A Monetary Solution to Remove Settlers

 

Dr. Martin Sherman gave a defense of his formula for solving the Palestinian Arab versus Israel conflict in an article titled, “</a href=https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/22651 target=blank>Haaretz vs. IISS-The anatomy of ‘Fake News’,” which he depicted how he was misrepresented in an article in Haaretz, and we would advise reading his defense. In his defense, he covers his concept for a solution to the Palestinian Arab-Israeli conflict which involves several interwoven cloths of solutions which are far different and more complete and far less violent than the Haaretz article depicted. We are not surprised by this but were conflicted as to why Dr. Martin Sherman actually deigned to give any interview to Haaretz and why he expected they would treat him with any sense of propriety or responsibility. Why Dr. Sherman thought he was getting an opportunity with any equal treatment from this far left newspaper with a record of excoriating every right wing or nationalist position and having done so for decades was beyond our scope of understanding. Their slanting of the news in our opinion was so far left and anti-Zionist that we stopped reading them except when they came up in searches for exact information, which we will credit Haaretz in that they do often represent facts with a straight-forward and honest manner which is why we have often quoted their presentation of facts. Their problem is with those who hold opinions which differ from their political framework, which Dr. Sherman qualifies, along with his great ability to speak and write in a clear and easily understood manner. Apparently, he was not clear enough or the author of the article had some animus for the position presented by Dr. Sherman and thus heard something quite different than the actual words presented, whatever the reason, she really got under Dr. Sherman’s skin enough to have him write, as he pointed out, an entire article in defiance of the Haaretz lynching of his actual opinions and positions.

 

Dr. Martin Sherman

 

We actually agree with much of what Dr. Sherman includes in his formula with some basic differences. The very first item is to differentiate the indigenous people from the actual settlers. Factually, as you will realize, the Jews are the indigenous peoples while the Arabs are the settlers, so glad that has been sorted. The first item we would present the Palestinian Arabs with is that Israel will annex all the lands west of the Jordan River in a fixed period of one year or less, depending on the mood of the government and what they will accept. We would advise that the time period should be decided to be as short as considered feasible and not a second longer because the longer the time period, the more time there will be for problems and interference from the rest of the world. For some reason, the entire world believes that they have the right to tell Israel how they will be permitted to run their affairs. Simple things which if performed by any other nation would simply pass without even notice is immediately snatched by the busybodies of our world and immediately made into a life or death problem which must be negotiated by the European Union, the United Nations, the Arab League and so many other organizations and nations who all feel that before Israel is permitted to conduct any business, the item of that business must first be passed through the rest of the world and made to fit the particular perfidies of every critic. Sorry world, Israel is an independent and equal nation with the same rights, powers, political freedoms, passage of laws, declarations of national established origins, basic national flag along with anthem with language as well as being a national home for the Jewish People and court case decisions which do not require, need or desire your assistance in accomplishing these areas. So, when it comes to dealing with the remnants of Arabs left behind after Jordan lost the area it illegally occupied and illegally populated with numbers of their citizens, some which they forcefully transferred, Israel needs to tread softly yet definitively to correct the crimes committed by Jordan from 1948 through the Six Day War in 1967. In providing for solutions in many wars, including both World Wars, the people whose governing nations lost the regions which they resided within were relocated to their previous national lands often without any compensation and given a very limited time frame before threat of military force would be applied. This option was, of course, denied Israel as was retaining lands gained in a defensive war as has been the rule of international law except for Israel. So, how can Israel finally address this problem and possibly get this monkey off our backs and the whole world can finally rest at night, though we completely doubt that any of the detractors of Israel will lose ten seconds before exploding into indignation, but at some point Israel will have to weather such a storm and simply reply to the world that they can simply bug-off.

