy, she exists to be the Jewish State and take whatever steps are necessary for her own future and survival. The façade of a peace process has gone on long enough and it is time to settle things and bring it all to an end. The proper end would be and should be that Israel is entitled to every inch of the lands promised her by the Mandate, by the League of Nations, by the Allied Powers of World War I (it is a very old promise) and by the United Nations who promised as much in Article 80 of their Charter. That is the reality and there really should be little if any argument about this. The Europeans and their World War I allies are aware of the promises, as is the Arab League and every Arab and Muslim nation. It is inscribed indelibly in the San Remo Conference, Treaty of Sèvres, the Mandate Agreements and numerous other places, thus ignorance really has to be willingly adopted. The time has long passed for the grievance mongers to be rejected and sent upon their way into the dustbin of history and Israel to take her place as a nation without question. Those who wish to recognize her may and those with problems may have their problems, these problematic countries should not act as an excuse to deny Israel her rightful boundaries. There were promises, an Arab state was already carved from 78% of the British Mandate, and there is no agreement that a second Arab state followed by a third and a fourth until all the Jews reside in a single building in Tel Aviv is required. The time has come to end the ruse and reveal it for what it is, the dream of politicians around the world to step-by-step disassemble the Jewish State and bring the life of the Jewish People to an end where they become a scattered few who live at the kindness of others. Never Again! That phrase should become the negotiating slogan as Israel takes that which is hers and makes it final. Never Again means that we will take the interlopers injecting their politics to Israeli detriment no longer. That time has arrived and it will not take much longer before Israeli politics catch up and this becomes a reality. Prepare for this and prepare your politics for this as the end of the ruse is coming.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Advertisements

November 11, 2017

Who Turns First, Britain or America

 

The United States and Great Britain both have conservative party leaders currently. Both Prime Minister May and President Trump have made mention of items concerning Israel. President Donald Trump stated early in his term when Prime Minister Netanyahu visited the White House, “With this visit, the United States again reaffirms our unbreakable bond with our cherished ally, Israel.” Speaking during events centered around the centennial celebration of the Balfour Declaration, British Prime Minister Theresa May stated concerning Arab and leftist calls for Britain to apologize for ever issuing the Balfour Declaration, “Balfour wrote explicitly that ‘nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.’ So when some people suggest we should apologize for this letter, I say absolutely not.” One would be justified in believing that Israel was in solidly with both Great Britain and the United States, and they would be completely wrong.

 

President Donald Trump & British Prime Minister Theresa May

President Donald Trump & British Prime Minister Theresa May

 

Currently Israel is in a period of grace with both nations and this will continue very probably for as long as the two parties, the Republican Party in the United States and the Conservative Party in Great Britain, remain in power. For the United States that means holding the Presidency and in Great Britain it gets a little more complicated and requires being the major Party forming a coalition which requires giving money and other favors to other parties sometimes leading to altering the government position on issues. But there will eventually be a change in which a party holds the office of power in both nations, then what? All we need do is look at what the opposition parties and the leaders currently believe and extrapolate. Almost every nation in the developed world is facing a similar problem of the polarization of their electorate with the sides growing ever further apart and heading to their respective extremes. The more liberal parties are being controlled and populated with ever more leftists holding extreme leftist positions, the conservative parties are moving further right, and there are ever fewer people seemingly occupying the middle ground. It is getting to the point that what used to be a liberal and what used to be a conservative have become united as the center with the rest of the electorate at the fringes of the left and right having left the others behind. What would be most interesting would be the founding of a centrist party which held moderate views with a collection of liberal and conservative points with the emphasis on the few ideas both sides could agree to hold in uniting this party and allow things to play out from there. The other choice is for the electorate to be so far apart that whichever party wins an election is looked upon by the members of the other party not as just the other party but as their enemies as is the apparent situation with many leftists concerning President Trump.

