Beyond the Cusp

June 11, 2018

Trump Russia Probe is Now All About Israel

 

We know what many are shaking their heads asking, ‘Really BTC, not everything is about Israel.’ Well, true, but let’s dive down this rabbit hole and see where it leads us. The reporting we saw came from an article titled Does Mueller have an Israel problem? Quoting from the initial paragraph, it states the following;

According to The Conservative Review’s Jordan Schachtel, Special Counsel Robert Mueller has exhibited a “disturbing pattern” of suspicion directed against Israel over the years – which continues to this day.

Ominous start, but why not explore the remainder and then all make up our minds. Looking at Jordan Schachtel’s article in Conservative Review titled “Robert Mueller’s Israel Problem,” we read in his first paragraph,

As the Mueller probe drags along into year two of its supposed investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, a disturbing pattern has emerged. The special counsel has become obsessed with the state of Israel. The former FBI director is deeply suspicious, to the point of total paranoia, that there is a grand conspiracy involving the Trump campaign and transition officials as potential agents for the Israelis.

Is this starting to get a little more interesting yet? Well, we also went through a number of the Daily Caller articles where we finally found the source for the initial intrigue where presumably George Papadopoulos plead guilty to lesser charges in order to avoid the threat from Mueller that he would prosecute him as an Israeli spy. That source was presumably George Papadopoulos’ wife, Simona Mangiante. While looking at the Daily Caller articles on the Mueller Probe, and they apparently are obsessed with this probe, we found this little jewel,

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team is looking into White House adviser Jared Kushner’s contacts with Israeli officials in the days leading up to the election.

 

Eventually, running all of this backwards far enough and we find the Wall Street Journal article, “Special Counsel Mueller Probes Jared Kushner’s Contacts With Foreign Leaders” where our suspicions were finally verified on what the entire Mueller Russia Probe is all about, the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 condemning all Israeli settlement activity beyond the Green Line (the 1949 Armistice Line) including East Jerusalem and everything that entails claiming it constitutes a “flagrant violation” of international law and has “no legal validity”. It demands that Israel stop such activity and fulfill its obligations as an occupying power under the Fourth Geneva Convention. We all remember the claims that President Obama had absolutely no part in the authoring of this resolution, and we agree as it was entirely written in Tehran and was last swipe at Bibi Netanyahu and a conjoined effort by the Mullahs of Iran and President Obama probably with Valerie Jarrett acting as the go-between. So, one last quote from Conservative Review’s Jordan Schachtel,

The special counsel has become obsessed with the state of Israel. The former FBI director is deeply suspicious, to the point of total paranoia, that there is a grand conspiracy involving the Trump campaign and transition officials as potential agents for the Israelis.

 

President Obama probably with Valerie Jarrett acting as the go-between

President Obama probably with Valerie Jarrett acting as the go-between

 

Now we can continue with the rest of this now that we have found that kernel of reality, which binds it all together. Mueller, who is a close friend of President Obama and was hand picked by the Deep State at the Justice Department with high recommendations from then FBI Director James Comey was chosen to lead this expedition as revenge for President Obama on President Trump because Trump had the audacity to make an attempt to thwart President Obama’s United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 with which he was going to show those upstart Israelis who really holds the power. Can one really believe this entire mess has been a personal vendetta also joined into with the Clinton’s as Trump had just bested Hillary Clinton in an election which was supposed to coronate her as the heir to the throne. One can only be tempted to substitute these characters into the series “Game of Thrones” and debate who is going to have their head chopped off next. Just to set things straight, Mueller would be the Ice King’s dragon sent forth to destroy the normal with the Ice King and the second in command being Obama and Hillary and the Ice Wall was the Constitution of the United States, that which protects individuals from political vendettas. Now back to our regularly scheduled article.

 

We have Papadopoulos pleading guilty to lesser charges after Mueller, the Great Inquisitor, threatened him with prosecution as an Israeli spy. Papadopoulos knows there is virtually no evidence which would link him with being an Israeli spy, but also knows that there are many people out for blood in this matter and he did not desire any of it being his. He probably thought it is better to require a Band-Aid than surgery to treat the wounds he was going to receive. So, he pleads guilty, turns evidence as to whatever Mueller demands and walks away a few months later with all his parts in order. We understand completely, when choosing between a cement truck and a tricycle, you pick being run into by the tricycle over run over by the cement truck. We now know how they got the presumed goods from Papadopoulos to go after General Michael Flynn with misleading the FBI about his conversations with the Russian ambassador about a UN anti-Israel resolution in December of 2016. This is an easy trap to set; you have Papadopoulos swear in a deposition that he heard General Michael Flynn say something simple. Then you have James Comey claim in his deposition that General Michael Flynn also said the same something simple. Both agree that what Flynn stated to the FBI was not the actual truth and bingo, two against one. Now you have General Michael Flynn caught in the Mueller bear trap with the intent of turning him against President Trump and then you have impeachment proceedings to remove Trump, or better yet, conspiracy to alter the outcome of an election to take to the Supreme Court in order to overturn the election results because there was tampering with the vote and really Hillary Clinton won the election. That would really be selected, not elected, the chant we heard back during George W. Bush’s first term in office after the Florida debacle.