 

The solution which Israel may need to take, and do so in the near term, is to inform the Arabs residing in the Shomron (Jordanian named West Bank) that they will be required to sign a guarantee that as resident aliens of Jordanian lineage they swear to act in a manner which will have the characteristics and results of non-belligerence or face deportation without any reimbursement for property or other losses. They should also be granted that they have two other alternatives. The first and far preferable would include their being reimbursed for all properties for which they have deed proving ownership above market value plus a relocation bonus which should be of a level which would make them attractive to most nations as their wealth would be welcome. This bonus would be less than many Israelis or others might believe, likely less than one-hundred-thousand-dollars. This payment would be a one time offer and one time payment for which they would sign that they are satisfied with their settlement and also promise to never seek to reside within Israel in the future under pain of deportation. The other choice would be to refuse either option above and as such have decided to take up a belligerence against Israel and consider themselves to be in a state of open war with Israel. In response to those choosing this option will be complied with and will face the full power of the IDF as soon as they are located without any measure of remorse. These would be the three choice method in which the Arabs currently residing in the Shomron could be given which would resolve the difficulty and remove any doubt as to their desire to remain within Israel peaceably without any desire to disturb the peace while others will have chosen to not reside in Israel and take monetary compensation and seek to reside outside of Israel and surrender all rights to reside within Israel in the future. Then there will be those who will decide they wish to wage war against Israel. They will face the rules of war and such a war will be waged against those so choosing. We would believe that anybody choosing to war with Israel will be minimal and the vast majority of the Arab population would take the reimbursement and inducement and the remainder will likely choose non-belligerence and actually mean this.

 

The problem would result from those who either signed the documents and stay or take the payments and leave and then continue to commit acts of terror and target Israelis. This should also be stated that should any choose either option and continue to commit acts of terror, they will immediately be considered to actually be amongst those who chose to war with Israel and be treated as such. The likelihood that those deciding to be at war with Israel will continue to be a problem for more than a few months is highly unlikely as the Israeli Defense Force is a well trained military and as this will be actual acts or war, the IDF will be informed that they may feel free to engage those choosing to war with Israel with maximum vigor and that Israel is willing to take prisoners but that prisoners are not a high priority. Those taken as prisoners will be placed within a prisoner of war camps built specially to care for them until the entirety of the Arab and Muslim worlds make peace with Israel and establish friendly relations. We would prefer that they actually live long enough to see such become a reality but if they do not, we will not lose any sleep. Those who choose to remain within Israel as resident aliens will be given as many freedoms as feasible with the hope that they will fairly soon be able to be treated with equality to all other legal aliens who reside and work within Israel. All other problems should resolve themselves within two years and after these are settled, then Israel can hopefully live in peace and the world can finally take a breath and leave Israel to their own future.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Truth About Anti-Trump Rabbinates

 

The four Jewish Rabbinical organizations deciding to boycott the annual conference call with President Trump are politically driven. They are simply another embodiment of the polarization of the American people. One might even see the nation now as the Divided States of America. What is sad is that these Rabbinical groups would place politics into their religious leadership of these organizations. That is a new situation where religious leaders decide on whether or not they are going to attend an event with the President which is an annual event to mark and celebrate the Jewish High Holidays, Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, on purely political motives. Their claims that this is over Charlottesville tragedy is purely fabricated out of whole cloth as most of these Rabbis also boycotted President Trump at the AIPAC conference when he spoke. Rabbi Jonah Dov Pesner has written an op-ed on March 25, 2016 in the Jewish Journal expressing “deep anguish over Donald Trump’s appearance at the conference.” Additional rhetoric in his op-ed depicted his exact duplicity as he wrote, “As a religious movement, we do not endorse or oppose political candidates. Still, along with several other rabbis and lay leaders, I decided that I had to register my opposition and growing concern with the tone, rhetoric, and violence that have come to define Donald Trump’s campaign by not staying in the arena when he spoke.” Add to that, Rabbi Pesner is completely aware that as a religious leader his place is to provide support to his congregants but apparently the good Rabbi has chosen his congregants so carefully that he knows none supported the Trump campaign and thus they all supported his disrespecting one candidate while giving support through his presence the other candidates.