 

Let us begin with the British and their Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn. He too made some comments addressing the centennial commemoration of the Balfour Declaration. His commentary was quite different from the words of Prime Minister May. Leader of the Opposition Corbyn stated as quoted by the British media, “Let us mark the Balfour anniversary by recognizing Palestine as a step towards a genuine two-state solution of the Israel-Palestine conflict, increasing international pressure for an end to the fifty-year occupation of the Palestinian territories, illegal settlement expansion and the blockade of Gaza.” We will not address the mistakes and errors in his statements and instead offer this article Reflections on the Balfour Declaration to stand as the correcting statements of Jeremy Corbyn and numerous others who took to the media to spread falsehoods about the Balfour Declaration, a common practice in this world concerning the history around the founding of Israel. The single misstatement commonly made which we wish to correct is that Israel was designed to be a British colonial implant in the Middle East. Israel was the nativist dream of the indigenous Hebrews who were renamed by the Greeks and Romans after their largest remaining Tribe, the Tribe of Judah, which was eventually shortened from Judean to Judan to Ju, currently spelled Jew but pronounced as the original Roman spelling. Back to Mr. Corbyn, a man who has at times in his political career faced charges of anti-Semitism and who has admitted to being an anti-Zionist. Well before taking the leadership of the Labour Party, back in 2009 Jeremy Corbyn stated, “It will be my pleasure and my honor to host an event in Parliament where our friends from Hezbollah will be speaking. I’ve also invited friends from Hamas to come and speak as well. Unfortunately, the Israelis would not allow them to travel here so it’s going to be only friends from Hezbollah. The idea that an organization that is dedicated towards the good of the Palestinian people and bringing about long-term peace and social justice and political justice in the whole region should be labeled a terrorist organization by the British government is really a big, big historical mistake.” The fate of British-Israeli relations should Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters ever become the leadership of Britain was made obvious back in 2009 with this statement from which he has never distanced himself. So, Israel can count on the support of Britain likely for as long as the Conservative Party remains leading the ruling coalition and will face a hostile Britain should the Labour Party ever be the leasing party of a coalition.

 

Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn

Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn

 

The United States is not very different than Great Britain, but let us investigate anyway. The Democrat Party had two politicians who sought that party’s nomination for President, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. We will start with Bernie Sanders, the one who lost the primaries but made an impressive showing despite his loss. The most telling facts about his positions concerning Israel were his appointees to critical positions. The first was his choice for Jewish outreach, a position considered important in Democrat politics, as it can be responsible for considerable funding opportunities. Bernie Sanders chose Simone Zimmerman who is a supporter of the extremist Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) – which the ADL named as one of America’s top 10 anti-Israel hate groups. This may not have been as critical a choice since many of the modern American Jews, especially the younger and more assimilated Jews, no longer have the close feelings for Israel which was the root of the Jewish community in previous elections as was notable in the Jewish support for President Obama in his reelection after there had been ample proof of his lack of support for Israel and obvious animosity for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. The other appointments made by Bernie Sanders which gave such insight were his two selections which he placed upon the Platform Committee. One of his appointments was Professor Cornel West, he has called the Israeli Prime Minister a war criminal but openly supports the BDS movement (boycott, divestment, and sanctions). Professor West has made his position on Israel clear and has been rumored to hold similar views concerning Jews. Mr. Sanders other choice was the longtime pro-Palestinian activist James Zogby. Mr. Zogby’s view of Jews and Israel are well documented and need not be referenced here. Bernie Sanders has proven repeatedly through actions and statements made his antipathy for Israel obvious.

 

Democrat Front Runners Hillary Clinton Bernie Sanders

Democrat Front Runners
Hillary Clinton
Bernie Sanders

 

The other Democrat was their candidate for President, Hillary Clinton. Max Blumenthal, the son of Sidney Blumenthal, both longtime Clinton friends, both have a history of questionable to outright malignant and vicious views concerning Israel. Then there are numerous others from the administration of President Obama and other friendships which could easily call any comments she has made to AIPAC and other Zionist Jewish groups into question. Still haunting Hillary was the reported quote which Paul Fray, then manager of Bill Clinton’s unsuccessful campaign in Arkansas, has verified (search text for Paul Fray) that she referred to him with an anti-Semitic curse despite Paul Fray not being Jewish, thus it was intended as an insult and not a comment on his personhood. There have been rumors for years about Clinton references to minorities using disparaging terms considered to be remnants from the “Old South” over the years which, as they were from the good party and not the evil party, were disregarded as inconsequential. The ugliest of these rumors came in a book by one of the former Secret Service who had served on her security detail before leaving the Secret Service.

