4 Days to go: 20 January 2025

 

Whether the Knesset ratifies any ceasefire remains to be seen. President Biden wanted to close his time in office with some big news, but premeditated Jewish delays are already threatening the supposed ceasefire deal as 70 Palestinians are murdered by Israel in the last few hours.

Everybody is expecting big changes in national and international politics. Panama Canal built by USA to be controlled by USA. Another USA State or more than one new USA States? And when you talk about the Gulf, it might not be about Middle East or Asia Minor but closer to home as the Gulf of Mexico becomes the Gulf of America.

Will Keir Starmer, Zelensky and Ursula von der Leyen be invited to the inauguration of the new American President? Another bit of 'let's wait and see'. Will the now British Foreign Secretary that has repeatedly insulted President Donald Trump be invited to the ceremonial and very formal occasion?

We know that happened to Governor Trudeau that soonafter a meeting with President Trump was given his marching orders. Will other politicians be given their marching orders? Again, let's wait and see. In Germany, a Federal Election can dramatically change the political environment in Germany and in France the new Prime Minister is fighting for his survival and being threatened with a no confidence vote. Will he last until July 2025 when new French Assembly Elections can take place.

And in Britain, Keir Starmer is losing cabinet members as trees lose leaves in the autumn. Will Rachel Reeves remain in her post? Let's see what she can come up with in the new budget. Although inflation is said to have fallen, the fall has nothing to do with announced financial measures that will only come into effect in April 2025. Let's see what happens to inflation after April 2025 when the real picture of the British economy will come to the surface. 

Going into Afghanistan in 2001 was an act of madness. Leaving in 2021 after 20 years of occupation was another act of madness.

 

Osama bin Laden was the reason George Bush and Tony Blair gave as justification to go, bomb and invade a country of more than 38 million people.

They went in like Bomber Harris, bombing, bombing and bombing indiscriminately because they wanted to kill Osama bin Laden.

Imagine if we were to bomb Mexico, Colombia, Bolivia or any other country because we wanted to flush out a group of narco-traffickers.

And the world watched the so called War on Terror that became a war against the people of Afghanistan, most of who had nothing to do with Osama bin Laden and AlQaeda. From the war on terror, we went into the Nation Building Approach with talk about a promising future of the people of Afghanistan with social developments including education. 

Now, Joe Biden has put an end to social developments and education and replaced them with another war in which Taliban is going against its own people to turn the clock back and the number of casualties to whom promises were made about a brilliant future. Those who dared to believe in a promising future are being stabbed in the back by President Joe Biden. 

As soon as Western troops started to pull out the slaughter began.

Palestine never existed as a state, but as territories of other states

 

Regardless of the judgement of the International Court of Justice, there never was a State of Palestine. There were territories that belonged to other states that went to war against Israel and having lost wars against Israel they lost part of the lands that they controlled. Talking about war crimes is an idiocy. The said wars happened a long time ago and for decades lands taken from Arab states have been controlled by Israel.

The Organisation of the United Nations has no right to go around telling what can be done or cannot be done. It can only make statements that more often than not are no more than empty words because reality on the ground takes precedence. Any settlement can only be kept or changed by force and force is something that the Organisation of the United Nations doesn't have. Whether the rest of the world likes it or not, the Golan Heights - for example - are part of the State of Israel having belonged in the past to Syria. The sames goes for Gaza and West Bank. In a treaty signed by Israel and Egypt, the Sinai Peninsula was recovered by Egypt. 

Whether the rest of the world accepts Jerusalem as capital of Israel is irrelevant. Who controls Jerusalem? Israel. Therefore, the logical conclusion is that as long as Jerusalem is controlled by Israel and is an integral part of the State of Israel whatever the world says about it will not change an iota. All the talk about Jerusalem being an international city is bollocks.

World history is full of 'this belongs to me and this belongs to you'. Looking at the map of Europe itself, national borders have changed after a series of conflicts. The Europe of Metternich is a clear example. Looking at the map of the Americas much of a similar nature can be said. Much of the south of today's United States are occupied territories. They used to belong to Mexico and to other countries including Spain. The Louisiana was bought from France. 

The Six-Day War was a time of territorial acquisitions for Israel. Egypt, Syria and others waged war against Israel and lost. Their intention had been to wipe out of the recently formed State of Israel. So, they lost. Bad luck. Are they called 'occupied territories' because Syria and others didn't sign a peace treaty with Israel? Well, for all we know, for decades the attackers have not been at war with Israel and this led to a status quo. With peace settlements or without peace settlements, the reality on the ground is that for decades acquired territories have been under Israeli rule and wil presumably be under Israeli rule for the foreseable future.

There is an unhealthy war of words that is not conducive to peaceful coexistence. If the rest of the world were to be treated according to the same standards Israel is measured with, there wouldn't be peace anywhere. European countries would be at war with each other trying to recover 'occupied territories'. Is it about Danzig and Memel or Gdansk? What about huge chunks of Germany given to Poland and others? What about parts of Italy and Austria that are now part of neighboring countries? What about the status of Baltic Republics? Are we going to suddenly start ignoring reality?

I heard a Member of the House of Lords talk about what is happening today in the Soviet Union. Really? Apparently the noble Lord is not aware of the fact that the Soviet Union came to an end in 1991. It is all too good to talk about the UN Plan for the partition of Palestine, but it is useless talk. 

Much of what Western politicians talk via mass media is sheer nonsense when it comes to geopolitics. Just a few days ago, there was a military coup in Myanmar (Burma). Suddenly, we heard them talking about taking action against the military in Burma. They talk as if they owned Burma which, of course, they don't. Burma, apart from being a sovereign nation is a sovereign nation with close ties with China. China and some European countries have huge economic interests in Burma. The UN, the USA, or whoever else, can protest about the status of Muslim minorities in Burma until they become red in the face. Nothing is going to change.