 

But we should not leave out the names of the entities which have decided that this President is unworthy of even the decency of a phone call to commemorate the Jewish High Holidays, a completely nonpartisan event. The Central Conference of American Rabbis, the Rabbinical Assembly, the Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association and the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism are the groups whose leadership has declared their membership of Rabbis are to boycott the Presidential call as the representatives of their congregations. One can only wonder how many of these Rabbi’s congregants just might have voted for President Trump or might actually take pride simply that their Rabbi would take the call from the President celebrating the High Holidays simply because of the honor of the office of the President. The article about the boycott probably made the best statement when they opened with the following introduction before getting to their apparent support of the Rabbis refusing to take the Presidential call stating, “For years, the presidential conference calls were a nonpartisan holiday tradition: President Barack Obama would speak by phone with hundreds of rabbis in advance of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, in what participants described as a meeting of minds, largely free of raw politics.” Wonderful, for years, since the Presidency of William Jefferson Clinton, this has been a politics free event without any grandstanding or other political jesters. No longer will this be the case and we seriously doubt Charlottesville was anything beyond cover for a purely political protestation and more carryover from the defeat of the inevitable one, Hillary Clinton.

 

International Socialists as Communists vs National Socialists as Nazis

 

This is simply more of the reaction and partisan furor over the election of Donald Trump after the fake news system failed to deliver the overwhelming predicted victory of Hillary Clinton. The leftists were so convinced by their own propaganda that they have been completely incapable of coping with their failure to retain the Presidency. These Rabbis are simply a symptom and nothing more. We witness the complete frenzied refusal to accept the election of President Trump but there is a far more serious problem starting to explode within the American political scene. The problem is not just with the scene in the United States, we have the effects from the leftists on the policies concerning Israel. The American group J-Street who claim to be the alternative to AIPAC for Israeli policy and also the only true peace advocates have been out screeching to the media that President Trump has destroyed all hopes for peace between the Israelis and Arabs. J Street on Thursday attacked the Trump administration for refusing to endorse a “two-state solution” to the Israeli-Palestinian Arab conflict. J Street president Jeremy Ben-Ami attacked State Department Spokeswoman Heather Nauert for her comments made Wednesday, August 23, 2017 (see entire briefing below covering many subjects from Egypt to Cambodia as well as the Israeli Arab peace process), stating, “We want to work toward a peace that both sides can agree to and that both sides find sustainable. We believe that both parties should be able to find a workable solution that works for both of them. We are not going to state what the outcome has to be. It has to be workable to both sides. And I think, really, that’s the best view as to not really bias one side over the other, to make sure that they can work through it. It’s been many, many decades, as you well know, that the parties have not been able to come to any kind of good agreement and sustainable solution to this. So we leave it up to them to be able to work that through.”

 

 

 

What is interesting are the exact complaints registered by the J-Street leadership which we need discuss. Their problem with the position stated by the State Department and President Trump on numerous occasions is that there will be no supposition of any condition for the resulting form of any peace agreement in the Israeli Arab negotiations. J-Street were distressed that the Administration stated position does not include the demand that there be a “two state solution” and Ben-Ami claimed, “displayed dangerous ignorance about the nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and what it will take to end it. The Trump administration has spoken often of its desire to broker a comprehensive and transformative peace agreement in the Middle East. Early steps taken by the special envoy and others suggested a real interest in constructing a viable approach to achieving that objective. But there is no way to accomplish that goal without a two-state solution.” This was according to Haaretz who simply love to print everything that J-Street claims as it fully backs their leftist post-Zionist slant on the news. J-Street has consistently supported making an Arab Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria and dividing Jerusalem and using the Green Line as the defining border and the labelling of any Jewish manufactured or grown goods from the area. J-Street has also taken a position against any “settlement growth” in Judea and Samaria. Unsurprisingly, these are also the demands made by the Arab Palestinian Authority (PA). Why a presumably pro-Israel group would support the exact same demands as the PA which is working towards, as they have stated, the destruction of Israel as the Jewish homelands is far beyond reason. The media also, from the press briefing, are stunned and in disbelief that the Trump Administration is allowing the two sides to find whatever solution the two are able to agree upon, whether that be a two state solution or some form of shared political and security arrangement no matter what form as long as both sides are able to agree.