 

The clinching condemnation of the Democrat Party and their Israel position came at the 2012 Democrat Convention. The easiest means of providing the evidence is the video below. They actually did refuse to accept Jerusalem as the Capital City of Israel and refused to include The Almighty in their Party Platform and had to resort to simply ignoring the feelings of the floor and place it in the platform over their rejections.

 

It is fairly obvious that except for a few of the old time Democrats, the new Democrat Party does not support Israel. This is something also greeted with enthusiasm by the new number two person in the Democrat Party, Keith Ellison. When Haaretz has a problem with a Democrat, that Democrat has an obvious Israel problem, and Keith Ellison earned that problem. We will clearly grant that Democrats such as Senator Chuck Schumer still support Israel, but many of the new, far left Democrats, not so much. Should the Democrats once again take the White House, Israel might be seeking some new friends.

 

The extremely delicate condition of the political support Israel faces in the world today is the very reason we keep insisting that Israel already be designing their next generation fighter and the facilities in which to manufacture said aircraft. The same foes for rifles, sidearms, ammunition, helicopters, ships and even submarines as none of the current Israeli suppliers should be considered as safe continuing into the Twenty First Century. Any nation which is dependent upon its military for its continued existence should not permit itself to ever become dependent upon foreign providers for its defense requirements. This has always been part of the policies of the United States, China and Russia and should become the policy for Israel as well. Israel most certainly does not lack the brain trust to design and produce all of her weapons requirements, and she has an economy easily sufficient for the manufacture of her entire military needs. The sooner the leadership in Israel recognizes these vital requirements and the facts making them all the more necessary, the brighter the future of Israel will become.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

August 4, 2017

If You Hate Your Obamacare, You Must Keep Your Obamacare

 

America was promised that first thing out of the box, given the power, Obamacare would be repealed and some things improved if they were to be kept. Well, that did not happen, did it. They have tried at least twice to repeal and replace it with what they said would be a system based more on competition and less on government. The first was rejected by many conservative commentators and healthcare specialists. That was probably predictable as they are politicians, not geniuses. Well, the House went back and presumably asked for advice from physicians and insurance executives as well as heads of healthcare facilities of every level and type and came up with a Plan II. The Senate spent a fair amount of time in debate and made alterations amending parts, adding and cutting until they felt they had molded something worthy of sending back to the House of Representatives and presenting to the people. The Republican leadership requested the party come together and send the legislation back and advised that after the House of Representatives had their shot at altering, adding and cutting the Senate would have another go at what they received. The Republicans were likely guaranteed that unlike Obamacare, which was passed in haste and fearing the replacement for Senator Kennedy would topple their chance to pass anything different, they passed the legislation as it stood in a state of sheer panic, unfinished and knowing it would fail. This was acceptable as they defined the plan to murder the insurance leg of the healthcare support system. That would place healthcare at the precipice and without the financial support of the insurance leg, soon the entirety of the healthcare system would be pushed beyond the cusp and the American people would demand that they be saved from the collapsing healthcare system. They would demand from the very people who allowed the crisis, actually enacted the necessary infection of the system forcing its collapse, the authors of the problem to save them and repair the problem.

 

The repair was going to be single payer government healthcare, the British styled system just like the system which just allowed Charlie Gard to die. The single payer style British, or Canadian, French, Swiss, German or any other European styled healthcare or similar to any socialist system’s healthcare system and then the government would control life itself. Many are probably wondering why the British Courts decided that Charlie Gard, Charlie the Innocent, had to have his life support terminated and thus making Charlie terminated. There will be reports that he was unsavable, but not all treatments had been tried and New York – Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center was willing to try an experimental treatment free of any cost if the British courts would permit them the opportunity to attempt and save his life. The parents through a funding site had raised more than sufficient money to pay for any incidentals to allow them to accompany their newborn son. But the problem was simple for the courts, could the government allow their citizens to chase treatments which might actually save their lives outside the British system. Allowing Charlie Gard to be treated, even for free, could set a dangerous precedent and if such became anything approaching normal, then their entire system would be called into question. They could not allow for the British government single provider system to be questioned and called into doubt. The risk that the people in Britain might come to doubt whether they were really receiving the best conceivable healthcare from their government could not be risked and Charlie Gard had become the test case before the world. Charlie against the British government healthcare system, Charlie had to lose, Charlie had to be allowed to die with dignity because that was the British way, or at least it is now. Charlie had to be denied any chance to live outside the British healthcare system.

