I have already written about how I believe Israel may have bloodied Hamas' nose but in the end I believe the events that led to the cease fire enhanced Hamas' diplomatic standing. I further believe Israel will regret the U.N. vote and Netanyahu should have done more to make Obama stop it from happening. (See 1 below.)
---
Our son and daughter in law's Sweet Tammy's, after years of hard work, long hours and much frustration, appear to have finally broken through and are beginning to establish their brand beyond their current marketing area of Pa. and Ohio.
This is a comment made about one of their products when they set up a booth at a recent national distributorship event: "Sweet Tammy’s. Artisanal Breads and Pastries. Delicious, couldn’t possibly get closer to homemade, dairy-free and natural. Their booth was mobbed. I do hope they follow several admirers’ advice (including mine) to make their cookies smaller, so we can enjoy them more often. http://www.sweet-tammys.com/"
They will soon have their new web page re-established for on-line ordering.
---
Hostess Bakery plants shut down Friday the result of a union strike idling some 18,000 workers.The Obama administration will hire most all of these displaced employees. The State Department will hire the Twinkies, the Secret Service the Ho Hos, the generals will sleep with the Cupcakes and all the Ding Dongs are going to Congress.
---
Listen to Bill Whittle: http://www.ijreview.com/2012/11/23073-bill-whittle-what-a-conservative-candidate-sounds-like/
---
American influence is now either ignored or not used effectively. Obama and his incompetents have seen to that rather effectively.
Historical events are often conveniently forgotten. (See 2 and 2a below.)
---
Obama continues to be more interested in political strategizing and maneuvering than solving the fiscal problem.
Quote of Cicero's: "The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed, lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work instead of living on public assistance." - Cicero , 55 BC (See 3 and 3a below.)
---
Dick
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1)
Gaza Contradictions Into 2013
By Yisrael Ne'eman
Now that the eight day "Pillar of Defense" operation is over once again Hamas, Israel and the Middle East find themselves facing multiple contradictions on two levels, one as concerns international diplomacy and the second when relating to bilateral Palestinian-Israeli relations (more about this in the next article). Most blatant is the move by Fatah's Abu Mazen for international recognition of non-member state status in the United Nations to be presented today, November 29th, exactly 65 years after the vote on the UN Partition Plan in support of the two-state solution, one Arab and one Jewish. The Arab bloc voted against the resolution in 1947.
The Americans and Europeans are pro-Fatah, support Abu Mazen and stand behind the two state solution. Interestingly Hamas opposes the Fatah move at the UN because it implies recognition of Israel. At best they favor a temporary two state arrangement as a step by step process for Israel's elimination. For Hamas such a move is anathema since it is seen as legitimizing non-Islamic (Jewish) territorial control over waqf lands in the Middle East. Any and all such negotiations and compromises are condemned in Articles 11, 13, and 32 of theHamas Covenant. Israel also opposes the Palestinian Authority bid for non-member state status believing it must be achieved through direct negotiations between Ramallah and Jerusalem. Rather amusing but Israel and Hamas find themselves on the same side but for totally different reasons. Hamas demands Israel's destruction and will not tolerate any compromise while Israel wants a directly negotiated settlement with the PA, not one imposed through international diplomacy.
Back to Gaza we see the two non-Arab Middle Eastern powers Iran and Turkey vying for influence in a mini-battle for power. The Turks as Sunnis appear to have the upper hand. Egypt as the Arab world's most populous nation and the only one bordering Gaza claims an even greater stake in the territory, especially since the Jihadi activists in the Sinai Peninsula both influence and are impacted by events in the Strip. Furthermore the Egyptian – Turkish rivalry for control in the Arab world has continued on and off over some 200 years since Mahmet Ali challenged the Ottomans. Yet, supposedly everyone is "on the same side". In truth international rivalries inside the Gaza Strip are continuing and intensifying.
Along the 14 kilometer Rafiah land border the Gaza blockade is Egyptian, yet few remember this most important fact. Israel supplies fuel, water and basic foodstuffs according to agreement from her side of the frontier into the Strip. At times this supply line is disrupted by Islamic terrorists, including Hamas. Even President Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood dominated Egypt does not want to be drawn into a clash with Israel, at least for the time being. On the other hand Hamas actions in Gaza appear far too radical even if ideologically they are in line with Egyptian Brotherhood doctrine. Hamas is heavily influenced by the Salafists and even Al-Qaeda who believe in continual Jihad against Israel. Morsi and those more centrist types in the Brotherhood fear being outmaneuvered at home and losing power to the extremists. The Salafists did get 25% of the overall vote in the Egyptian elections of 2011 – 2012. Lest one forget Islamism in the Palestinian arena set the inspirational tone for the other wings of the Muslim Brotherhood, including Egypt. Further radicalization in Gaza can easily spread to Cairo and Morsi will be outflanked to the right.