 

The J-Street disagreement and accusational attitude towards the Trump Administration after their love affair with the Obama Administration is simply another example of the bias towards the left by American Jews. This has become something which has been somewhat distressing to many Israeli Jews. Many are confused and do not understand why the American Jews are taking sides which would cripple Israel and possibly injure Israel severely if their positions were to become fact. Seeing American Jews taking the identical position as the PA confuses them but part of the reason for the position of the American Jews comes down to the Democrat Party. The Democrat Party has, of late, taken the same outlook to a solution between Israel and the Arabs which is fully-supportive of the positions stated by the PA. This was the position taken by President Obama who favored not only the PA but also to have a Middle East where the major power would be Iran instead of Israel. Candidate Clinton had stated repeatedly that she supported the Obama position on the Arab Israeli peace as well as empowering Iran such that they would replace Israel and the Saudi Arabians as the strongest in the Middle East. The Obama Clinton positions were near identical and were both anti-Israel and post-Zionist if defined by Israeli terms. The Jews in the United States have turned to where their politics supersedes their religion and when their politics clashes with their Judaism, their leftist policies take precedence over Torah. This will continue to place a wedge which will force the Israelis and the American Jews further and further apart over time. Israel is becoming more religious while the American Jews are becoming less religious and this will lead to something problematic in the near future unless something should come to pass which would force the American Jews to be forced to defend their Jewishness.

 

The coming of the near future for American Jews will be their dissolution through assimilation. Within the next twenty to thirty years, the numbers of Jews will dwindle greatly. Most of the Reform and Conservative congregations now are largely made up of five time a year Jews with a small core of Jews who actually follow the religion. The Reform Jews probably have virtually, if not, no religious Jews remaining and their congregations will dissipate into nothing, as the next generation is not raising their children within the faith. The Conservative congregations will also start to disappear with the next two generations. The one shining and hopeful reality is there is one group of Jews who are growing in numbers, and those are the Orthodox and the Haredi Jews. What is also of interest is that these two groups are more-supportive of President Trump than the other denominations. The Orthodox and Haredi Jews are more conservative politically and generally more supportive of the Israeli side of the Israeli Arab conflict. This bodes well for Israel but not so much for the influence of the Jews in general in the United States. The leftist Jews are leaving the fold and will water down their performance of Jewish customs and observance eventually making them not Jewish except by genealogy. There is one thing which could alter this trend which is hopefully unthinkable. That would be anti-Semitism raising its grotesque head to the point where Jews were singled out and had legal restrictions placed upon the community.

 

This has been an occurrence which has often come about when the Jews in regions were assimilating to a dangerous point where it threatened their existence and the rise of hatred forced the Jews to return to their faith. The Jews in Persia were assimilating to a great degree to the point that the Queen to King Ahasuerus was a Jewish woman named Esther. Then Haman came forth gaining a royal decree that all Jews were to be put to death, when Esther informed the King that she was a Jewess, the King made a second decree which did not countermand the first, that was not permitted by Persian law, but he ruled the Jews were permitted to be warned of the date and may defend themselves. Hamas and his sons did not fare well and were hanged. This is celebrated as Purim with the reading of the Megillah of Esther. The Jews again were almost completely assimilated under the Greek rule. The Hellenist Jews were liberal and following the ways of the Greeks until the Maccabees revolt which is celebrated as Hanukkah and the lighting of the lights. Under the Romans the Jews were never allowed to assimilate and actually managed to revolt and remove Roman rule twice, one resulting in the destruction of the Second Temple and the next in the first dispersion and the rumors of another revolt brought the second and near total dispersion. This spread the Jews over much of the Roman Empire and some even beyond their borders as they fled from Rome altogether to escape persecutions. The Jews in Germany actually served in a higher percentage than other groups even including the Lutherans in World War I and many were highly decorated. The Jews were all but completely assimilated in Germany leading into World War II. The Nazis took care to separate the Jews from the rest of the German population and the resulting genocide of the Jews of Europe is recorded in the Holocaust where two-thirds of the nine-million European Jews were murdered, six-million Jews.