 

Charlie Gard with Tweets of Pope Francis and President Donald Trump

Charlie Gard
with Tweets of Pope Francis
and President Donald Trump

 

This is the eventuality which Obamacare was and will bring about. Should the number of insurance companies dwindle until there were only a few, possibly just one, and the government’s job would be made that much easier. Part of Obamacare was the government covering the losses of health insurance companies and using bureaucratic delays, they could starve the weaker insurance companies into folding leaving fewer providing coverage until the government could simply absorb the remaining companies and merge it all into government single payer healthcare. Presto Change-o and the government would respond to the cries of the sheeple who would not know where to turn and would be willing to accept anything because they were scared. That plan is still working, and working right as planned and the system to give the government control over life and death is still working because there are those who desire the government to absorb this power. These are the government lifers who have been in Washington D.C. so long that they have come to believe their own propaganda. They believe that government will be exactly what the people need and if the government just took over all the healthcare, then things would be perfect. When, after taking over healthcare, they still did not have all the power required to control the population, then what, then what would they grab next? What would be next, the food stores?

 

Who are the people who desire to run everybody’s life from Washington D.C. and are blocking any hope of changing the current Obamacare trap from snapping shut? Well, the Democrat Party leadership is all behind this and were the ones who enacted this to begin with. When the Democrat Party leadership wants something, they get what they want because they appear to have complete control over their members. When the Democrat leadership wants something passed, it passes. When the Democrat Party leadership wants something opposed, it is opposed. Then there are the Republican Party faithful. When the Republican Party needs their votes, they get them. Then there are the government faithful, those for whom the government means everything. They will support government even over the people. These Republicans just shot down the latest Republican healthcare plan. The plan likely was not perfect, but nothing is but it would have given some hope against Obamacare. Who are these Republicans who prefer Obamacare and the government over the people? Well their names are Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn.; Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va.; Susan Collins, R-Maine; Dean Heller, R-Nev.; John McCain, R-Ariz.; Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska; and Rob Portman, R-Ohio. For many these names are not of any surprise and they all live in states where they will very likely be reelected and will die while serving, or is that disserving in the Senate.

 

Senator John McCain has taken his objection to a whole other level when he stated to the media that the “major failures” of ObamaCare were that it was “rammed through Congress by Democrats on a strict party-line basis without a single Republican vote. We should not make the mistakes of the past that has led to ObamaCare’s collapse, including in my home state of Arizona, where premiums are skyrocketing and health care providers are fleeing the marketplace. We must now return to the correct way of legislating and send the bill back to committee, hold hearings, receive input from both sides of the aisle, heed the recommendations of the nation’s governors, and produce a bill that finally delivers affordable health care for the American people.” That is a mouthful and probably would escape many that what John McCain, Mr. Loyalty when on the campaign trail, what he just stated is that he will join any Democrat effort to oppose any efforts to repeal or replace ObamaCare. He has just joined the Democrat offensive to refuse anything that the Republicans offer unless it is to further fund ObamaCare and continue to inflict its heavy toll on the American people. So, as long as the Democrats continue their rejection, they can count upon Senator John “I’m a loyal and trusted Republican” Sidney “but I am also a ‘Never Trump’ loyalist and with his opposition on anything which makes him look bad or not honor his evil promises” McCain, thus I must join the Democrats once again on this effort to save ObamaCare and “Stump Trump.” So, the Republicans in the Senate can add John McCain to the Democrat Party opponent list for the duration and should put up an honest and valid challenger to his next election or force his retirement. He has joined the left and will not be retrieved; he has gone round the bend.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.