Beyond the Cusp

December 8, 2017

Trump Recognizes Jerusalem So Now What?

 

President Trump went “All-in” with Israel and the Jewish People, even if there are those who do not realize or wish to recognize this truth. President Trump announced before the world that Jerusalem is the Capital City of the Jewish State, always has been and always will be, will be the location of the United States Embassy, and, whether he realizes it or not, the right of the Jewish People to have for all time Jerusalem as their central dream. (Speech can be viewed at bottom of our article) There run-up to President Trump announcing an obvious truth to all who have any knowledge of history or religions, was filled with threats and promises of violence, as well as political pressures sent from Arab capitals, European capitals, African capitals, Asian capitals and from almost every continent with the usual exception of Antarctica. Even from within the United States there came pressures and threats. The State Department, as usual, resisted moving the embassy or even recognizing the over three thousand year-old truths about Jerusalem as the center of Judaism and capital of every Jewish State since King David conquered the city before the year 1000 BCE, the media hyperventilated over threats such as the one from Grand Imam of al-Azhar Ahmed al-Tayeb who stated, “If the door is opened for foreign embassies to move to Jerusalem, the floodgates of hell will be opened to the West more so than to the East.” And “fuel anger among all Muslims and threaten world peace,” while Keith Ellison, Democrat Representative from Minnesota told Democracy Now, “I believe in a two-state solution, an Israeli state and a Palestinian state side by side in peace and security. So issues of where the capitals will be has always been something that will be negotiated in the course of a peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinians.” He was also quoted stating, “Recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital a horrible tragedy.” (see below) Additionally were the warnings from King Abdullah of Jordan, numerous officials from the PA*, Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Saudi Arabia’s King Salman, and even Pope Francis went adding his voice to warnings by Arab and Muslim leaders that recognizing Jerusalem as the Israeli capital would have dangerous repercussions.

 

 

So, the warnings came from every direction, virtually every religion, every region, every level of government, from democracies and kingdoms alike and they all forgot one thing, President Trump does not respond or react as a politician and take the safest route of expediency because President Trump is not a real politician, something which was driven home during the entirety of the Presidential campaign. So, now that President Trump has jumped about as far out on a limb as one can jump proclaiming Jerusalem as the rightful capital of Israel and that the State Department has been tasked to relocate the Embassy of the United States in Israel to Jerusalem, what could he ever do next to match that? Truth be told, we probably have just witnessed what will be determined to be one, if not the, pinnacle of his time in the Oval Office. As for what next, hopefully he will actually fight the Congress, demand the entirety of the tax cuts he desires, and give the America people the lower and completely rewritten tax code he promised. But for the Middle East, President Trump has just reformed and rearranged virtually everything. Jerusalem will now remain forever the Capital City of Israel, the peace process has been revealed to be the venture and the sole purview of the Arab Palestinians and the Israelis, and no longer in the hands of the United Nations, the European Union, the Arab League or any other nation no matter what other leaders might want to believe. President Trump stated that any peace which might come between the Arab World, Arab Palestinians as well as the Muslim World and Israel would need to be the result of their direct negotiations and that the remainder of the world need allow the parties involved determine their acceptable peace as no outside assistance has ever proven effective thus perhaps no outside assistance would best serve the conditions for peace.

 

The truth is the world is facing a new world and will need to choose between peace and freedom. The peace which has been offered to the world by Islam, is a chimera offering the peace of the slave, while those opposing the terrorists through stiff opposition offer the fruits of freedom. The choice is between peace and freedom, something which sounds ridiculous until one understands the issues involved. As was obvious in the week leading up to President Trump announcing the recognition of Jerusalem and intentions to move the embassy, the Muslim World, the Arabs in particular, threatened violence and terrorism throughout the world, specifically stating intent to target the Western World, as the consequence of operating outside their predefined conditions for the world. Those who have paid attention have likely also noted that such threats have been used regularly against Western governments when they announce any plans which run contrary to their delights. Israelis have lived with these threats and the ensuing consequences, as they are often carried out, with increased terrorism from time to time intended to cow Israel into further surrenders. There are always increases in Arab terrorism whenever the Israeli government accedes to these threats as such cowing simply strengthens their belief in the successful function resulting from their violence. This also occurs whenever there is the promise to reconvene a new round of the peace process. In reality there is not any peace process as all that exists in reality are successive rounds of demanded successions which the world is obliged to foist upon Israel under pain of increasing terrorism if the Western nations do not put sufficient pressures upon the Israeli government. These are the realities which the Western World is facing and it will only get worst the more the Western nations give in to these threats of violence.

