Beyond the Cusp

February 16, 2015

December 16, 2014

Palestinian State and Obama, Will He Vote Yes or No?

Filed under: 1949 Armistice Line,1967 War,Administration,al-Aqsa Mosque,al-Aqsa Mosque,Amalekites,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Arab Appeasement,Arab League,Arab World,Arabs,Ariel,Blood Libel,Civilization,Condemning Israel,Disengagement,Ditherer in Chief,Divided Jerusalem,Dome of the Rock,East Jerusalem,Egypt,Equal Responsibility,Equal Rights,Equal Treatment,Equality,Europe,European Council,European Governments,European Union,Executive Order,Federica Mogherini,Forced Solution,Foreign Minister,France,Gaza,Government,Green Line,Hamas,Hamas Charter,Hate,History,Holy Sites,IDF,International Politics,Intifada,Islam,Islamic Jihad,Islamic Pressure,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Israeli Interests,Jehrico,Jenin,Jerusalem,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Home,Jewish Leadership,Jewish State,Jews,Jihad,Jihad,Jordan,Jordanian Pressure,Joseph’s Tomb,Joshua,Judea,Judean Hills,Kever Yosef,Kotel,Land for Peace,Leftist Pressures,Machpelah,Mahmoud Abbas,Mainstream Media,Media,Middle East,Mount of Olives Cemetary,Muslim Brotherhood,Muslim World,Muslims,Naqba,Netanyahu,Old City,One State Solution,Oslo Accords,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Palestinian Liberation Organization,Palestinian Pressures,Partition Plan,Peace Process,PLO,Politicized Findings,Politics,President Obama,Prime Minister,Prisoner Release,Promised Land,Protests,R2P Right to Protect,Rachel's Tomb,Recognize Israel,Refugees,Right of Return,Rock Throwing,Rocket Attacks,Russian Pressure,Samaria,Security,Settlements,Shechem,Six Day War,Statehood,Support Israel,Tel Aviv,Temple Mount,Terror,Third Intifada,Tomb of Rachel,Tomb of the Patriarchs,Two State Solution,United Nations,United Nations Presures,United States,Waqf,Western Wall,World Opinion,World Pressures,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 3:38 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

There is a high expectation that by the end of the week, if not today, the Jordanian delegation to the United Nations will use their seat on the Security Council to place into consideration the petition for a Chapter Seven Resolution establishing a Palestinian Arab state in Gaza, Judea and Samaria using the 1949 Armistice lines, often referred to as the pre-1967 war borders despite the Arab League refusal to recognize them as a border for the state of Israel, with East Jerusalem as its Capital City. According to Voice of Israel public radio, any unilateral declaration of independence is a violation of the Oslo Accords and that if it receives international support, this would render all diplomatic agreements as void. This week has been witness to another example of extreme folly by the United States with President Obama claiming not to have decided whether or not to use the United States veto to kill the Jordanian petition and Secretary of State Kerry making the rounds talking to numerous European leaders from numerous nations as well as the European Union and also both the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. The reasoning given by the leadership of the United States was that President Obama wished to get a feeling for how the European leadership was deciding to respond to the Jordanian request. There is also rumored that should the Jordanian resolution fail that the French are also drafting a resolution in a similar vein though particulars are quite sparse. There have been reports that part of Secretary Kerry’s actions this week was to attempt to get other Arab and Muslim leaders including from Saudi Arabia, Egypt and possibly Morocco or even others to make an effort to have Mahmoud Abbas, the leader of the PLO which is the Arab group representing the Palestinian Arabs presenting the request using Jordan, as they do not have membership permitting their direct ability to petition the Security Council, to cancel the request for Jordan to present the petition.

 

One has to wonder what the actual reasoning is behind President Obama’s actions, particularly deploying his Secretary of State to go basically begging Arab leaders to intervene and plead his case for Mahmoud Abbas to withdraw his demands being relayed through the Jordanian United Nations Ambassador and then seeking the positions and reasoning of numerous European and European Union leaders as well as meeting with the Israeli Prime Minister, whose position is unlikely to surprise anybody, and the Russian Foreign Minister getting their ideas and demands about the coming petitioning for United Nations action. All of this could have been avoided if only President Obama was willing to take a stand instead of attempting to gage if the Jordanian proposal was going to even pass a Security Council consideration. This is similar to President Obama’s actions once before when it appeared that Mahmoud Abbas was going to apply for the Security Council to force a solution on Israel by recognizing a state for Abbas and the Arab population he presumably represents and upon finding that that proposition would not pass that it allowed President Obama to abstain and not use the United States veto power thus not offending Mahmoud Abbas. All President Obama needed to do to prevent this entire fiasco from playing out was for him to pick up that phone he was so proud of when threatening to act unilaterally on immigration and other areas of contention in the Congress and call Mahmoud Abbas and simply tell him that the United States is going to veto any prospective placed before the Security Council so he was simply wasting his time and that of everybody else in pursuing a vote on his resolution. That simple act would have brought this wild insanity to an abrupt halt as Mahmoud Abbas probably does not desire a confrontation with the United States, one of the largest donors to the Palestinian Authority and to UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency). But instead President Obama is attempting to be allowed to simply vote as he had in the majority of legislative actions when he was a state Senator and voted ‘present’ instead of ever taking an actual stand.