What is most contradictory here is that despite all efforts by everyone trade and military contraband between Gaza, Sinai, Iran and terror organizations continues to flourish through the hundreds of tunnels passing under the border. Economic and military pressure on Gaza will only work if the tunnels are destroyed, and no one wants to take that task.
Egypt is seen as having brokered the Hamas-Israel cease-fire in the name of US and Western interests. The Egyptian army is financially dependent on the Americans for billions of dollars in aid. Egypt did America's (and Israel's) bidding and those in power may be forced to pay the price or outmaneuver the West to save their own rule. Morsi's American tango will backfire if he does not move swiftly to erase any images of being a Western lackey, a definition the Salafists/Al Qaeda could certainly adopt. Halting the right wing fanatics can only be done by further consolidating power and this can only be accomplished by eradicating any vestiges of the previous Mubarak secular dictatorship. Better yet the liberal democratic activist elements most responsible for sparking the revolution can be repressed simultaneously. First Morsi reigned in the military and now he is overriding the Mubarak era secular judiciary. Morsi and the Brotherhood claim such concentration of power is necessary to ensure future democratization of Egypt. In reality he is crushing all secular opposition, whether of the Mubarak shade or the liberal democratic type. Here the Salafists are appeased, at least for the meantime. The Pillar of Strength operation acted as a catalyst for an inevitable process whereby the Brotherhood conquers the center in the post revolutionary era, unless of course the right wing rises and overthrows the regime. The liberal democrats do not stand a chance. The Salafists on the other hand may be absorbed within the ruling Brotherhood framework, at least in part, as the regime moves towards a Sharia legal system.
So where does this leave the West? Political diplomatic realism demands continued support of Egypt provided the Gaza-Sinai border with Israel remains quiet. At best this can work for a few years. Paradoxically, US/European gratitude will allow for the destruction of liberal democratic forces in Egypt.
The Pillar of Strength operation has ramifications well beyond the immediate Israel-Hamas issues. Such matters will be discussed in the next article.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
By Rick Richman
Back in 2005, after Israel removed every soldier and settler from Gaza, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas announced that “from this day forward, there will be no security turmoil and weapons chaos and abductions, which are not characteristic of our culture.” He proved a poor prognosticator regarding Palestinian culture: given the chance to live “side by side in peace and security” with Israel, the Palestinians demonstrated they could not do so even with themselves.
Abbas was expelled from Gaza in 2007; there have been no parliamentary or presidential elections since 2006; no functioning Palestinian legislature exists; Abbas is entering the 95th month of his 48-month term; he cannot set foot in half of his purported state (in the words of Israel’s UN ambassador, he cannot even see it with binoculars); he has refused to negotiate with Israel for more than four years; he demands recognition of a Palestinian state while refusing to recognize a Jewish one; and he now seeks admission to the UN as a non-member state even though “Palestine” meets none of the four requirements under international law for a state.
Under the Montevideo Convention (1933), a state “should possess the following qualifications”: (1) a defined territory; (2) a government; (3) capacity to enter into relations with the other states; and (4) a permanent population. “Palestine” lacks a “defined territory.” A “defined territory” cannot include an area whose status and borders can only be defined, under longstanding international agreements, by negotiations….
“Palestine” lacks a “government.” It is ruled half by a terrorist group and half by an unelected administrative entity. Its last election occurred nearly seven years ago, and it has no capacity (much less inclination) to hold a new one. The government of each half considers the government of the other half illegitimate, and both are correct: one regime took power by a coup, and the other remains in power four years after its term expired….
“Palestine” lacks the “capacity to enter into relations with the other states.” Abbas has no capacity to bind the rulers of Gaza, nor even to implement his own commitments in the area in which he can at least set foot. While in office, he failed to implement his prior obligations, including Phase I of the Roadmap (which mandated the dismantling of Hamas and other terrorist groups), and he is currently an unelected official, unrecognized by half his putative state, with no capacity to bind “Palestine” to anything.
“Palestine” lacks a “permanent population.” Most of the population considers themselves not putative citizens of a new state but perennial “refugees”…who reject any suggestion they should form the permanent population of a new state. They consider themselves instead to be temporary residents (and UNRWA, the UN agency devoted to caring for them, is legally a “temporary” UN body) who seek to “return” to a different state, not to be permanent residents where they currently live.
