%20(1)%20(4)%20(1).jpg)
I believe Globalists are meeting in Davos this week and they are skiing, stuffing themselves with rich canape's and deciding our fate. Between the U.N, pompous politicians, radical Muslims, narcotic war lords and unhinged dictators it is amazing the world is still here.
The focus of the meeting is solving the problems they have created.
God Help Us.
+++
Whilst Putin is an aggressor he is also clever. He has Europe in the palm of his hand because like the idiots here in Australia they believe climate change is destroying the world just like that clever John Kerry who is making millions pratting the same crap and scooting around the world in his jet, polluting the atmosphere with emissions from his engines, and laughing all the way to the bank. The western world with its political correctness, climate change activists, woke idiots, is quickly going backwards and will soon become third world countries. The west are also contemplating joining W.H.O. so that it can control any future pandemics? At what cost to western nations? (another similar useless UN set up which costs western nation plenty), and doesn’t that tell you the west is heading towards a world order? Germany and other European nations need to fire up their nuclear power stations, and gas/coal fired power stations, before it's too late. Russia & China are laughing at us all the way to the bank and they have no care factor about climate change. Australia the least most emission country is hell bent on zero emissions, why, because they want to please the minority believers who are degenerating nations, just for their votes. What a joke, those pricks in Government are only interested in their personal benefits and are basically telling the rest of us to eff off….bastards!
A wake up call – Green Politics.
By Michael Shellenberger
How has Vladimir Putin—a man ruling a country with an economy smaller than that of Texas, with an average life expectancy 10 years lower than that of France—managed to launch an unprovoked full-scale assault on Ukraine?
There is a deep psychological, political and almost civilizational answer to that question: He wants Ukraine to be part of Russia more than the West wants it to be free. He is willing to risk tremendous loss of life and treasure to get it. There are serious limits to how much the U.S. and Europe are willing to do militarily. And Putin knows it.
Missing from that explanation, though, is a story about material reality and basic economics—two things that Putin seems to understand far better than his counterparts in the free world and especially in Europe.
Putin knows that Europe produces 3.6 million barrels of oil a day but uses 15 million barrels of oil a day. Putin knows that Europe produces 230 billion cubic meters of natural gas a year but uses 560 billion cubic meters. He knows that Europe uses 950 million tons of coal a year but produces half that.
The former KGB agent knows Russia produces 11 million barrels of oil per day but only uses 3.4 million. He knows Russia now produces over 700 billion cubic meters of gas a year but only uses around 400 billion. Russia mines 800 million tons of coal each year but uses 300.
That’s how Russia ends up supplying about 20 percent of Europe’s oil, 40 percent of its gas and 20 percent of its coal. The math is simple. A child could do it.
The reason Europe didn’t have a muscular deterrent threat to prevent Russian aggression—and in fact prevented the U.S. from getting allies to do more—is that it needs Putin’s oil and gas.
The question is why.
How is it possible that European countries, Germany especially, allowed themselves to become so dependent on an authoritarian country over the 30 years since the end of the Cold War?
Here’s how:
These countries are in the grips of a delusional ideology that makes them incapable of understanding the hard realities of energy production. Green ideology insists we don’t need nuclear and that we don’t need fracking. It insists that it’s just a matter of will and money to switch to all-renewables—and fast. It insists that we need “degrowth” of the economy and that we face looming human “extinction.” (I would know. I myself was once a true believer.)
John Kerry, the United States’ climate envoy, perfectly captured the myopia of this view when he said, in the days before the war, that the Russian invasion of Ukraine “could have a profound negative impact on the climate, obviously. You have a war and obviously you’re going to have massive emissions consequences to the war. But equally importantly, you’re going to lose people’s focus.”
But it was the West’s focus on healing the planet with “soft energy” renewables and moving away from natural gas and nuclear, that allowed Putin to gain a stranglehold over Europe’s energy supply. As the West fell into a hypnotic trance about healing its relationship with nature, averting climate apocalypse and worshiping a teenager named Greta, Vladimir Putin made his moves.
While he expanded nuclear energy at home so Russia could export its precious oil and gas to Europe, Western governments spent their time and energy obsessing over “carbon footprints,” a term created by an advertising firm working for British Petroleum. They banned plastic straws because of a 9-year-old Canadian child’s science homework. They paid for hours of “climate anxiety” therapy.
While Putin expanded Russia’s oil production, expanded natural gas production and then doubled nuclear energy production to allow more exports of its precious gas, Europe, led by Germany, shut down its nuclear power plants, closed gas fields and refused to develop more through advanced methods like fracking. The numbers tell the story best. In 2016, 30 percent of the natural gas consumed by the European Union came from Russia. In 2018, that figure jumped to 40 percent. By 2020, it was nearly 44 percent and by early 2021, it was nearly 47 percent.