 

One might wonder what might be the difference between the petition about to be presented by Jordan and the petition which the French are currently drafting. The obvious difference is the Jordanian petition is a known entity as its contents were made available earlier this week while the French petition is still a work in progress thus any estimations into its contents are simply guesses, even if they are reasoned out, that would only make them reasoned guesses. The Jordanian petition sets a two year timeline whereby Israel must pull all of the IDF (Israeli Defense Force) troops, Shin Bet and other intelligence units, police and all Jewish residents who have built homes and lives beyond the Green Line, the 1949 Armistice Lines. This petition would make November 2016 the expressed deadline that if made as a Chapter Seven mandatory Resolution from the Security Council would obligate the nations of the world and especially the five permanent nations of the Security Council, United States, Russia, Britain, France and China, to provide military forces to apply the stipulation of the Resolution by force. This would place the United States, amongst the other nations, up front and center in providing troops to enter Judea and Samaria and even potentially Gaza and in the name of protecting the new Arab state with Mahmoud Abbas as their President for Life holding power enforced by the armies of the world. These forces would be charged with assuring that Israel refrain from any actions which could be determined as potentially harmful to the Arab state forced into fruition by the collective armies of the world who would occupy these new lands and enforce their will upon Israel.

 

Such a situation would permit the Arabs in Judea and Samaria to launch rockets down onto Tel Aviv and the rest of central Israel onto the most heavily built areas in Israel with complete impunity as Israel would be powerless to take any preventive measures. The Israelis would be blocked from entering Judea and Samaria even to arrest a known rocket scientist who was developing and assisting in building, aiming and firing these rockets. The same would apply to Gaza which is inhabited and basically ruled by Hamas and Islamic Jihad, both organizations very similar to ISIS, especially Hamas whose Charter instructs them to strike down the disbeliever wherever you should see them and to lay in ambush and terrorize them, and to beat that, their Hamas Charter includes language calling for the extermination worldwide of all Jews and afterwards setting up the caliphate over the world using the United States arsenal of weapons including nuclear weaponry. The existence of American troops as well as European troops, Russian troops, Chinese troops standing to enforce the borders of Judea and Samaria and guarding the Western Wall, Kever Yosef, Kever Rebecca and the Cave of Machpelah (Cave of the Patriarchs) and most notably the Temple Mount itself, places all within Arab territory thus placing them beyond the reach of every last Jew in the world and reserving all of them to the not so tender mercies of the Islam.

 

Of course, like any of this would really matter once the world has lined up opposing Israel and backing the terrorists and granting these terrorists a launching platform defended by the armies of the world from which to launch their rockets with impunity. Then we need to ask how these troops stationed within these terror-filled areas will react when those terrorists begin to launch attacks on Israeli civilians. Should they actually attempt to carry out the entirety of their mission and with honest efforts to shut down such attacks over the border targeting Israel acting as real peacekeepers? I have a difficult time even visualizing such a construct but I can easily define the acts should such an attempt at interfering with the terrorists be tried. The result would be roadside bombs, suicide bombers and other manners of traps, ambushes and attacks placing the soldiers who took the fateful steps of attempting to prevent Arab assaults on Israel as prime targets for the terrorists until they made the appropriate mea-culpa and stood down from any further attempts at preventing the barrages on Israel. Eventually, Israel would absolutely have no alternative but to respond to the opposition forces protecting the terrorists and enter the territories and arrest those they knew were responsible for launching rockets into Israel. Would these foreign troops then stand to prevent the IDF entering Arab lands to destroy the production factories and terror related structures, reducing their threats posed to Israelis? Would the forces placed within the Arab state by the United Nations then become part and parcel of the Arab army facing off against the Israeli forces? Just such a scenario would become reality and this is something which nations would need to address before sending troops into such a potentially charged situation. These troops would require special mission statement clearly stating what actions they could expect to have their home country sanction and what would be the limits that they could act upon and interfere.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

April 17, 2013

Another Visit to the Liberty vs. Security Debate

No article on this subject can avoid quoting one of the numerous variations on the Benjamin Franklin quote where he said something close to these reputed words, “People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” Often simply quoting Ben Franklin is enough to consider the discussion closed, but where does one draw the line allowing for the most amounts of freedoms and liberties while also ensuring comfortable levels of security. This is where the normal discussion debates the different segments which governments utilize in order to provide security and in this information and computerized age the line can be crucial and must not be drawn with any lack of clarity. The advent of miniaturization, high powered optics, computerized facial recognition software, super-sensitive microphones, spy satellites capable of reading newsprint from orbit, thermal imaging which can “see” through walls, laser sound detectors which can monitor conversations in a room by measuring the slightest vibrations of the glass in a window, abilities to activate cell phones in order to use the camera and microphone to monitor the room were the phone sits, electronic data surveillance capabilities and processing with untold capabilities, universal electronic monitoring capabilities, and other items which easily have the ability to make privacy a quaint old idea whose time has long passed. The majority of the capabilities mentioned above have existed and been utilized by the majority of governments in the industrial world since the middle 1980s or the early 1990s at the latest. The capabilities available to current government agencies leave the citizenry absolutely no place to hide and their lack of knowledge of any person of interest that is being monitored could only be explained by human error. For those who might propose that there are limits on the government spying on their own citizens, I am happy to report that you are correct in your belief that laws guard the individual against unofficial warrantless searches and data gathering. Unfortunately, for quite a while now there has been a treaty between the English speaking nations of Canada, Britain, United States and Australia concerning this problem. By this treaty a list of persons of interest from each country is presented to the other nations who in turn request surveillance on these individuals of their home country by one or more of the other countries. Often each of the member countries would request different set of requests thus should one request be discovered the rest of the investigation would remain undisturbed. The home country then collects the information and passes the raw data which is processed by the foreign nation. Once the data has been organized and processed it is returned to the home country which wished to observe one of their citizens.

The one reassuring item is the ability that governments have displayed for incompetence and missing the forest for the trees. I would not want my privacy or worse to depend on the government’s incompetence but with the investigatory powers available to the government with all the modern data processing and state of the art sensors, no individual is beyond the government’s ability to be able to tell you all of your most guarded secrets and even the smallest of facts no matter how mundane and inconsequential. With all the technical abilities available to law enforcement and intelligence agencies it is remarkable that any crime is able to be committed without the authorities lying in wait before the crime has been committed and nabbing the lawbreaker in the midst of the crime. About the only thing lacking for the government to attempt to emulate the movie “Minority Report” are the psychics wired up to a computer in the basement of the FBI future crimes division. The government is currently gathering agreements with credit card companies, banks, credit unions, communications companies, utility providers and so much more to get them to allow the government to splice into their data banks and use all the data they have gathered on anybody without any need to bother any officials for permission. This includes the coming smart meters measuring electricity and in the near future smart grid appliances which will be capable of reporting each individual appliance and its use of power. This will also allow remote control of these appliances, remote setting of thermostats on heating and airconditioning units, even recording the number of times the power to the refrigerator increased by the small amount that turning on the light causes when you open the door. So many items which were purely science fiction a few decades ago are now or soon to be possible to government in order to inspect every tiny bit of minutia concerning your life.

Benjamin Franklin would become apoplectic if he was transported to our modern world. Once he realized the powers to intrude into the citizens’ private life by government he would likely turn hermit and remove all electronic devices from his residence. Paranoid delusions would be the likely psychological diagnosis of Ben Franklin’s mental breakdown as he was taken away babbling something about liberty has died in his dear loved country of America. The debate of how much liberty or freedoms we might compromise upon to grant government the necessary powers to make us more safe is mute and no longer necessary. We no longer have any liberties or freedoms against government interference and monitoring of every iota of our existences to trade away for security. The real problem is that even with total knowledge at their fingertips the government is still incapable of providing us with absolute security. Yesterday’s bombing in Boston stands as a case in point. About the only power the government does not possess is to be able to read your mind and know your intent, though there is a partnership between the government and Google working on understanding how the mind thinks and developing AI (Artificial Intelligence) where the government will permit Google complete access to the vast majority of their collected data collected by government agencies such as the IRS, Census Bureau, and many others at all levels of government, Federal, State, County, Township and City. They are gaining permission from all levels of governments around the nation with promises of providing better services and other benefits from this research. The amounts of data mining being accomplished by government at all levels is beyond imagination and the lack of security in our persons, houses, papers, and effects has dwindled out of existence and with it our rights as guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment which reads;

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Liberties and Freedoms as envisioned by the Founding Fathers have evaporated before the heat of advancing technologies. There is virtually nothing which can be considered beyond the government’s ability to know if they are persistent and bring all of their capabilities to bear. The only hopes we have is to retain our protections against having such information from being used against us in a court of law. Beyond that we are likely fighting a losing battle. Our hopes for security of our privacy are now relegated to the whims of government bureaucrats and the officers of the government. Should this make you feel uneasy and raise your levels of concern then you probably have a desire to some level of privacy from the encroaching eyes, ears and sensors of government. It is not so much that we the people have surrendered our liberties, freedoms, and privacies as much as it is the government’s power to compromise these rights have become overtly formidable. How we regain the upper hand in this struggle is beyond me but that does not mean it is not an effort worth taking. If we can rescue even the slightest measure of our eviscerated privacies then any effort expended was worth the struggle.

Beyond the Cusp

« Previous Page

Blog at WordPress.com.