When you refuse to negotiate a defined territory;… when you lack a government that controls your purported territory;…when you lack the capacity to enter into relations with other states;…when you have residents who reject permanent residence and assert instead a “right” to “return” to another state, you meet none of the requirements for a state.
The irony is that between 2000 and 2008, the Palestinians received three formal offers of a state, and rejected them all…. Now one group of Palestinians seeks UN recognition as a “non-member state,” when they fail to qualify as a state at all, and they ignore the fact they could already have been a member-state three times over (or more), had they simply said yes….
Once again, “Palestine” is all set to be a failed state, no more ready for statehood than it was a year ago. Article 10 of the Montevideo Convention provides that the “primary interests of states is the conservation of peace.” The Palestinian gambit at the UN is not intended to produce peace, but to provide a platform for law-fare. It will do nothing to bring the Palestinians closer to the state they could have had long ago, if a state were really what they wanted, and it will in fact put peace further away.
Abbas was expelled from Gaza in 2007; there have been no parliamentary or presidential elections since 2006; no functioning Palestinian legislature exists; Abbas is entering the 95th month of his 48-month term; he cannot set foot in half of his purported state (in the words of Israel’s UN ambassador, he cannot even see it with binoculars); he has refused to negotiate with Israel for more than four years; he demands recognition of a Palestinian state while refusing to recognize a Jewish one; and he now seeks admission to the UN as a non-member state even though “Palestine” meets none of the four requirements under international law for a state.
Under the Montevideo Convention (1933), a state “should possess the following qualifications”: (1) a defined territory; (2) a government; (3) capacity to enter into relations with the other states; and (4) a permanent population. “Palestine” lacks a “defined territory.” A “defined territory” cannot include an area whose status and borders can only be defined, under longstanding international agreements, by negotiations….
“Palestine” lacks a “government.” It is ruled half by a terrorist group and half by an unelected administrative entity. Its last election occurred nearly seven years ago, and it has no capacity (much less inclination) to hold a new one. The government of each half considers the government of the other half illegitimate, and both are correct: one regime took power by a coup, and the other remains in power four years after its term expired….
“Palestine” lacks the “capacity to enter into relations with the other states.” Abbas has no capacity to bind the rulers of Gaza, nor even to implement his own commitments in the area in which he can at least set foot. While in office, he failed to implement his prior obligations, including Phase I of the Roadmap (which mandated the dismantling of Hamas and other terrorist groups), and he is currently an unelected official, unrecognized by half his putative state, with no capacity to bind “Palestine” to anything.
“Palestine” lacks a “permanent population.” Most of the population considers themselves not putative citizens of a new state but perennial “refugees”…who reject any suggestion they should form the permanent population of a new state. They consider themselves instead to be temporary residents (and UNRWA, the UN agency devoted to caring for them, is legally a “temporary” UN body) who seek to “return” to a different state, not to be permanent residents where they currently live.
When you refuse to negotiate a defined territory;… when you lack a government that controls your purported territory;…when you lack the capacity to enter into relations with other states;…when you have residents who reject permanent residence and assert instead a “right” to “return” to another state, you meet none of the requirements for a state.
The irony is that between 2000 and 2008, the Palestinians received three formal offers of a state, and rejected them all…. Now one group of Palestinians seeks UN recognition as a “non-member state,” when they fail to qualify as a state at all, and they ignore the fact they could already have been a member-state three times over (or more), had they simply said yes….
Once again, “Palestine” is all set to be a failed state, no more ready for statehood than it was a year ago. Article 10 of the Montevideo Convention provides that the “primary interests of states is the conservation of peace.” The Palestinian gambit at the UN is not intended to produce peace, but to provide a platform for law-fare. It will do nothing to bring the Palestinians closer to the state they could have had long ago, if a state were really what they wanted, and it will in fact put peace further away.
2a)Palestinian Islamic Jihad Leader Promises "Savage Round" of Fighting
by John Rossomando
A leader of the third-largest Palestinian faction told the Egyptian newspaper El-Balad Thursday that the truce with Israel will be brief and that Palestinians are braced for a "more savage and bloody round" of fighting with Israel.
"We are preparing for a new, more savage round," Dr. Mohammed Al-Hindi, a leading Palestinian Islamic Jihad figure told the newspaper. "We are in a short truce (hudna), the Israeli enemy is preparing for further rounds of war in Gaza."