 

Map of Terrorist Attacks in Europe Middle East and North Africa after 9/11

 

People, especially Muslims, love to point to all the Western politicians who have referred to Islam as the “Religion of Peace” usually immediately after a terror attack. They then go off the rails by claiming that this means that the terrorists are the exception and the relatively few Muslims residing peaceably in the West are the rule in Islam. They further point to the fact that there are over a billion Muslim of which most are peaceable. What they are refusing to admit is that there are different ways in which Muslims can support Jihad meant to conquer the world under Islamic rule. All Muslims are required to engage in Jihad, the few who actually commit the acts of violence, those who financially support those efforts, and the remainder is required to support these acts in any means by which they are able, allowing terrorists to find refuge in their homes and neighborhoods, joining in referring to the deceits as truth, deceiving police investigations or simply remaining silent and never, ever turning fellow Muslims in for any act of terror. Islam is the “Religion of Peace” providing that they define peace. The Islamic idea of peace is made most obvious by how Muslims divide up the world into two spheres, the House of Submission or (Dar al Islam) and the House of War (Dar al Harb). The Muslim World is permitted peace while any part of the world is not under Muslim control is considered to be at war with Islam. So Islam is the Religion of Peace and all other religions are Religions at War, namely at Islam or Islam is at war with them. That is the politically incorrect but true definition of the Religion of Peace which those who have studied Islam might serve the free world a favor and be more vocal but too many of them have become enamored with Islam and the Arab World and spend much of their time in the cafes of the Arab world in their magical favorite places. Were they to speak up and tell the truth they would no longer be welcomed.

 

Let us talk reason and what will slowly, but inevitably, become known and understood the world over when Islam ramps-up their offensives throughout the Western World. Europe has already started down that path, particularly Western Europe and Paris specifically. The reality that peace can only be had by coming under Islamic Sharia, the Islamic rule of law which denigrates all those who are not Muslims to Dhimmitude, a second class form of existence where one had absolutely no rights in a court of law and few rights and must always defer in all things to any Muslim. Religions are not permitted to build new houses of worship or even to repair existing ones such that with time all houses of worship which are not Islamic, eventually collapsing. Such treatment is followed down the line in all things in order to pressure all to become Muslims and eventually these places will reach the final stage where all who have not surrendered to Islam are provided a choice, surrender to Islam or face death. So, what will come to the Western World in the future is a choice between the “peace” of Islam or Western freedoms. That is why we claim that people are going to have to choose between freedom and peace. In an old television show a commander informs those around him in a meeting that, “The opposite of war is not always peace, sometimes it is slavery.” Islam defines peace as surrender to Islam which is a form of slavery of a life with no freedoms as everything is defined precisely by Islam. Even government is defined in Islam and must be led by the religious leadership such as in Iran or by dictatorial governance who are beholding to the religious leaders such as in Saudi Arabia. The governments in the West are incompatible with Islam and the Islamic World is filled with perfect examples with virtually no, if any, exceptions showing that Islam begets totalitarian regimes which are often theocratic tyrannical oppressive regimes. Time will tell and unfortunately, the amount of time it may take will eat into the possibilities of the final solution coming peacefully.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

*PA = Palestinian Authority

 

 

 

Advertisements

November 16, 2017

Israel Cannot be Another United States

 

The first and most obvious reason is size, though that is the least important reason. But the long version of the title for this article should read, “Why Israel cannot be another United States and why the Middle East and Northern Africa (MENA) are in such a mess.” Then the first sentence would change. So, let us start again. Israel cannot and must not be made into a small version of the United States in the Middle East any more than Japan made into United States Asia Pacific, Thailand made into United States Southern Asia, Tanzania made into United States Africa or Poland made into United States Europe. In every case, these are nations which have been homelands to a particular people in some cases since before written history. The Jewish People are directly traceable to the southern nation between the two nations of the Hebrews who came out of Egypt. The two nations were, the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judea whose people became known as Judeans which over time, and for ease of pronunciation, became Jews. The northern kingdom of Israel was the northern ten tribes with their priest lived in the tribes of Judea and the far smaller Benjamin and their priest, which resulted in the tribe of priests, the Kohanim and the Levites divided between the two kingdoms. As the newly reformed nation invites all of the tribes of Israel and Judea to return, the older name Israel was chosen for the nation of the Jews.

 

Let us now speak to why there are so many wars and unrest throughout the nations making up the area called MENA. The problems derive from the decisions made on how to break up the areas which had belonged to the Caliphate and then the Ottoman Empire as the Ottoman Empire had sided with Germany and Austria-Hungarian Empire in World War I, the losing side. The Allies; Serbia, Russia, France, United Kingdom, Italy, Belgium and the United States were left to decide the new boundaries for the losing forces. The decision was decided to return lands to their indigenous peoples with the exception of the Ottoman Empire as these lands had been transformed into Arab-Muslim lands under Arab rule with their original indigenous tribal demarcations pretty much erased. Germany and Austria-Hungarian Empire were redefined with new borders defined for Germany with their losing areas to Poland and France. The Austria-Hungarian Empire was broken up into numerous nations which were again divided after the fall of the Soviet Union leading to the nations Czech Republic, Slovakia, Austria, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Hungary, Romania and Serbia today (see map below). These divisions were presumed to make nations too weak to begin a new war as Austria-Hungarian Empire had, forcing the Great War. As further punishment, Germany was restricted in the size of their military and police, forced to pay prohibitive reparations and was forbidden from making air or naval power sufficient to threaten England, France or Russia. Obviously, that plan had failed, as it was one of the mitigating factors leading to World War II. We can only pray that the divisions made of the lands of the Ottoman Empire do not cause World War III.

 

Austro-Hungarian Empire Break-up into Independent Nations

Austro-Hungarian Empire Break-up into Independent Nations

 

The division of the Ottoman Empire came under two main rulings, the first resulting from the San Remo Conference and the Treaty of Sèvres which was restated and included in the Treaty of Lausanne. Many ask why all of these treaties, conferences and other agreements from World War I, especially what became known as the Mandate System, and the reason is Article 80 of the United Nations Charter. Article 80 states, in simple English rather than Legalese, that all these agreements from World War I are enforceable by the United Nations and remain recognized and applicable. Two men had met before the end of World War I and decided between them how to “fairly” divide the Ottoman Empire with much of the lands being turned over to, you may have guessed, France and Great Britain. These two men were the Frenchman François Georges-Picot and the British sent Mark Sykes who together drew up the lines which became the Sykes-Picot Agreement. This agreement gave colonial powers to the various allied powers including Spain, Italy, France and Great Britain. Subsequently, all of these powers have relinquished their rule permitting independent states (see map below). We must note that the 1979 date for Iranian independence notes the Islamic revolution and coup which removed the Shah and in his stead placed the Ayatollah Sayyid Ruhollah Mūsavi Khomeini (Persian: سید روح‌الله موسوی خمینی‎‎) into power of the Islamic Republic of Iran. These lines were drawn willy-nilly, as the British might say. There was no regard given for tribal lines, or at least that is the normal reason given. We hold to another more sinister reason for these lines, a combination of complete laziness and the idea that each nation would be near ungovernable. The borders below (see map) are drawn with slight regard for obvious boundaries such as rivers and very straight lines. By dividing peoples into different nations and splitting up tribes in like fashion while placing numerous tribes within every nation, Sykes and Picot guaranteed that rule could only be established through a dictatorial strongman such as Saddam Hussein, Muammar al-Qaddafi and Bashir al-Assad.

 

Dates that the MENA nations received their independence after colonial rule many since the times of the Persians or even earlier

Dates that the MENA nations received their independence after colonial rule many since the times of the Persians or even earlier

 

This very likely was the plan, leave nations near ungovernable and leave tribes and peoples split between different nations preventing their coming together to try to establish their natural homelands. This was the opposite of the European plan where they returned lands to the local peoples while in MENA they mostly did the opposite with select exceptions. These exceptions included the Mandate areas which were divided between Arab Muslim from Christian and Jewish lands granting Lebanon to the area Christians to rule and Israel to its indigenous peoples, the Jews and other tribes of the Hebrews. Thus, Jordan and Syria were made Arab Muslim lands. The Kurdish were promised their own lands but the discovery of oil and a lucrative agreement with King Faisal I (Arabic فيصل الأول) and the British (read Getty) left the Kurds divided between Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey. Of these countries, Turkey and Iraq were the two most determined to remove their Kurdish presence through genocide if required. Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons amongst other horrific methods against the Kurds in Iraq and Turkey would do to the Kurds what they did to their Armenian people starting in 1913 and continuing through to nearly the end of World War I in 1917. There were also the added struggles between Shiite and Sunni Moslems with these differences felt the most severely in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and many of the Gulf States. This is in part what caused much of the violence during the Arab Spring.

 

The Arab Spring very quickly became and remains the Arab Winter except where the state was strong enough and willing to use that strength to squash any rebellion. That was how Saudi Arabia treated any rebellion amongst its fellow gulf states with the best example being Bahrain where Saudi Armor poured down all lanes of the connecting causeway to the main island bringing the demonstrations and any ideas of a revolt to a very fast and permanent end. There are still numerous revolts in various levels of violence ongoing in Libya, Syria and Yemen with possible problems still existing in Turkey, Jordan and Egypt. There is also the continuing violence committed by the Sudan on the recently established South Sudan. This is a sectarian struggle pitting the Islamic fighters from the north against Christians and Animists residing in the south. This war between the Islamists against the Christians and Animists continues across the continent of Africa in what is referred to as the African Transition Zone (see below). Eventually these lands will form borders based on their tribal affiliations. Even then, there will be those who believe as if it were their religion that it is their destiny to expand over more lands. If one were to ask how many more lands, their answer would be all of the lands and they and their children will fight until all lands belong to them and their beliefs. Fortunately, their claim to land is limited to those lands where mankind live, so founding colonies on other planets simply provides them with more lands which must be brought to the one true faith. That is their religious law until the Imams decide otherwise.

 

African Transition Zone

African Transition Zone

 

Therein lies the answer, convince their Imams to change the law or at least how they interpret their laws. We are far from alone in this proposal as some have proposed this before and others continue this cry for hope in their future. They see that continuing on the path of eternal conquest can end only one way, one greatly destructive conflagration. These almost singular voices are all but undiscernible over the cacophony of the raging world around them. One such voice has even carried his plea to the center of Islamic teaching, Al-Azhar University. Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has walked into the den from which the most renowned and influential of Imams graduate. Al-Azhar University is the Oxford University for Imams. President Sisi has taken the lead position with his appearances and demands for transforming Islam and teaching coexistence, cooperation and acknowledgment of other religions leading inevitably to peace and possibly harmony for mankind at long last. There is the Muslim Reform Movement which are standing for just such a change as are those mentioned at the end of this article. These are people who should be provided prominence as an option worth consideration.

 

To some extent, the allied powers from the First World War, or at least Mark Sykes and François Georges-Picot, is responsible for the discontent and violence which had ravaged the Arab Muslim world for the past quarter a century or so. Then, on the other side, the allied powers did not actually do such a great job with Europe judging by the ensuing World War II. The truth is the exact reason why the resurgence of Islam must be handled with a sense of urgency as well as tactfully. If the near future is bungled, then the result could very well be World War III. The entire problem was born of World War I and led to World War II and must be prevented from ending with World War III. All one need remember is the answer Albert Einstein gave when asked, “What weapons will World War III be fought?” To this Einstein replied, “I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.” Perhaps it would be best not to test the validity of Einstein’s prediction of a possible future.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

November 13, 2017

Rape, Sexual Harassment and Feminist Hypocrisy

 

Let us all admit this right up front, Harvey Weinstein was and probably still is a pig and a disgusting one at that. He deserves much of the scorn for his practices and using other human beings as sex objects, toys even. We should also accept that he operated in this fashion in a time when such was more of a common practice than today and was almost alive during times when slaves existed in many places around the globe openly. If we were to be complete honest about this practice, then we should expect to have much, if not most, of Hollywood, producers, major stars and starlets and to be sure, male and female sexual predators alike. But that is simply Hollywood and the sexual harassment and worse produced as matter of fact coin of the realm.

 

What about one who preached modesty for women, proper behavior and restraint for women, unbecoming clothing to hide the female form all so men would not act like the sexual predatory animals they presumably are and then acted exactly as one of those predatory animals men presumably are? Should the feminist lobby and membership be outraged or understanding as this presumably honorable man has been accused of acting boorishly, committing rape and taking advantage of his position of power and influence in order to take advantage of women who trusted him. The man holds and has held prestigious positions such as a former Professor of Contemporary Islamic Studies in the Faculty of Oriental Studies at St Antony’s College, Oxford, and also teaches at the Faculty of Theology and Religion, University of Oxford, is a visiting professor at the Faculty of Islamic Studies at Hamad Bin Khalifa University in Qatar, and the Université Mundiapolis in Morocco plus is also a senior research fellow at Doshisha University in Japan and is a Swiss academic, philosopher and writer. Since the accusations of sexual misconduct have piled up with some of the women unknowns, a few women of stature have also brought accusations that in their youth when they were not accomplished, they had been victims of this illustrious man of religion.

 

The man in question, as you have all probably recognized already, is Tariq Ramadan, the Islamic Imam extraordinaire of Europe and as much loved and respected by the seculars of Europe as he is by Muslims the world over. The allegations against Tariq Ramadan must be addressed seriously just as they would be inspected with all seriousness were this a cleric of another religion. Imagine how seriously women would be taken if they were to come forward with similar charges against one of the Catholic Bishops or Cardinals claiming that as a priest they had molested and raped these women in their youth or if high clergy of a protestant church or respected Rabbi were accused of these same charges. In any of these cases, the women would be canonized by the Feminist Movement and these Christian or Judaic clergy, religious men would not be permitted an ounce of sympathy and would be held accountable and their accusers believed just as have the charges against Harvey Weinstein. It has taken Oxford University a number of weeks before deciding to influence Tariq Ramadan to take a leave of absence until these matters have been cleared. The basic response in Europe has been to treat him with kid gloves and accuse the women of slander and protest their absurd and contemptible accusations against such a man who stands above reproach.

 

Islamic Imam Extraordinaire of Europe Tariq Ramadan

Islamic Imam Extraordinaire of Europe Tariq Ramadan

 

Did we miss the demand that we return to the 1950s or earlier where a woman accusing a man of rape was ridiculed and charged with asking for it or is this a unique case where the person accused is absolved due to their religious orientation granting automatic immunity against such charges. To claim that Tariq Ramadan cannot be held to the same standards as other men is to support the Islamic claim that if a woman was raped, then she deserved it unless she can produce four men to support her claims and were witness to such an act. There would never be four men who would claim to have witnessed such an act as rape and not intervened to prevent such an abhorrent act, thus the women could never produce sufficient witness to uphold her wild accusations. Tariq Ramadan would be dismissed as innocent and his accusers stoned in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria and much of the Islamic world. In reality, no woman would dare bring such charges in a Muslim nation, as they would know they were risking their own lives with such an accusation. To bring a charge such as these against a man of the stature and position of Tariq Ramadan would be certain death. Fortunately, these women are in the Western World and thus are not risking their lives, only their reputations.

 

But will being in the Western World make their accusations any more productive or will they be discarded as foolish women who should have known and expected such treatment from Tariq Ramadan meeting him in a private location without witnesses. They must have known that being alone with a Muslim man would drive his sexual desires beyond his abilities to control his actions. What were they thinking, one meeting him alone in a hotel room, she had to realize that he was inviting her to his own little den of iniquity. Meeting him alone anywhere, his office at Oxford, a meeting room at an Islamic Center, any location unsupervised would simply be an invitation to do with them as he pleased and he pleased to please them, or himself. These were Muslim women and one admitted to meeting him unveiled and wearing close fitting Western clothing which was in fashion, she had to be temporarily insane to agree to meet dressed thusly. These other students, they were likely improperly dressed to be meeting a Muslim man alone in an unobserved and remote location. The Quran warns women not to place themselves around Islamic men in any place or situation where the men might act animalistic as this is a temptation which no man can resist. Tariq Ramadan is being charged with being a man, a normal man under Islamic belief and as such, he could not be expected to withhold his desires and lusts in the presence of such temptresses. Obviously, the officials and public throughout Europe are well versed in all things Islamic and have already reached their verdict, Tariq Ramadan was acting as a man and these women are to blame for his actions against them as they were asking for it. They placed candy before an infantile mind and the child-man simply took the candy, what did they expect. If these women honestly believe that Tariq Ramadan did something untoward to them, maybe they should go back and consider the stress and irresistible temptations they placed before him and the terrible situation they imposed tempting him in such an unholy manner. To have expected anything different than what they received was simply ignorance and after all, would not any women accepting such a meeting with Tariq Ramadan be doing so knowing the result and secretly desiring such an end? We must understand that these women had glanced the beatific aura and rugged handsomeness that was Tariq Ramadan (see image below) and were taken by his radiance as well as the powerful positions he held and importance in the Islamic World, it is no wonder they sought to tempt him so shamelessly.

 

Tariq Ramadan

Tariq Ramadan

 

The end of this series of events, or fiasco depending on one’s predisposition, is still something we will need patience to wait and then ascertain. The initial reading of the tea leaves would indicate that Tariq Ramadan will lose some of his sheen but still be considered a radiant and brilliant person above reproach in the finer societies of Europe and for the leftists in the United States. He might lose his position at Oxford but is more likely to be granted a sabbatical to return to somewhere in the Middle East to further his studies only to make a triumphant return in a year to eighteen months. The women will be insisted to be more reserved and to reconsider their charges. Most will be glad to escape this circus intact and not permanently labeled as a woman without morals, as an easy woman. Hopefully, some will stick to their guns and perhaps receive support from some more prominent women, possibly Muslim women of prominence with a similar story from their past and Tariq Ramadan. There must be some Muslim woman who he demanded favors for a recommendation early in their career. Such a woman making an accusation would be risking becoming a pariah in the Islamic World and be without any support from the Islamic World. They would be signing their own death act should they return to the wrong country in the Middle East, North Africa or anywhere where Sharia is enforced. They would be best advised to avoid many of the Muslim neighborhoods where they enforce their own laws in Europe, the United States or elsewhere in the world. They would no longer be acceptable should they bring down a Muslim man for sexual misconduct as such so rarely exists in the Islamic World as to be considered an impossibility, something one would probably never witness in their lives. These women would become ostracized and face the wrath of Allah according to most Imams. This is the risk each of these women who have made accusations is already facing and that alone adds credence to their claims. The result of these claims and possible future claims will be interesting to watch, not so much the actions in Europe and the United States but throughout the Islamic World, that is where change is necessary and the reaction to this fiasco, as it is currently playing out, will tell us much about the future of the Muslim World, and thus the rest of the world as well.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.