 

But there is still the matter of Barack Obama getting his revenge on Trump for attempting to get Russian President Putin to have his United Nations Ambassador veto President Obama’s United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 against Israel. Well, it failed anyway probably because President Putin, like President Obama, is allied with Iran and as they wrote the resolution, or helped possibly, he had to back his important Syrian ally. What is so very interesting is what has happened since. President Putin was following what then President Obama desired probably figuring that Trump would be a one-term President and a complete fiasco and failure having no influence or power. President Obama had all the signs of power and was the safer bet. Putin likely wishes for a do-over as President Trump has proven to be far more than an empty suit. Nowhere has this been more evident than concerning Israel with the official recognition by President Trump that the United States sees Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and moving the embassy to Jerusalem with great alacrity. That, in and of itself, has all but cancelled President Obama’s Resolution 2334. Yes, we know that President Trump gave lip-service to the moving of the embassy has nothing to do with the final borders the two sides might agree to in the end. With all that has happened in the past year, it has become obvious that it has been the Palestinian Authority which has prevented any steps towards peace to even those who have been asleep for the past fifty years.

 

Further, Mueller, as part of his pursuing charges against President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner’s part in the attempts to shoot down President Obama’s United Nations Resolution 2334, sent an investigatory team to Israel to speak with as many people who might have had contact with Kushner. This effort was all part of seeing if Kushner might be acting as an Israeli agent which would bring him instantly under charges. They turned over every leaf, combed every paper trail, and still came up empty. Interestingly, quoting once again from Conservative Review’s Jordan Schachtel,

Mueller’s suspicions of Israel — and Jews as a whole — go back to his early days as the FBI director.
In 2004, the Mueller FBI alleged that a massive Israeli spy ring was operating out of the Pentagon. The stunning revelations sent shockwaves throughout the intelligence community, and it was followed by endless editorials painting Israel as a nefarious actor seeking to undermine the United States.
Yet it later turned out that the allegations were completely bogus. There was no Israeli spy ring, but rather, what appeared to be a deliberate attempt to target Jews for prosecution. There were several disturbing instances of the Mueller FBI running sting operations attempting to “tempt Jews” to betray their country. “All turned down the offer,” according to the Washington Post. Mueller’s attempts to lure Jews into a trap failed. The botched operation confirmed the troubling reality that elements of the U.S. intelligence community remained attached to anti-Semitism.

Meanwhile, the investigatory team sent to Israel was tasked specifically to track down the activities of at least two Israeli social media and consulting firms. Mueller and his prosecutors suggested in leaks to the media, something done way too freely by everyone from the Justice Department, that the Israeli firms probably have colluded with the Trump campaign to secure his election victory. After all, it simply could not have been the will of the American electorate, those ones which President Obama once quipped, “They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

 

 

We used to believe the Mueller Probe was largely about overturning the Presidential Election as well as, failing that, preventing President Trump from accomplishing much of his program by hogtying as many in his administration with fighting against seemingly honest efforts to remove Trump from office. This has so catastrophically failed that even many Democrats now see the Mueller Probe as a boat anchor preventing their ship from sailing. Trust that it is more than that anchor as the mainstream stalwarts of the Democrat Party insist on firing their cannonades through the decks and the bottom of the boat which is sinking their hopes for the midterm elections. The Republican Party stands to gain in both houses despite recent efforts by retiring Speaker Paul Ryan to sabotage Republican gains. All the Republicans really need control is President Trump and his Tweeting something horribly offensive or some other unforgivable gaff. Also, the Republicans should do everything quietly and behind the scenes to encourage Mueller to continue full speed ahead and continue leaking like a sieve. The media will take care of the rest, as they cannot help themselves. If they even get a whiff of something anti-Trump, they are right on it and running with it to their ever-appreciative editors. But could we ask one more favor of Mueller while he is running to and fro attempting to chase his personal daemons, could you actively attempt to link Israel with Trump and Russia and spell it all out in the media and throw in a full recounting about how the Israelis foiled you uncovering their spy ring in the Pentagon and how this is all about Israel preventing you from finding the truth about Trump because, well, you know, they control Trump and the government. Of course that would mean they chose you knowing that you are looking for the Israel angle almost as hard as you are the Trump and Russia angle. Keep up the good work, really.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Advertisements

March 8, 2017

History of Jerusalem and Status Quo Incompatible

 

Of the cities within Israeli Control; Hevron, Jericho, Safed (Tzfat), Shiloh, Bethel and Akko are amongst the oldest. Shiloh and Bethel are most notable as locations for the Tabernacle before it was brought to rest in Jerusalem by King David. Hevron is notable as the first capital city of the Israelite Tribes before King David made Jerusalem the capital city around 1100 BCE to 1200 BCE depending on your source (yes we understand some claim different dates and others claim Kings David and Solomon were myths and the Hebrew Bible belongs next to Aesop’s Fables and the Tales of the Brothers Grimm in the fiction and moral tales aisle, but we tend to ignore such tripe). Safed was considered one of the four holy cities along with the aforementioned Jerusalem and Hebron as well as the later addition of the Roman city of Tiberius. Tiberius was built by the Romans in a location that made it visible from much of the entirety of the Israelites civilization and was built with one simple and overriding purpose, to dazzle, impress and force the will of Rome through visualizing Roman superiority and greatness through the magnificence of the city of Tiberius, and it worked except the Hebrews (Jews) simply included it as one of their own taking away the Roman attributes and simply thanking the Romans for constructing what Hashem demanded of the Romans to do for the Hebrews. This leaves Akko which presents an interesting set of tales. It need be mentioned that Akko is considered to be the oldest city in all of the area which became Israel by quite a number of years. Thus let us compare the two oldest cities and Jerusalem and their respective status-quo.

 

Jericho is the city which guards the gateway to the Holy Lands. It is centered in the Jordan River Valley and guards the largest of the passes through the Judean hills and as such must be taken if one expects to supply their armies. Oddly enough, battles for Jericho, other than the one time its walls came tumbling down, are rather absent from much of history despite it being taken by many conquerors including at least one Islamic Leader. Once any group is established in the areas of the Holy Land, they are able to use multiple trade routes; it is largely necessary to take Jericho if one is attacking from the east or south as from the south one is more likely to circle around the Negev Desert and attack crossing the Jordan River necessitating taking Jericho. Should any of these invasions succeed, then their conquest is noted crowned by their conquest of Jerusalem, not Jericho. Jerusalem and Akko are the two main gems in the crown of those wishing to conquer the holy lands simply because Jerusalem was the Capital City of Kings David and Solomon which made it the notable city in the entire area. Akko is the oldest city even older than all the aforementioned especially Jerusalem and older than Beersheba, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Gaza City and any other as Akko is claimed to be approximately five-thousand-years old. It is worth reviewing Akko, the great port city of its age, as it has a protected port in the small bay guarded by the city as well as a seaward port which can handle deep draft vessels meaning Akko could be a port for any ships or smaller boats for across the sea and local trade with more natural docking berths than even Alexandria, especially deeper draft berths. This made Akko as important as Jerusalem to controlling the Holy Lands.

 

Mosaic of the Early Holy Land

Mosaic of the Early Holy Land

 

So let us compare Akko and Jerusalem. Before the Hebrews, the Israelites, the area of Canaan was ruled by city-states of which Akko was one of the oldest and displayed the greatest of walls. The walls of Akko would only be challenged by the walls of Jerusalem herself. The main powers of the early history, almost prehistory, were the Hittites and the Egyptians who basically would fight one another for control over the Holy Lands and even the Sinai Peninsula when Egypt was weakest. These two would mostly fight in the open and whichever side won the day, that would be the greater power which the area city-states would pledge allegiance. On occasion the ruling force might demand additional troops from the cities under their control and whether they were given forces who fought well, they were probably considered the preferred and stronger of the two superpowers fighting to control the region. Akko being located farther north than Jerusalem was often not as likely of being contested and thus remained largely under Hittite rule with only occasional Egyptian rule; this was a more secure and established city with a steady rule while Jerusalem was often under contention, siege, and often would change hands sometimes for days or weeks and at other times for some years. The introduction of the Hebrews, the Israelites, around the year 1525 BCE started their exodus which led to their conquest of the Holy Lands starting roughly sometime in the fourteenth century BCE. Akko already had some history but much of that was Hittite with brief periods under other rulers. There is one individual’s conquests which depict the special difference which Akko held and why for many years during the Crusades remained in Crusader control despite the rest of the area falling to the Muslims. Jerusalem during these times changed hands which led to many individual sweeps which tried to purge the non-believers from Jerusalem. The Crusaders murdered Muslims and the Islamic rulers purged Christians and both sides had one concept in common, both purged Jerusalem of its Jews yet somehow some number of Jews always survived. The conquest of the region by Napoleon was revealing in that he controlled Jerusalem but despite two separate assaults on the walls of Akko, Napoleon was unable to breach the walls and thus Akko never fell to Napoleon. What are we trying to convey? Namely that of all the cities of the Holy Lands, Jerusalem was the most conquered, most divided, and the city with the least amount of a status-quo as the changing of hands led to different rules with each change of rulers. Simply, the status-quo of Jerusalem is about as fluid as any city in all of recorded history and even before.

 

But the talk now is about the recent status-quo of Jerusalem that we are referencing when we talk about status-quo and mostly about the status-quo of the Old City and the Temple Mount even more particularly. The reason that the Muslims specify the Old City and Temple Mount is because Western Jerusalem has been under Israeli rule and was the Capital City for Israel from May 15, 1948, uninterrupted to this day and thus it actually has a status-quo, Israeli rule under Israeli law with Israel responsible for its security and the Jewish State never lost control of this area resulting from the invasion by much of the Arab world the very first day of Israeli existence with the intent of a genocidal conquest slaughtering every Jew in the lands. At dawn of May 15, 1948, Israel legally was the ruling force of all the lands west of the Jordan River to the eastern border of the Mediterranean Sea. The Arab forces had already infiltrated the easternmost lands by stationing troops and special forces inside most of the Arab cities, towns, and other communities with the intent of breaking any lines of communications, reinforcements and resupply thus weakening the Israeli defenses. These defenses were already in disarray with the many different forces spread between the Haganah, Irgun, Sternists, Palmach, Lehi, Mahal (foreign volunteers such as Colonel David Daniel “Mickey” Marcus played by Kirk Douglas in the movie Cast a Giant Shadow) and various individual forces made up mostly of community guards and volunteers from farmers to refugees straight fresh from the boats from the numerous detainment camps which the British used to keep the vast majority of Jews trying to reach the Holy Lands after World War II. The result of this war left Jerusalem split in half with the eastern half which included the entirety of the Old City and Temple Mount in Jordanian hands and the western parts of Jerusalem in Israeli hands. The Jewish residents of the Old City were forced from their homes by the Jordanians or shot during the fighting simply because they were Jews in Arab controlled areas. This situation led to two completely separate status quos for the divided city of Jerusalem.

 

Colonel David Daniel "Mickey" Marcus

Colonel David Daniel “Mickey” Marcus

 

The following history of the city of Jerusalem for the nineteen years from May 15, 1948, through June 7, 1967, when Israel liberated the whole remainder of Jerusalem during the Six Day War after Jordan attacked on the second day of the war despite Israeli pleas that they not join the losing efforts of Syria and Egypt. Jordan chose to believe the reports by Syrian and Egyptian broadcasts that they were closing on Tel Aviv and destroying the Israeli forces on every front. The reality was quite the opposite as Israel not only was not losing but had liberated Gaza and taken the Golan Heights and Sinai Peninsula plus had advanced towards Damascus with the Syrian forces being routed just as were the Egyptians. After Jordan joined the war, they were forced from their occupation, illegal occupation, of Judea and Samaria with Israel regaining the lands lost in 1948 during the war against the Arab world intent on destroying the Jewish State. During those nineteen years the eastern parts of Jerusalem, the parts occupied by Jordan, remained remarkably the same with minimal amounts of additional building beyond that necessitated by increases in population. That was a real status quo with almost nothing changed. On the western parts of Jerusalem under Israeli control the city was built up and modernized with an entire new city center and whole entire suburbs with new roads, schools, synagogues, homes, businesses and gained an entire new look. There is a whole new Jerusalem today than there was in 1967, let alone in 1948 or in the year 500 or back in 1100 BCE when King David conquered the city gaining access through the waterway from the spring outside the city to the central cistern from where his small raiding party opened the city gates and his troops poured in before dawn. The question kind of has to be what status quo as Jerusalem has been a city of constant change and change is the enemy of status quo.

 

Jerusalem 1950 Jerusalem 1970 Jerusalem 2010

Jerusalem 1950 Jerusalem 1970
Jerusalem 2010

 

We have spoken on the supposed status quo in Jerusalem before which can be found as the first seven links from these search results but let us speak of it once more. What the Palestinian Arabs as well as the Jordanians and much of the United Nations wish for Israel to do when they demand we keep the status quo in Jerusalem is to enforce the occupation rules when Jordan illegally occupied half of Jerusalem. Further, they are demanding that Israel also enforce the Jordanian rules in all of the lands which the Jordanians illegally for the nineteen years between May 15, 1948 and June 7, 1967 which would prevent Jews from even visiting areas of Judea and Samaria, let alone reside there. This would continue to forbid Jews from returning to their actual homes which they still retain the deeds to despite the fact that Israel has liberated those homes. They would forbid the Jews whose homes are in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem from returning to these homes and forbid Israel from restoring the Synagogues destroyed by the Jordanians simply because they could not tolerate a Jewish construction in the area while they controlled it, even illegally occupying the area. This is the status quo the world, or at least much of it, demand of Israel which comes down to one simple concept, they wish to deny Jews equal rights in areas within Israel. That is blatant anti-Semitism and that is not an enforceable or even allowable status quo no matter what anybody wishes to claim. Israel, in theory, has freedom of religion yet those demanding the retaining of the status quo are demanding that Israel suspend freedom of religion and allow only Muslims to pray on the Temple Mount and only Islam be observed. This is true even for the Church of the Holy Sepulchre which would be an interesting question to pose as it is on the Temple Mount, surely they can hold services. Well, the priests inside may pray but they may not hold any public services as that would break the iron law of status quo. There has been a small concession in the status quo, on the days when the Islamic Waqf decides and only on the hours granted, people other than Muslims may visit the Temple Mount but they are not permitted to enter the Mosques nor may anybody offer even a suspected whim of praying. Even a Buddhist or Taoists or Native American would not be permitted to utter a solemn sound as that would destroy the status quo and the purity of Islam. But is this really the actual status quo or a new demand which is not new as the status quo has been a moving line where the rules have changed as the Islamic forces rise in their perception of their power while the Western World appears to be wilting. The truth is fascinating.

 

Back after the Six Say War and again after the Yom Kippur War when the Islamic forces were thwarted by Israel and handed them a crushing defeat the rules were very different. The Waqf said little if anything and the Temple Mount was open most of the time only closed on Muslim Holy Days and this was at a decision made by the Israelis out of respect. Prayer was not an issue and the Waqf rarely placed watchers on the Temple Mount as there would have been little for them to enforce. Entrance to the Mosques was limited but permission was given for those requesting a tour which was usually guided with the holiest areas off the tour though often visible from an adjoining area. These rules were the status quo for much of the time until the start of the First Intifada in the late 1980’s and the Oslo Accords in September of 1993. Then with each concession by Israel in order to persuade, read bribe, Yasser Arafat and then Mahmoud Abbas, read Yasser Arafat in a suit, the Waqf gained in strength and the status quo slowly but inexorably moved to be more and more strict. This progression would seem to have reached its end but there is still room to allow only Muslims onto the Temple Mount and all others banned from the site even to the point of demanding the priests from the Church of the Holy Sepulchre be removed from their posts and then the turning of the church into yet one more Mosque. Think that might be something they would not do, then you need to look into the history of the Hagia Sophia which was first made into a Mosque after the conquest of Constantinople, where even the name of the city itself was changed to Istanbul, and in recent times has been changed into a museum which depicts both of its histories. Do not hold your breath praying this becomes the status quo for that former greatest cathedral in all Christendom as Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has been slowly moving Turkey towards becoming an Islamic theocracy aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood; so the Hagia Sophia Museum may be headed for a new future back to being a mosque.

 

As the status quo of the Temple Mount has been altered with time and feelings of gaining the upper hand and becoming powerful while Israel appears to have weakened in protecting any Jewish rights to the Temple Mount even to not preventing the destruction of countless artifacts from the First and Second Temples which the Waqf had claimed to be installing drainage ditches in order to dig down and destroy every artifact they found and the Israeli Antiquities Authority protested but was overruled by the Waqf claiming their unopposable Islamic right to any action they chose. The reality is that the Waqf only retains any authority for as long as Israel is willing to tolerate their actions. Let me repeat that, for as long as Israel tolerates their actions. Why are they still here and not back in Jordan where they belong? Prime Minister Netanyahu that question is for you. Minister of Justice Ayelet Shaked, why is Israel not applying our authority over the Temple Mount as an integral part of our Capital City of Jerusalem and location of the holiest ground in the Jewish faith? We do not expect any of the myriad of Israeli officers, who have the authority to remove the Waqf from all of Israel and send them back to Jordan which is the nation responsible for choosing these officers, to perform their duty as currently demanded by a majority of the Israeli population. What we would expect is for Israel to finally get sick and tired of the world demanding that we shrink from our rightful claims and legal ownership under International Law through an entire series of treaties and other legal rights granted through the League of Nations and enforceable under the Charter of the United Nations that all the land west of the Jordan River belongs to Israel. We gave away Gaza under what became obviously an on again off again promise which was given by United States President Bush and not enforced by President Obama and overruled by the United Nations with Security Council Resolution 2334 which being under Chapter Six is not enforceable by military action or economic embargo by the United Nations itself and contrary to the United Nations Charter (which actually negates the entirety of Resolution 2334) and apparently will be honored by President Trump. Gaza will remain in the hands of Hamas which will be left to Egypt to either tolerate or retake control over the area as they had before the Six Day War. Israel has obviously taken a mow-the-grass attitude where whenever Hamas decides to attack at a level no longer tolerable by the Israeli public, then they will destroy Hamas and Islamic Jihad from being capable of continuing their destruction and aggressions against Israel. As far as Hamas and their aiding the terrorist forces in the Sinai Peninsula, as that harms Egypt far more than Israel, this problem will be left up to Egypt to address. Should this become the situation harming Israel, they would work with Egypt on resolving who would take the appropriate actions or what combined actions are required. But regarding the areas of Judea and Samaria, Israel has every right to resolve all aspects of the conflict in whatever means Israel might decide is to Israel’s best advantage. The rules which gives Israel dominion over the lands west of the Jordan River places an obligation to provide religious, social, ownership of property, and all rights with the exception of political rights. This allows that Israel treat any and all Arabs residing in Judea and Samaria as legal resident aliens which would allow them everything they currently have except they would not be permitted to vote in elections. Israel would likely allow them to continue self-rule in areas where they are the majority population at the time of the reestablishment of Israeli governance. This could be any date or time even ten minutes from now, the only requirement would be for Prime Minister Netanyahu making an announcement of such a decision, nothing more.

 

This is another one of those eventualities which will happen, it is simply a matter of when but we would advise not holding one’s breathe. The world will make a huge noise and protest as loudly as they are capable with the United Nations General Assembly passing more resolutions against Israel than usual. Many of the Arabs residing in Judea and Samaria would initially believe that they would be thrown from their homes and lose their businesses fearing the worst and expecting Israel to act as they had acted when they illegally occupied these lands and evicted or murdered every Jew residing within the region. Their reaction would be similar to any Japanese soldier captured by the allies in World War II as they had been told that they should expect to be tortured just as the Japanese did to the allied prisoners they captured. Much to the Japanese surprise they were treated well and with respect and much to the Arab’s surprise the Israelis would grant them more rights while allowing them to continue residing on their land and retaining most of their rights. They already do not vote in Israeli elections and that would remain the same. Israel would likely give them an offer to resettle outside of Israel with an incentive to aid their relocation and payment for the property they currently own as if they had sold it and once they took such a deal they would not be permitted to return with any intent to reside in Israel in the future. But all this is conjecture until Israel gets true, strong and confident Zionist leadership willing to take decisive measures to assure Israeli survival. We await such times and pray it will not require the Messiah in order to reach such finality.

 

Beyond the Cusp 

 

February 4, 2017

Two States for One People Solution

 

The world through governments, leaders, politicians, statesmen, reporters and editorialists all tout the “Two States for Two People” as the agreed upon mantra for the solution of the Arab Palestinian-Israel Conflict. As an example, under the heading “What is the two-state solution?” New York Times journalist Max Fisher defined the two principles as being the same: “The two-state solution would establish an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel — two states for two peoples.” Would but such be true the conflict would have very long ago been settled. Unfortunately, this is the side taken by only one of the sides in the debate, the Israelis. The Palestinian Arab leadership has a very different set of parameters for a solution. Perhaps a short list of their favorites would be in order. There is their “River to the Sea, Palestine must be free” solution in which there is one Arab state named Palestine founded upon the graves of over six-million dead Israeli Jews. Even then the Arab Palestinians would have another set of problems, what to do with these Jewish bodies and what to do with the Jewish bodies which have been interred within these borders throughout history back into antiquity. One need understand that when the Arabs claim there must not be one Jew on their precious and pure lands that includes on top, alive or dead, or beneath it no matter how long dead. When Israel surrendered Gaza they were forced to reinter their dead which only added to the calamity and sociological shock suffered by the Jewish communities which were uprooted even unto their dead friends and relatives. Imagine being forced from your home, your place of work being destroyed and having to dig up friends and family from their resting places and rebury them locating them sometimes a great distance from where they resettled making their graves now difficult to visit and tend. That was part of the horror of the plan to solve everything by simply giving the Arab Palestinians the Gaza Strip so they could prove how they could be productive and live peaceably beside Israel. Simply stated, that experiment was a dismal failure.

 

The New York Times once again in an article, “The Two-State Solution: What It Is and Why It Hasn’t Happened,” would have one believe that the Palestinian Authority government fully supports the idea of “Two States for Two People” solution to the conflict with Israel. But what do Arab Palestinian leaders have to say on the Two State Solution? Back in July 2011, Senior Palestinian Official Nabil Shaath slammed the French peace initiative because it called on them to recognize the Jewish State, so he told ANB TV that the French Initiative had,

reshaped the issue of the ‘Jewish state’ into a formula that is also unacceptable to us — two states for two peoples. They can describe Israel itself as a state for two peoples, but we will be a state for one people. The story of ‘two states for two peoples’ means that there will be a Jewish people over there and a Palestinian people here. We will never accept this — not as part of the French initiative and not as part of the American initiative.

Additionally Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas also was quoted in 2011 stating, “I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. I will never recognize the Jewishness of the state, or a ‘Jewish state.’” Both of these were statements directly contradicted what French President Nicolas Sarkozy stated in 2012 where he clearly underscored this difference between the statements made by Palestinian Authority (PA) leadership and the generally accepted beliefs of the Western World when he posited,

It is not enough to have two states; there must be two states for two nations. I know very well that there are two ways to destroy Israel: from without and from within. This is why the two-state solution is not enough. We need to have two states for two separate nations. One for the Jewish people and one for the Palestinians.

There is an additional slander which claims that Israeli complaints about the PA instigating violence have no basis in credibility. This has been the mantra of many reporters, editorialists, and largely European political leaders. This can be proven ridiculous simply by playing this now infamous video of Mahmoud Abbas and others speaking in the language nobody outside of a select few Westerners are capable of translating, Arabic (see videos below). These two videos are but a small example of the horrific statements almost always stated in Arabic knowing full-well that the European and American leftist and mainstream medias will pretend they are unable of making heads or tails of such statements only quoting that which these leaders of the Arab Palestinians feed them in English. We wish we could attribute this to their being lazy except with the proof of what was said already translated by MEMRI, they have no excuse other than a severe anti-Israel and thus anti-Semitic bias. Finding the lies could not be easier either, simply visit CAMERA and read almost any coverage they show about Israel and the Palestinians. Be prepared for news you may not have seen before and for much of what the nightly news has fed you to be upended with quotes and references.

 

 

 

Now prepare yourself for our small dose of food for thought. In the December of 2000 as President William Jefferson Clinton was desperately attempting to solve the unsolvable Arab-Israeli Conflict he held a series of meetings. The crux of these attempts to bridge the gap between Yassir Arafat and Ehud Barak led to an interesting turn of events during the desperate days in Paris. President Clinton met for hours with Yassir Arafat finally getting him to actually state what terms he would accept believing the Israelis would never in a million years meet these demands. They were for Israel to turn over 90% of the “West Bank” (Judea and Samaria) and all of the Gaza Strip as well as half of Jerusalem to become the Capital City for Palestine. Late in the evening President Clinton visited Ehud Barak and set forth the terms which Arafat had given him. It took some time and arm twisting but in order to make peace Ehud Barak agreed to returning 95% of Judea and Samaria along with all of the Gaza Strip and dividing Jerusalem. Once receiving Barak agreement, President Clinton sent word to Arafat’s delegation that they were to meet early the next morning for a joint session to negotiate face-to-face. Yassir Arafat smelled that he was a rat trapped by his own admissions and ordered secretively for his car to be brought around to the front entrance fully packed, door open, and driver ready to hit the gas as soon as Arafat was in the vehicle. When President Clinton presented copies of the agreement to the two leaders, Ehud Barak reached for a pen while Yassir Arafat bolted out the long corridor. Immediately afterward, Madeline Albright dashed after the fleeing Arafat in an ungainly and borderline hideous limping gallop never closing the distance. She cleared the door to have the cameras of the news reporters recording over her shoulder the black limousine circling out of the drive with Arafat seated in the back seat. A subsequent offer was tendered from Taba later that week which was not even dignified with a response and thus ended the Presidency of William Jefferson Clinton. But wait, there’s more.

 

Next comes along President George W. Bush and the ending of his term. He has successfully forced Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to turn the Gaza Strip over to the PA in exchange for some sweet words and fourteen promises written in a letter as an understanding between the two offices. This was supposedly an agreement between governments and this one won overwhelming affirmation from both houses of Congress garnering a total of comfortably over five-hundred votes from the combined Congress. These were the fourteen conditions under which the release of the Gaza Strip was performed and their refutation could have led to Israel retaking all of Gaza or some sections thereof. President Obama did indeed crumple up this agreement and trashed it completely with his assisting the passage of UNSC Res. 2334 during the closing days of his administration. This act will likely leave an unpleasant taste in any world leader’s mouth and be seen as a dire warning against accepting the world of any American President for the foreseeable future, especially one would hope Israeli leaders if no others. So, in late 2008 President George W. Bush and his Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice were pressing Israel once again to make the necessary sacrifices for peace. Again an Israeli Prime Minister, this time Ehud Olmert, made the supreme sacrificial offering of dividing Jerusalem and again over 90% of Judea and Samaria with land swaps for the remaining lands. This time they were dealing with Mahmoud Abbas, presumably a more reasonable and honest broker simply because instead of wearing fatigues and having a revolver strapped to his side, Abbas wears a business suit. Well, the apple did not fall far from the tree and Mahmoud Abbas proved to be a suitable (all inferences to a pun intentional) follow-up to Yassir Arafat as he officially received the offer and never even bothered to reply or make a counter offer. Instead he simply closed the negotiations with no further communication except to threaten to take the entire matter to the United Nations and the Court of The Hague and internationalize the conflict.

 

Division of lands between Israel and Semiautonomous Arab Zone

Division of lands between Israel
and Semiautonomous Arab Zone

 

With the ample assistance proffered by President Barack Hussein Obama, Mahmoud Abbas has done exactly that, internationalized the conflict such that any European nations, the United Nations in any of its near infinite capacities and anyone or anywhere else can jump in and demand Israel make concession after concession receiving nothing but threats and violence in return. The world is internationalizing the conflict quite adequately with city after city in Europe and numerous colleges conducting some level of boycott against Israel, often all Israel claiming all of Israel is responsible for there being no solution. Technically, from the Arab point of view, they are correct; the fact that there is an Israel which makes the statement that it is the Jewish Homeland, that is sufficient to make peacemaking impossible as the Arabs of the PA and the Arab World demand the end of Israel as Jewish. They will accept an Israel provided the Arabs rule and the Jews, if permitted, remain as Dhimmis, second class citizens with restricted rights who may be executed at any time by whim of any with the authority to do so, often meaning any Muslim. Since this United Nations Security Council Chapter Six Resolution 2334 which blames Israel, particularly the “settlements” which are simply Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, legal under International Law, for blocking the path to peace, the Arab Palestinians are free to demand anything while doing nothing and the world gets to blame Israel for not appeasing the Arabs sufficiently through boycotts and calls for “Kill the Jews.” What is surprisingly illegal are any claims made by the PA and other Arab representatives as while they have legal rights to their property, they have no legal leg to stand upon claiming self-rule or requiring an independent state. The reality, as we have stated near endlessly, and are working on endlessly, is the lands all belong to Israel for use as the Jewish State and that the only means by which any of the land can become an Arab State is if Israel signs a treaty relegating our claims and rights to these lands. And one does not need believe us, but one might feel inclined to take the wording of a decision made by the Third Chamber of the Court of Appeal of Versailles in a case brought by the PA against the French companies Alstom and Veolia for building Jerusalem’s light rail system. Their final decision was also a warning to the PA that Israel has the sole claim to all of Judea and Samaria and that they would do best not to take this into any court of law. The fact this came from the friendliest court system the PA was able to find makes this all the more impressively important. Please take our kind invitation to read for yourself a copy of the Court Ruling. Furthermore, in an earlier case brought before Egyptian Judge, Justice El Araby, and the International Court of Justice (ICJ), who sat in judgement as part of the panel which heard the case where the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) sought an advisory opinion in 2003 from the ICJ on the legality of the security barrier erected by Israel; the Honorable Justice El Araby warned the UNGA and others, including Mahmoud Abbas and the whole of the PA, that filing further ran some risks, as he stated,

“The international legal status of the Palestinian Territory (paras. 70-71 of the Advisory Opinion), in my view, merits more comprehensive treatment. A historical survey is relevant to the question posed by the General Assembly, for it serves as the background to understanding the legal status of the Palestinian Territory on the one hand and underlines the special and continuing responsibility of the General Assembly on the other. This may appear as academic, without relevance to the present events. The present is however determined by the accumulation of past events and no reasonable and fair concern for the future can possibly disregard a firm grasp of past events. In particular, when on more than one occasion, the rule of law was consistently side-stepped. The point of departure, or one can say in legal jargon, the critical date, is the League of Nations Mandate which was entrusted to Great Britain.”

 

Mandate of San Remo for French and British including actual treaty demarcations for each nation

Mandate of San Remo for French and British including actual treaty demarcations for each nation

 

Things are not only not as they are portrayed by far too many in the Western Media Enterprise, but actually quite the opposite. Israel is not the occupier; the Arab Palestinians are the actual occupiers. International Law which is constructed from treaties, conferences, agreements and other contracts between men and nations is usually understood to have some leeway or allowance for differing opinions. The fact that Israel is defined on her east by the Jordan River and on the west by the Mediterranean Sea is an exception as it is delineated and spelled out with diagrams and maps in several agreements, conferences, treaties, Mandates and even Article 80 of the United Nations Charter. As the border of Israel is accepted as stated above in the United Nations Charter Article 80, the recent UNSC Res 2334 is invalid as the United Nations individual bodies cannot overrule the Charter thus in any instance where there might be a conflict, such as the statement that the Jewish communities defined as “settlements” due to their location east of the 1949 Armistice Line, also called the Green Line, is invalid as these communities are all west of the Jordan River and thus legally on Israeli lands. All of Judea and Samaria by default are Israeli lands unless Israel gives them away in a treaty, not agrees to talk about the possibility but actually agrees, until then the lands remain as an integral part of Israel. Those are the hard and true facts and the only lands that Israel signed away has been Gaza. How anybody can even think for a second after the catastrophic results of the Gaza giveaway that repeating the same motions this time with Judea and Samaria including the tactically significant Judean Heights and the Jordan Valley and its overlooking mountains has to be suffering from some severely debilitating mental disorder or actually desire to plot the end of Israel and her Jewish population. Gaza has proven that once the land has been signed away, no matter how severe the resulting rocket barrages and other acts of warfare committed against Israel, any reaction by Israel will be condemned by the world bodies and numerous governments where the best Israel can expect is half a dozen friendly nations, possibly the protection of the United States Veto in the Security Council (not an automatic despite what anybody says as Presidents change) and the great sacrifice some European nations and a few others might take by abstaining from a vote to condemn Israeli defense of her citizens from attacks. Former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Abba Eban said it best stating, “If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.” Abba Eban, having resided for a period in New York City, was able and took the opportunity to enlighten and grant the New York Times a singular piece of literary brilliance along with a moment of fresh air in the form of actual truth concerning Israel when he was quoted stating,

“Nobody does Israel any service by proclaiming its ”right to exist.” It is disturbing to find so many people well-disposed to Israel giving currency to this contemptuous formulation. Israel’s right to exist, like that of the United States, Saudi Arabia, and 152 other states, is axiomatic and unreserved. Israel’s legitimacy is not suspended in midair awaiting acknowledgement by the royal house in Riyadh. Nor does a group such as the Palestine Liberation Organization have any juridical competence to accord recognition to states, or withhold it.
A majority of the 155 states in the modern international community are younger in their sovereignty than Israel, which was the 59th member of the United Nations. There is certainly no other state, big or small, young or old, that would consider mere recognition of its ”right to exist” a favor, or a negotiable concession.
What Israel is entitled to have in return for the increase of its territorial vulnerability is not verbal recognition but an effective security system, to be arrived at by negotiations.
Back in 1967, when the world community adopted its unanimous policy for the Middle East in Security Council Resolution 242, some members suggested that Israel should be satisfied with a solemn declaration of the right of all states to exist. They added that Israel might, if it chose, regard itself as included in that definition. At that time, hardly any responsible government in the Western world or elsewhere accepted that definition of Israel’s rights as adequate…”

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.