The "resistance factions" must be prepared for the next battle, which will be more violent and "start the curve of the collapse of the Israeli occupation," Al-Hindi said Wednesday night at a ceremony honoring journalists working in the Gaza Strip.... read more: http://www.investigativeproject.org/3829/palestinian-islamic-jihad-leader-promises-savage
----------------------------------------------------------------3)GOP Rejects Obama Offer of $1.6 Trillion Tax Increase
Congressional Republicans dug in to fight President Barack Obama’s plan to skirt the fiscal cliff, rejecting his tax-and-spending proposal as the president heads out today to sell it to the American public.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner shuttled among congressional leaders yesterday with a plan to trade $1.6 trillion in tax increases for $400 billion in unspecified entitlement program cuts, Republican congressional aides said.
Republicans complained that the offer was little more than a rehash of old budget proposals, setting the stage for more contentious negotiations over the next several weeks as the year-end deadline approaches for more than $600 billion in spending cuts and tax increases to kick in.
“If the president is going to lead on this critical issue, he has to propose a plan that can actually pass,” said Republican Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri. “This is simply not a serious proposal.”
Obama today is scheduled to visit a manufacturing plant in Hatfield, Pennsylvania, about 33 miles north of Philadelphia, to emphasize his call for an extension of George W. Bush-era tax rates for middle-income households. He is using the approach of the holidays to argue that families will curb spending if they don’t know whether they will have to pay more taxes next year.
Angry Birds
The president is going to a facility of the Rodon Group, which is the only U.S. manufacturer of K’NEX Brands, which makes Tinkertoys, K’NEX Building Sets and Angry Birds Building Sets. The company also produces plastic parts for the construction and pharmaceutical industries.
The fiscal plan presented by Geithner yesterday was modeled on Obama’s budget proposal from February and includes at least $50 billion in economic stimulus spending for this fiscal year, according to the aides. It would permanently increase the U.S. debt limit to avoid the need for congressional action, said one of the aides, who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly.
Geithner met separately with each of the top four leaders in Congress in their first direct talks since Obama hosted the leaders Nov. 16 at the White House.
Obama and congressional Democrats have insisted that the Bush tax cuts should be allowed to expire at the end of this year for the top 2 percent of taxpayers. The tax cuts should be extended for middle-class taxpayers, they contend.
Entitlement Programs
Republicans reject higher tax rates for all income levels. They are seeking an overhaul of entitlement programs in exchange for raising tax revenue through other methods, such as limiting deductions. They want a higher Medicare eligibility age and an alternative yardstick for calculating inflation that would reduce Social Security cost-of-living adjustments, according to a Republican aide who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly.
The administration has been consistent about its plans during the campaign and after the Nov. 6 election, said Senator Barbara Mikulski, a Maryland Democrat.
“The voters knew what the president was saying,” Mikulski said. “They voted for the president. The election’s over. Let’s get on with it.”
Geithner’s offer, as described by two Republican aides, is based on Obama’s fiscal 2013 budget and his 2011 proposal to the deficit-cutting supercommittee, which last year didn’t come up with a plan all sides could accept.
Top Earners
It would raise taxes for top earners by $1.6 trillion over the next decade with higher rates on income, capital gains, dividends and estates, along with limits on tax breaks. It would call for about $400 billion in cuts to entitlement programs, which Republicans have deemed insufficient.
The plan would either extend or replace a payroll tax cut that is set to expire at the end of the year, according to the Republican aides. It would protect millions more people from having to pay the alternative-minimum tax and defer by a year the federal spending cuts set to start taking effect in January.
The administration hasn’t taken a public position on the extension of the payroll tax cut, which reduces employees’ share of the tax for Social Security to 4.2 percent from 6.2 percent. The current break, which started in 2011, expires Dec. 31.
Geithner said in a Nov. 16 Bloomberg Television interview that the U.S. should abolish the debt ceiling, arguing that it enabled the threat of default in 2011. “The sooner the better,” he said. Republicans have used previous debates over increasing the debt limit to hold out for policy changes.
Infrastructure Spending
The proposal seeks infrastructure spending similar to what Obama proposed in September 2011 in his American Jobs Act, which included $50 billion for roads, rails and airports and $30 billion for schools.
The Congressional Budget Office has warned that if Congress doesn’t avert the fiscal cliff, the economy might slip into recession next year and boost the unemployment rate to 9.1 percent in the fourth quarter of 2013, compared with 7.9 percent now.
House Speaker John Boehner, while urging Obama yesterday to propose “serious spending cuts,” avoided publicly discussing specific options for a budget deal. The speaker wouldn’t say how large a spending cut he seeks for an agreement by year’s end.