In the meantime, those who pretend to have a say about what is happening elsewhere should pay closer attention to what is actually happening in their own countries. 

 

 

President Donald Trump: Some pluses along the way

President Donald Trump: Some pluses along the way

I was one of those who criticised US involvement in Syria that I saw as counterproductive because it meant an illegal intervention in the sovereign territory of another country that would also delay the resolution of a very bloody conflict. Supporting rebels and targeting government forces that were trying to restore control could only benefit Islamic State-linked guerrillas.

The news that the US is reducing or ceasing its operations in Syria is welcomed news because it allows the administration to focus on vital issues. 

North Korea had been a constant concern. The increasing number of missile launches with rockets that reached as far as Japan was a major issue that had to be resolved. President Trump not only managed to persuade North Korea to stop missile launches. It also managed to open the way to create goodwill between the two sides in the conflict in the Korean Peninsula and cancelled a vast expenditure item in the US Defence budget by getting rid of annual military exercises in the region.

The building of a wall to prevent illegal immigration is a fundamental step in terms of National Security. Legal immigration is allowed but the closing of gates that allow regular passage of illegals and drugs is an absolute necessity. In a budget measured in trillions of Dollars, 5 billion Dollars is just peanuts to deal with a very serious problem.

I might disagree with other items of US Foreign Policy, but I totally agree and I fully support measures to support a peaceful way in the Korean Peninsula, a reduction of US intervention in Syria and the construction of the wall for very valid reasons including National Security. Illegal immigration, drugs and other forms of criminality associated with drugs are extremely serious matters.

President Donald Trump is not closed for business. Quite the opposite. He hasn't closed the door to other countries in the Americas. A new deal with Mexico and Canada will be beneficial for all those involved. Asking for fairness is not extreme. 

With regards to Britain, the EU and the relationship with the USA, it is fair to say that taxes applied on US imports are absolutely unfair. Why should an American car be taxed more than an EU made car? Many in the EU talk against protectionism when the EU is nothing more than a gigantic protectionist block that not only damages the US economy but also the economies of many Developing Countries. The anomaly is such that Britain is applying EU Tariffs on products that Britain needs and doesn't produce. Asking for fairness, once again, is not extreme.

Is somebody in the Democratic Party launching pretend attacks to get votes in Mid-Term Elections?

Democrats using false attacks to boots their electoral chances?

From false accusations about sexual abuse to distortion and fabrication implicating prostitutes, Democrats have used practically every tool to revive their electoral chances. They even have public figures openly inciting violence against President Trump and President Trump's supporters.

Looking at the record of attacks against Democratic politicians - John Kennedy was shot. Robert Kennedy was shot - it seems unlikely that somebody actually willing and wanting to cause lethal damage would use improvised devices that don't explode nor cause any damage. The said devices are not only sent to politicians but also to well-known personalities aka celebrities that have been critical against President Trump. Therefore, this looks very much like a false flag, a well organised publicity campaign. If the Democratic Party has to resort to such underhanded and infantile tactics to win votes, the Democratic Party is not fit for purpose.

The big item in the news is a march of people trying to enter the United States of America illegally. Who would you trust when the time comes to prevent illegal immigrants from entering the USA? Would you trust Democratic politicians to prevent an invasion? The record of the Democratic Party in recent years will show that they would leave the gates wide open. Where are the said illegal immigrants coming from? They have come across Central America and will try and enter the USA via Mexico, a country that has entire areas that are run by Drug Cartels that not only deal with drugs but also exploit people form as far as India that pay vast amounts of money to be trafficked illegally to the USA. Which party has openly opposed  a boost of US border controls? The Democratic Party. "Don't build that Wall, President Trump. Allow drug-traffickers and illegal immigrants to enter the USA freely and without any worries".

    

BBC shows report indicating that illegal immigration is run by drug cartels as a business

BBC shows report that indicates that illegal immigration is now a business for drug cartels operating worldwide

None other than the BBC produced a report indicating that illegal immigration is now a lucrative business for drug cartels operating worldwide. As drug cartels feel the heat of the fight against drug trafficking they are diversifying their activities engaging in making money out of illegal immigrants from very remote areas of the planet. What is even more gruesome is the fact that those who fall ill along the way are often executed by drug-traffickers and women are routinely raped.

Human beings are now the new commodity of organised crime that seeks to exploit those who are ready and willing to take any risks in search of what they think is going to be a better future and often end up dead and buried along the way.

For the sake of saving human lives, the time is long overdue to put an end to Political Correctness because Political Correctness is killing people. This is a new kind of terrorism that must be countered worldwide with all available resources.

The business of Illegal immigration is a danger to all civilised societies, regardless of political affiliation, regardless of religion, regardless of nationality, and regardless of race.It is an absolute disgrace. Those involved in this kind of trade should face trial for Crimes against Humanity.

USA illegal migration driven by loving parents?

Do loving parents put the lives of the children in the hands of people traffickers and send them across the boarders of a foreign country?

The British Prime Minister Theresa May has been quick to condemn the actions of the American government that tries to prevent illegal immigration and some British mass media have jumped on the bandwagon criticising President Donald Trump.

Now let's look at the facts. When unaccompanied children cross the border entering another country illegally the parents of the said children are very much responsible. Would a loving parent put the lives of their children in danger by sending them into the unknown to potentially face the danger of being sexually abused or even killed?

The Mexican government should take legal action against the parents of the said children because the parents are abandoning their children by putting them in the hands of strangers that turn them into illegal immigrants.

The Mexican government should put the said parents in jail and use its Armed Forces to secure Mexican borders and arrest criminals who are benefiting from illegal immigration.