 

The Jews of the United States are reaching very high level of assimilation and it would be unfortunate if Charlottesville protests would be the first sign. But do not let anyone be fooled about where the main threat to the Jews derives; it is from amongst both the far-right and the far-left. One side is comprised of Nazis and white supremacists while the other side has BLM and Antifa which are but a minor example. The new anti-Semitism is largely expressed as anti-Israelism, anti-Zionism and the convergence of Islamic antisemitism and Christian Replacement Theology. There were likely a close number of anti-Semites on both sides in Charlottesville, but do not expect to ever hear that from the mainstream media as for them the leftists are perfect people who would not have butter melt in their mouths. The Jews in the United States may also awaken in another twenty years, if not sooner, to find themselves being reproached regularly in the public sphere before it gets radically worse, just a warning of that which we hope never happens.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Reasons for NOT Moving the Embassy to Jerusalem

 

This has been the most and greatest coverage we have seen since the Inauguration of President Trump when covering his promises and the possibility that he might falter. Every article has mentioned different choices predicting which promises the President Trump would renege upon. Many claimed he would never build the wall along the Mexican border. Some kind of cheated by claiming that he would merely use a fence or even cameras with computer monitoring for motion detection and alerting the Border Police instead of building a wall along the entire border. Some would claim that the terrain would prevent it being a wall along the entire border but these arguments were disingenuous as the wording of a “wall along the Mexico border” simply meant closing the border through the use of combined deterrents, walls, fences or monitoring through advances of technology in the most difficult terrain or least used crossing locations and simply closing the border using all means necessary and required. Others claimed he would be unable to deport all the illegal immigrants as promised. First off, that was not the promise. He promised to deport illegal immigrants with felony convictions and to work at finding an equitable solution in which deportation may be an integral part of the equation.

 

The one item which made virtually every article’s list was the promise to move the American Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Almost, well, honestly every article we read claimed that President Trump would not be capable of moving the embassy as the threats, dangers, political pressures or even that Trump would use moving the embassy to force the Israelis to make the next concession of dividing Jerusalem and returning to the 1949 Armistice Lines with very minor land swaps making a final peace deal. What the problem with the claim is that the Congress passage and the signing into law of the Jerusalem Act “recognized Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel, under Israeli sovereignty.” That makes an undivided Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty United States law and thus holds any President to standing either actively for the undivided capital of Israel as being all of Jerusalem or remaining silent, no matter how President Obama attempted to divide Jerusalem as he disregarded numerous laws including the United States Constitution. Even some Israeli media has come up with lists for why President Trump will not, or should not (Haaretz), move the embassy to Jerusalem claiming things so extreme as stated by Haaretz, “Relocating its embassy to Jerusalem would mean the U.S. taking a partisan stance on a central and sensitive issue, a source of controversy between Israel and the Palestinians, and between Israel and the international community.” That is a falsehood unless moving the embassy to western Jerusalem would be taking a position that western Jerusalem would remain part of Israel. Is Haaretz indicating that Israel should leave western Jerusalem and if that is the meaning, then what else should Israel surrender or does Haaretz stand with the most extreme position such as that expressed by Helen Thomas who stated on May 27, 2010, when asked whether she had any comments on Israel? “Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine,” she replied. “Remember, these people are occupied and it’s their land. It’s not Germany, it’s not Poland.” When further asked where they should go, she answered, “They should go home.” When asked where’s home, Thomas replied: “Poland, Germany and America and everywhere else.”

 

 

The American Embassy could easily be moved to even the most western edge of Jerusalem and be as far as possible from any lands under dispute and still there would be whole hosts of people screaming that the United States is persecuting the Palestinian Arabs and determining to cheat them out of their homeland. This might at first glance appear as a ridiculous position to take as it could be so easily repudiated except that the Palestinian Arab claims include all of Jerusalem. The reality is the United States has already made a statement that is determined to cheat the Palestinian Arabs out of their homeland by leaving their embassy in Tel Aviv as the Arab claim is to all of Israel just as the students chant in campuses across the United States, Europe and beyond, “From the river to the sea, Palestine must be free.” The Palestinian Arabs are actually the entire Arab world’s crowbar and will be their implement by which they continue to wage their war to destroy all of Israel. The truth is the existence of a United States Embassy is an affront to the Palestinian Arab claims to their “rightful” country which would be built on the ruins of the Jewish State as anything less would be an aberrance to their stated demands and eventual goals. This is part of why Mahmoud Abbas, and Yasser Arafat before him, refused even offers which granted them with over 90% of Judea and Samaria along with all of Gaza and east Jerusalem as their capital when offered in 1999, 2000 and in 2008.

 

So, why should President Trump move the United States Embassy to Jerusalem according to us here at Beyond the Cusp? Well, we could use our favorite reason when trying to win an argument as kids with our parents when life got between us and a promise to go somewhere fun, “But you promised,” but we know that does not wash when things are on this level. First, it would send a message that there really has been a change in Washington D.C. and that the change will very likely be permanent for all intents and purposes. The world’s train is racing towards oblivion and nobody is manning the breaks. The old steam engine is racing with its speed balls spinning full out threatening to blow off their spinners. Everything about the old globe is screaming, whistles blowing and rivets near popping and the boiler exploding and the Deadman’s switch rig disabled and there is nobody in the cabin. Well, there was nobody in the cabin. This was the picture of the world not long ago and hopefully things will be saved before we hit a sharp curve and it all goes off the tracks. Brexit was step one and President Trump is step two but nobody knows how many steps it will require for sanity to rescue the world. Will the needful steps be taken or will the next cataclysm strike before the world regains sanity. What are the necessary steps that will bring the world back within the bounds, who can tell? The world has been slowly gaining reckless speed slowly slipping out of control and towards untold violence. There are those forces which would welcome the untold violence. They loudly proclaim their love for violence and the death it brings. They claim to worship death and that this allows them power over all who worship life. Their claim is that death conquers life. Those who love life claim that death is the rest one receives after a full, long and hopefully well spent life. These are opposing views which cannot be reconciliated, one must prevail. The good news is that President Trump is aware of the challenge though he has spoken only about it through allegory and indirect references. Moving the United States Embassy would be a strong message when it is announced as a definitive and executable policy decision. Perhaps that is the future for the moving of the United States Embassy, a declaration that the United States and life will declare over death and those who believe it is primacy. Yes, perhaps the moving of the Embassy will be a greater declaration than what the debaters believe it will be. Perhaps there is a grander plan than we are aware, perhaps the plan is greater than men and from beyond our understanding. This may be a greater issue than a mere embassy and the city in which it sits. Jerusalem had been more than a city and perhaps this is more than a simple embassy. Lastly, if the reason not to move the embassy to Jerusalem is because it reportedly will inflame Muslim passions moving them to further animosity and in turn greater acts of violence, then there is no reason not to move the embassy as from all observations of the Middle East, especially Syria, Iraq, Turkey, Libya and both Sudan and South Sudan as well as the levels of terrorism in Europe, more so Western Europe and also in the United States, though there it has been reported as anything but terror, especially Islamic driven terror, the levels could not conceivably be any higher. Violence, thy name is Islam, has become a truism of our times and thus simply move the embassy as there is no possible additional levels other than war, and that will happen whether the embassy is moved or not. If we had our way and the United States had not already purchased the land, then we would call for the embassy not only to be moved to Jerusalem but to the Jewish sector of the Old City as well. After all, did not Trump promise that his Presidency would be a brave and bold rebeginning for America and her relations with her friends? Well then, let’s get it off on the right foot.

 

Beyond the Cusp