It’s not “productive for either side to lay out hard lines” because “there are a lot of options of how to get there,” said Boehner, an Ohio Republican.
‘Waiting Game’
Boehner “knows that part of it is a waiting game until the pressure builds to where there is decision,” said Republican Representative Steve King of Iowa. “Barack Obama and John Boehner in the end are going to offer something back here.”
At a briefing yesterday, White House press secretary Jay Carney responded to questions about Republican complaints that the administration wasn’t offering specifics by holding up a proposal Obama presented in September 2011.
Carney said the plan “is very detailed” in how the White House would make cuts and “It is of a piece with his budget that he put forward in February 2012.”
The place where details are missing is “anything specific, politically feasible, or substantial from the Republican side on revenues,” Carney said.
The administration and Democrats say tax rate increases are necessary because deduction caps won’t generate enough money, especially if they are designed to protect charitable contributions and to avoid affecting 98 percent of taxpayers.
A $25,000 cap on deductions with those features would raise about $450 billion over 10 years, less than one-third of what the administration wants, according to a blog post on the White House website by administration economists Gene Sperling and Jason Furman. Keeping tax rates constant would make it more difficult to overhaul the tax code in the future, they said.
That would require any future tax overhaul “to raise taxes on middle-class families simply to preserve lower rates for the most fortunate,” they wrote.
3a)Boehner: Obama Must 'Get Serious' About Fiscal Cliff
House Speaker John Boehner said President Barack Obama must “get serious” about the fiscal cliff while the speaker remains “hopeful” about talks aimed at averting more than $600 billion in
spending cuts and tax increases.
Boehner, an Ohio Republican, told reporters today in Washington that there has been no substantial progress in talks between the White House and congressional leaders in the past few weeks. “This is a moment for adult leadership,” he said.“Despite the claims that the president supports a balanced approach, the Democrats have yet to get serious about real spending cuts,” Boehner said. Unless there is a “serious” discussion of spending cuts, “there is a real danger of going off the fiscal cliff,” he said.
Boehner spoke after meeting with Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, who is Obama’s lead negotiator on a deal to avoid an end-of-the-year fiscal cliff.
Geithner is meeting separately with each of the top four leaders in Congress in the first round of direct talks with congressional leaders since Obama hosted them on Nov. 16 at the White House.
Chief Executives
Yesterday chief executives from more than a dozen U.S. corporations shuttled from the Capitol to the White House and pressed for an agreement. Union leaders had visited Capitol Hill to lobby against any compromise that would cut entitlement programs as Republicans press for benefit cuts to Medicare and Social Security.
The Congressional Budget Office has warned that if Congress doesn’t avert the fiscal cliff, the economy could slip into recession next year and boost the unemployment rate to 9.1 percent in the fourth quarter of 2013, compared with 7.9 percent now.
Obama and Boehner said yesterday they were eager to reach a compromise before the end of the year, without publicly offering concessions. Republicans are demanding an increase in the Medicare eligibility age and an alternative yardstick for calculating inflation that would reduce annual Social Security cost-of-living adjustments, according to a Republican aide who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly.
Same Proposals
While these are the same proposals the president considered as part of failed debt talks last year, Democrats are now ruling out changes to Social Security as part of an agreement. Meanwhile, Republican leaders have shown no signs they’ll answer the president’s call for $1.6 trillion in new tax revenue by ending the George W. Bush-era tax rates for top earners. Fresh revenue should come from a tax overhaul in 2013, they say.
Amid the negotiations, Obama plans to have a private lunch today at the White House with Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential nominee he defeated in the Nov. 6 election.
Obama spoke with Boehner on the phone last night about negotiations to avert the fiscal cliff, said Kevin Smith, a spokesman for Boehner. Smith did not provide details.
Geithner and the president’s congressional liaison, Rob Nabors, are meeting today with Boehner, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell
.
Leaving Office
.
Leaving Office
Geithner, 51, has said he plans to leave office next month after securing a deficit compromise, his last deal with Congress in a four-year tenure that also has included shepherding the Dodd-Frank financial rules overhaul to passage.
Obama was criticized by Republicans for taking his message on the road. Obama and Boehner are pursuing a different approach to talks this year after several rounds of face-to-face meetings between Obama and congressional leaders failed in 2011, according to a Republican congressional aide.
Both sides have appointed negotiators, with Geithner as Obama’s lead emissary. House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin and Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp of Michigan, both Republicans, are advising Boehner and attended today’s meeting.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment