Beyond the Cusp

June 11, 2019

So, You Thought Hezballah was Merely an Israeli Problem?

 

You read the news and almost every time, if not every time for most, when the Hezballah is reported, it is virtually always to do with Israel or some other conflict in the Middle East. Hezballah is mentioned in threats to fire missiles striking in Israel, tunneling beneath the Lebanon border into Israel with intent of infiltration raids on Israeli civilians, fighting alongside Bashir al-Assad Syrian forces aided by Iran and the IRGC in Syria, aiding with training as well as fighting allied with the Houthi rebel forces in Yemen and in that rare occasional report which mentions the tri-border region in South America where Hezballah has a series of training areas where Argentina shares borders with Brazil plus Paraguay. The areas you almost never hear references to Hezballah is in Europe, Asia, North America and southern Africa. Perhaps this is due to such events being swept neatly under the legal carpet presumably for the common good of the society. After all, no political figure wants to hear the news reporting of any Hezballah plots to carry out an attack using three or so metric tons of an explosive, say, ammonium nitrate, anywhere near their district, city, county, state or country, all depending on the political level which would be so threatened. Perhaps the political pressures could affect the way in which any such threat would be detected, investigated, possibly prosecuted or, to avoid any undue strain on the body politic, and arrange for other means of handling those involved.

 

Well, guess what. That is right, such a terror threat which was foiled with minimal fanfare and without anyone being charged, that despite one initially being arrested, all because the timing was off. This has come to light thanks to a deep investigation carried out by The Telegraph where it was reported that Hezballah had been caught planning a terror strike in or around London with, you guessed it, using metric tons of ammonium nitrate. MI-5, assisted by the London Police Department, uncovered the stash containing thousands of disposable ice packs filled with ammonium nitrate. This amount was considerably more than was used in the Oklahoma City bombing that killed 168 people and damaged hundreds of buildings. The raids were carried out on three businesses and one home in North West London by MI-5 and authorities after a months-long investigation. It was stated that MI-5 was acting on a tip from a foreign government which uncovered the major terrorist plot linked to the radical Islamist terror organization and Iranian ally, Hezbollah.

 

Here is where everything becomes interesting and contains a political attempt to cover up the entire series of events as they came at an inconvenient time. What makes it all the more intriguing was that there was one suspect, a man in his forties, arrested in connection with the raids, though he was later released without charge. The fact that only one person was detained, and then no charges made concerning a plot of such size makes for numerous questions to arise. What had authorities so worried that there was a code of silence concerning the entire affair and no arrests, trials or other ramifications from a months long investigation. Presumably, citing “well-placed sources”, the report claimed that the terror plot had been disrupted by a covert intelligence operation “rather than seeking a prosecution,” which is puzzling. Where things become somewhat clearer is when we are told that this plot was timed during the time of the negotiations and pending of the Iran nuclear deal. This was where The Telegraph suggested that the matter was withheld from the public in order to keep “the Iran nuclear deal afloat.” Still, it was reported that the plot was so serious that then Prime Minister David Cameron and then Home Secretary Theresa May were personally briefed on the discovery of the explosive material. One need not read much further to see where to begin to look to see the origination of the demand that this be kept as quiet as possible and not to make any large display including arrests which could have led to some very uncomfortable complications. After all, this was around the point that the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) and we all knew instinctively that nothing, and we mean nothing, was to come between the P5+1 and the Iran deal.

 

UK supporters of extremist group Hezbollah

UK supporters of extremist group Hezbollah

 

The British public has every reason to be quite put out by such political suppression of such an important investigation to the point that there were no arrests or other actions taken beyond raids to impound the explosives while not pursuing further actions. We ask, how is it possible to have such a plot with three-metric tons of explosives but not have any people involved with the use of the explosives or even a group planning for its use. Nobody was found or even to be of interest to MI-5 or the London Police concerning what was definitively a major pending terrorist attack. This cover-up probably extended to high officials in the British government requesting the silence on whomever the unidentified foreign government which provided the initial tip to the British assisting in their preventing a potential tragedy. They were likely contacted and had the situation explained and thus the request for not reporting their efforts in preventing the attack. The threat of terrorism is far too great and is of great importance to the people of every nation. Such an attempt would be politically important as well as the right for the people to know the truth about the world we all live within. But the news and the ruling elite do not treat the people in all too many countries as being capable of handling the truth. Kind of reminds one of the critical lines from some movie. So, because the people are too unsophisticated, too ignorant, so delicate, so uneducated and so emotionally unstable that they are deemed not capable of living in a world where they are told what the reality actually is. This is why the news granted for public consumption is not the reality of the world but a picture of a world with just the right kind of problems which permit the political class to remain in power unchallenged and apparently with everything under control. Telling the people that a significant threat of a terror attack was planned in their precious city and was very probably prevented due to some unmentionable country providing a warning with sufficient information that MI-5 and the police could clean up the threat without even a ripple being told to those who were under this threat. Makes one feel as if the public is not entitled to the truth as they presumably cannot handle the truth.

 

 

This is where society has reached, the stage where there are two worlds, the one we are all left sleeping peaceably in our beds each night assured that all is well meanwhile the elites know the reality that they are fortunate that terror threats are discovered and it matters not by whom as long as the people are able to be left in blissful ignorance. This is a sad commentary on our societies as it provides a picture where the people are expected to simply accept the reality fed them by a coordination of the political class and their media allies. The media also does not believe that the people can handle reality, so they sell the people a story-line which lulls them into a sense of being fully protected and safe. The powers that be insist on keeping everyone within the lines they set out for the public and the media and the politicians work to provide as little of the real threats from being identified as it might upset their ability to be reelected, and that is all that matters, right? Why should the people expect for their ruling elite who are chosen time after time to return to their comfortable little jobs while the decision to place trust in these elected officials is all a mirage. So we have what is an important treaty in the wings, well, better not tell the people that those who the politicians are about to make a deal concerning the manufacturing of nuclear weapons were planning what would have been one of the largest terror attacks for somewhere in London to be executed by the terrorist groups which handles the worldwide terror network for the Iranians. The politicians wanted the treaty as it would allow for trade and making large profits for the people who really matter, so the regular folk need not be troubled with any such information which could be distressing. This goes double if it might make for difficulty in carrying on business as usual and making their financiers happy. So, rest easy, they made raids and took away all the explosives and nobody was responsible for the planned terror strike or for hiding three metric tons of explosives, it all just assembled all by itself without any human intervention. And not to worry, the people planning the attack would never attempt to try so again, they probably promised. You know, they promised that they would go home and never try such an attack as was spoiled again just as Iran has promised not to manufacture nuclear weapons or more advanced ballistic missiles, you know, just like the ballistic missiles they have been testing. Read about these tests here, here, here, here and here. We hope you have a nice day and remember not to worry; your worrying would only upset the governing class.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

August 22, 2012

America’s Choice; Pay Now or Pay Later

There was an old commercial for automotive lubricants where the mechanic holds up a can of oil with a car with smoke pouring from under the hood, up on the lift and says, “You can pay me now” (nodding to the can), “or you can pay me later,” (looking back at the car in the work-bay). Well, the same thing goes for America and her spiraling debt. The election will be a referendum on whether the people choose to take the necessary steps now to bring their budgets back into balance with a fair amount of pain and suffering or whether they prefer to continue blithely on until the financial emergency brings their entire economy and likely both their government and way of life crashing down around their ears. The first route will be uncomfortable until the economy grows sufficiently to allow for increasing spending, the next time hopefully wisely and with extreme caution showing that America had learned her lesson. The second route America will wake up one day with a splitting hangover and realize that the part is over as the creditors begin to claim whatever resources exist and just simply take them with no regard to people, the environment or whatever damage they do in extracting their money’s worth right out of the ground or by clear-cutting American forests. Along with this catastrophic collection on payment the American people will find that their dollar will be next to worthless beyond their shores and that they have little of anything with which to produce the products on the home-front. It will not be a pretty site and it will be from that bottoming-out that America will need to pull on their work boots and climb out of a deep and dreary hole of indebtedness.

Believe this or not, but this is not an advertisement for one side or the other for the Presidency as sufficient others will be making that argument. The Presidency is only one third of the problem, there are two other parts of government that are required to take the correct actions to try and salvage a solution from the critical crisis mode situation America faces. Those are the House of Representatives and the Senate. In the last session of Congress the House of Representatives passed at least three slightly different forms of a budget which actually did begin to address the problem and make a beginning point for responsible management of the budget. The Senate, on the other hand, figured that they had not passed a budget for over two years, why change now as everything is going so swimmingly. So, if the American voters can retain the level of sanity and sobriety in the House of Representatives as they have shown they are capable of committing, they will only have to find people to send to Washington to the Senate and bring about some fundamental changes in that body. The problem with this is that at any one election only one-third of the Senate is up for election so that limits the number of seats which can be changed to just over thirty. Since some of the Senators who are running for reelection are already on the correct side and have attempted to force the Senate to actually perform part of their Constitutionally ordained job, those Senators simply need reelecting. It will be the Senators who have joined with Harry Reid in blocking any attempts at making a budget and by such actually limiting and directing where government spending would be allowed. Instead, Harry Reid and his accomplices have been running the government on this item known as a continuing resolution which simply allows spending to continue at the current rate, often with a percentage increase, for a set period of time, usually a few months, and then repeating as necessary. The advantage for Harry Reid and his accomplices is that they can also pass other legislation to allow or even instigate other spending items which would normally have needed to be placed within a budget but without having a budget are each passed separately and thus debated completely out of any context to actual spending. This allows the conspirators to spend additional funds on those items they favor, usually vote buying types of spending better known as subsidies, without having to debate them in context of a comparison to previous spending levels thus making sneaking larger increases more easily hidden from direct scrutiny. This is especially true as they can add these extra spending allotments multiple times such that they do not appear to be as large as they end up becoming through a method of accumulation. The voters need to ask every Senator one simple question this election, “Will you vote to pass a budget or are you going to continue the deceitful practices of issuing continuing resolution to fund the government?” For any incumbent, just check their voting record and whether they voted in favor of any of the budgets passed by the house should become readily evident. If they opposed every budget vote, then do not give them your vote and send fresh blood to the Senate. And if the person you send does not support doing the hard work and crafting a budget in cooperation and debate with the House of Representatives, then when reelection time arrives, replace them. America cannot continue to proceed without an annual budget and simply voting to spend piecemeal which will always result in superfluous spending and dangerous deficits as we have seen of late.

There is one more place America needs to give careful scrutiny. Fortunately, not every American will find any disasters waiting to happen, already upon them, or potentially just down the road a bit. This problem is at every local level of government, the State, County, City, or Township. Even school boards may need to have a review to determine if they are using the funds well and what improvements may be made. Many States along with a fair number of Counties and Cities find themselves in deep debt or on the verge of large deficits. The American voter must take responsibility for these problems and elect responsible and adult people who will make the difficult choices and find the places where the budget can be cut, slashed in some places, and everything be brought back into a harmonious balance.

We in America have had it fairly good for quite a long time and had sufficient wealth and growth that it often appeared that we could accomplish anything as long as all it required was throwing money at the problem. We have reached the end of the gravy train and in many cases our train ran out of tracks quite a few miles ago. Now we are forced to park the train until we can lay sufficient tracks for it to once again roll forward. The difficulty is so many of us at all levels of income have grown comfortable with receiving gifts from government whether we truly needed the help or not. The time has come where we now need to look at these government outlays and decide if they are still in our best collective interests. If anyone can continue without dire difficulties without the government subsidy or with a far smaller subsidy, then we need to make the appropriate adjustments. This is going to take an honest and mature approach inspired by selflessness in place of the selfishness which got us to where we currently find ourselves, between broke and destitute. Another place we are going to have to change our attitudes is towards what we define as the responsibility of the Government and what is our responsibility to our fellow men. It is not necessary for government to be the giver of all assistance. There was a time not all that long ago where churches, synagogues, temples and organizations ran the food banks, soup kitchens, holiday food drives for those who might not have enough for a special holiday meal, clothing drives, and virtually anything and everything else one can think of to help the needy. This is what is meant by repair the world and giving charity. Paying taxes is not charity despite what many appear to believe.

Charity is given freely and from the heart while taxes are paid while facing the potential of a gun in your face. Americans have a proud history of being the most giving people in this world but we have slowly slipped from that high and proud perch as we have ceded more and more responsibility to government to do for us instead of picking ourselves up and doing for ourselves. We need to return to that America. Doing so will have numerous benefits beyond relieving the financial pressures on governments which do not have the funds to continue in the fashion we have become accustomed. We will also find that by returning meeting this need to the people we will get another gift, the gift of pride and respect and a warm heart when we take the actions to assist those among us who are in need. We need to insist that government not only return this responsibility to we the people, but that they also strike away those regulations which were placed between the people and the free giving of charity. What went along with the government taking this responsibility from us was a series of regulations over the years that had the singular purpose of protecting the government’s ownership of charitable actions. This was not done out of altruism or anything even close to resembling honorable. This was a selfish act by our elected officials who saw that by forcing the needy into dependence on government they could lock up the vote of that section of the population and thus assure in certain districts that those who gave out the goodies would forever keep their seat of power. We need to take that power back as it properly belongs to we the people.

Taking back our responsibility for caring for our brother will have benefits beyond making balancing the budget a little easier to accomplish. Taking back this right to care for each other and to make the world better through our own actions will bring out the best in us and could potentially show the rest of the world how honest, righteous, generous, and good people act and live. Another advantage comes in that we will find that by returning charity to the local people we will also make the act of charity more efficient than having it come from Washington. What many do not realize is that no matter how efficient the government agency might think it is; it cannot break the 80% barrier. The reason behind this upper limit is the IRS which has to allocate one dollar out of every five it takes in from taxes to processing and taking in those very same taxes. A government study once reported, if my memory serves me, that for every five dollars spent by the government the best efficiency managed to get three dollars to the target recipient while the worst got a mere seventy-five cents and the overall average for government was just short of two dollars out of five. One must keep in mind; these efficiency numbers for the government are about funds after the IRS has already wasted one out of every five dollars, so their 100% would actually be 80%. This means these numbers need to be multiplied by 0.8 to get the real efficiency. Compare that to even some of the poorest functioning charities with large overheads such as the United Way which gets and efficiency rating of about 53% while the Salvation Army gets an impressive over 95% efficiency. Oh, if all charity had their efficiency, but then the Salvation Army is a unique and wonderful organization. The average charity has an efficiency rating somewhere between 66% and 80%, both a far cry better than the government even on a good day. So, higher efficiency, a warm feeling in one’s heart, and a closer and healthier community if only we demand to replace government as the proprietors of charity, as it should be. Given time and enough efforts, we could eventually take over virtually all entitlement spending by taking the responsibility onto ourselves. That would free the government to do only that which it was tasked to do by the Constitution. This would allow for tax rates to return to levels not seen for over one hundred years, possibly even do away with income taxes, definitely FICA, and likely all taxes on the people and even on business and run the government off of fees and import and export taxes, as was done, as I like to put it, in the beginning.

The aim, dream and inspired actions of the American voters should be to return to that period of, In the beginning we had a Declaration of Independence which defined that mankind was a noble and proud group of individuals who were endowed with rights which they could choose which ones the government could assist in implementing, but they would always belong to the individual and the individuals could reclaim them at their fancy. Then we drafted a Constitution which tasked the governments among the people with the responsibility of defending those individual rights and never to impinge upon those individuals for it was the individual who was empowered and the government was to be their servant, not their master. The sole problem was that from that point we elected men to high office and they became full of themselves and eventually begot themselves the fill of the individual’s monies. That was not their place and we should never have allowed such theft in the first place. When did we give away that right that was ours and not belonging to the government for an individual is entitled to every ounce of their labor and is free to use the fruits thereof as they see fit without the taxman taking a cut for the government for such is theft by power. We must reassert that we do not agree to permit government to take on the role of a thief and get away with such usury. The time is now for us to reclaim our full rights and place government on notice that their sole job is to protect our rights from the foreigner and from the usury of themselves and we will be watching with more attention this time, let them be forewarned.

Beyond the Cusp

Blog at WordPress.com.