For all his fawning over Putin, Donald Trump, back in 2018, defied diplomatic protocol to call out Germany publicly for its dependence on Moscow. “Germany, as far as I’m concerned, is captive to Russia because it’s getting so much of its energy from Russia,” Trump said. This prompted Germany’s then-chancellor, Angela Merkel, who had been widely praised in polite circles for being the last serious leader in the West, to say that her country “can make our own policies and make our own decisions.”
The result has been the worst global energy crisis since 1973, driving prices for electricity and gasoline higher around the world. It is a crisis, fundamentally, of inadequate supply. But the scarcity is entirely manufactured.
Europeans—led by figures like Greta Thunberg and European Green Party leaders and supported by Americans like John Kerry—believed that a healthy relationship with the Earth requires making energy scarce. By turning to renewables, they would show the world how to live without harming the planet. But this was a pipe dream. You can’t power a whole grid with solar and wind, because the sun and the wind are inconstant and currently existing batteries aren’t even cheap enough to store large quantities of electricity overnight, much less across whole seasons.
In service to green ideology, they made the perfect the enemy of the good—and of Ukraine.
Germany.
Green campaigns have succeeded in destroying German energy independence—they call it Energiewende, or “energy turnaround”—by successfully selling policymakers on a peculiar version of environmentalism. It calls climate change a near-term apocalyptic threat to human survival while turning up its nose at the technologies that can help address climate change most and soonest: nuclear and natural gas.
At the turn of the millennium, Germany’s electricity was around 30 percent nuclear-powered. But Germany has been sacking its reliable, inexpensive nuclear plants. (Thunberg called nuclear power “extremely dangerous, expensive and time-consuming” despite the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change deeming it necessary and every major scientific review deeming nuclear the safest way to make reliable power.)
By 2020, Germany had reduced its nuclear share from 30 percent to 11 percent. Then, on the last day of 2021, Germany shut down half of its remaining six nuclear reactors. The other three are slated for shutdown at the end of this year. (Compare this to next-door France, which fulfills 70 percent of its electricity needs with carbon-free nuclear plants.)
Germany has also spent lavishly on weather-dependent renewables—to the tune of $36 billion a year—mainly solar panels and industrial wind turbines. But those have their problems. Solar panels have to go somewhere and a solar plant in Europe needs 400 to 800 times more land than natural gas or nuclear plants to make the same amount of power. Farmland has to be cut apart to host solar. And solar energy is getting cheaper these days mainly because Europe’s supply of solar panels is produced by slave labor in concentration camps as part of China’s genocide against Uighur Muslims.
The upshot here is that you can’t spend enough on climate initiatives to fix things if you ignore nuclear and gas. Between 2015 and 2025, Germany’s efforts to green its energy production will have cost $580 billion. Yet despite this enormous investment, German electricity still costs 50 percent more than nuclear-friendly France’s and generating it produces eight times more carbon emissions per unit. Plus, Germany is getting over a third of its energy from Russia.
Germany has trapped itself. It could burn more coal and undermine its commitment to reducing carbon emissions. Or it could use more natural gas, which generates half the carbon emissions of coal, but at the cost of dependence on imported Russian gas. Berlin was faced with a choice between unleashing the wrath of Putin on neighbouring countries or inviting the wrath of (that spoilt brat) Greta Thunberg. They chose Putin.
Because of these policy choices, Vladimir Putin could turn off the gas flows to Germany and quickly threaten Germans’ ability to cook or stay warm. He or his successor will hold this power for every foreseeable winter barring big changes. It’s as if you knew that hackers had stolen your banking details, but you won’t change your password.
This is why.
Germany successfully begged the incoming Biden administration not to oppose a contentious new gas pipeline from Russia called Nord Stream 2. This cut against the priorities of green-minded governance: On day one of Biden’s presidency, one of the new administration's first acts was to shut down the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada to the U.S. in service to climate ideology. But Russia’s pipeline was too important to get the same treatment given how dependent Germany is on Russian imports. (Once Russia invaded, Germany was finally dragged into nixing Nord Stream 2, - for now.)
Naturally, when American sanctions on Russia’s biggest banks were finally announced in concert with European allies last week, they specifically exempted energy products so Russia and Europe can keep doing that dirty business. A few voices called for what would really hit Russia where it hurts: cutting off energy imports. But what actually happened was that European energy utilities jumped to buy more contracts for the Russian oil and gas that flows through Ukraine. That’s because they have no other good options right now, after green activism’s attacks on nuclear and importing fracked gas from America. There’s no current plan for powering Europe that doesn’t involve buying from Putin.
Conclusion.
We should take Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a wake-up call. Standing up for Western civilization this time requires cheap, abundant and reliable energy supplies produced at home or in allied nations. National security, economic growth and sustainability requires greater reliance on nuclear and natural gas and less on solar panels and wind turbines, which make electricity too expensive.
The first and most obvious thing that should be done is for President Biden to call on German Chancellor Scholz to restart the three nuclear reactors that Germany closed in December. A key step in the right direction came on Sunday when Vice-Chancellor Robert Habeck, the economy and climate minister, announced that Germany would at least consider stopping its phaseout of nuclear. If Germany turns these three on and cancels plans to turn off the three others, those six should produce enough electricity to replace 11 billion cubic meters of natural gas per year—an eighth of Germany’s current needs.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The mop business is booming!
+++
Biden’s Real Taiwan Mistake
The big blunder is not including the island democracy in the new Indo-Pacific economic framework.
The Editorial Board
The press is saying President Biden blundered Monday in committing the U.S. to defend Taiwan, but after three similar statements in the last year maybe he means it. The arguably much bigger mistake is his decision not to include Taiwan in the new Indo-Pacific Economic Framework that the Administration launched on Monday.
Asked by a reporter if the U.S. would defend Taiwan militarily against China, Mr. Biden answered with a blunt “yes.” He went on to say that, “We agree with the One China policy. We signed onto it and all the attendant agreements made from there. But the idea that it could be taken by force, just taken by force, is just not—it’s just not appropriate. It will dislocate the entire region and be another action similar to what happened in Ukraine.”
That wasn’t a model of clarity, but it sounded like a change in policy from the “strategic ambiguity” toward the defense of Taiwan that has long been U.S. policy. Under the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, Washington committed to arming the island democracy to defend itself but was unclear about whether the American forces would join the fight.
And, as they often do, the ever-nimble White House communications shop quickly told the press that Mr. Biden hadn’t meant to suggest a policy shift. The President is a master of the verbal muddle, but perhaps he is doing this intentionally. Knowing the U.S. is likely to intervene—and if it does, that the U.K., Australia and Japan are likely to join—may give Chinese President Xi Jinping some pause about the costs of an invasion.
The problem is that no one can be sure what the U.S. policy now is. The constant White House walk-backs of the President’s statements undermine his personal credibility with allies and adversaries. We’d support more clarity in defense of Taiwan, but it ought to be announced in more considered fashion—with support lined up at home and abroad.
It would also require a larger and more rapid plan to arm Taiwan and build up U.S. defenses. One lesson of the Ukraine war is not to wait until the invasion begins to start sending enough weapons. Send them now to make deterrence more credible.
China has built its military to be able to overwhelm Taiwan’s defenses with an amphibious and aerial invasion. But it has also built a force to prevent the U.S. from rapidly reinforcing Taiwan with air and naval assets. China has a long-range missile force that could cripple U.S. bases and airfields in the region. Those missiles would also attack U.S. warships, including aircraft carriers, if they move within range to deploy U.S. fighters to defend the island.
Mr. Biden’s budget sets the Navy on a path to shrink to 280 ships in 2027 from 298 today even as China greatly expands its fleet. A credible defense of Taiwan and U.S. territories and allies in Asia is going to require a much bigger military budget.
All of which makes it odd that Taiwan wasn’t included in the 13-nation Indo-Pacific Economic Framework the President rolled out on Monday. The new platform is clearly intended to counter China’s rising economic influence. It includes Japan, South Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand and much of Southeast Asia.
The exclusion of Taiwan makes no sense if you’re trying to show the U.S. commitment to the region. Taiwan is an economic powerhouse whose participation would enhance any trade or supply-chain agreements.
Jake Sullivan, the White House national security adviser, ducked a question on why Taiwan was excluded. He said the U.S. plans “to pursue a deeper bilateral engagement with Taiwan on trade and economic matters in the coming days and weeks.” This would be welcome, but it’s still no reason to exclude Taipei from this new economic community.
The framework is also disappointing in its overall lack of ambition. It includes no reduction in tariffs or trade barriers, which would help the world economy. The White House says the deal is “intended to advance resilience, sustainability, inclusiveness, economic growth, fairness and competitiveness of our economies.” At least it included “growth” with the mumbo-jumbo.
The framework’s generality underscores the U.S. mistake in abandoning the Pacific trade pact that Barack Obama negotiated. Donald Trump walked away from it, but Mr. Biden has been unwilling to re-enter the accord that went ahead without the U.S. That blunder has let China set the rules of trade for Asia with its own regional pact.
At least the new framework is an attempt to get back in the Pacific mix on matters other than defense and security. But it still has a long way to go to restore U.S. economic leadership in the world’s fastest-growing region.
+++
White House Cleans up After Biden Again Claims U.S. Has Military ‘Commitment’ with Taiwan
By Charlie Spiering(Breitbart)
President Joe Biden forced his own White House on Monday to again walk back a false claim of his that Washington has a military “commitment” to defend Taiwan in the event of an invasion, most likely by China.
Biden answered affirmatively to a question about defending Taiwan on Monday during a joint press conference with Japanese Prime Minister Kishida Fumio in Tokyo.
Asked if he would be willing to get involved militarily to defend Taiwan, Biden replied, “Yes. That’s the commitment we made,” citing the Taiwan Act.
Taiwan is a sovereign state governed under a free and democratic system. China falsely claims it as a “province” and regularly threatens violent to bring about “reunification” (Taiwan has never been governed by a regime based in Beijing in its history).
The United States does not recognize Taiwan as a state, a concession to China granted by former President Jimmy Carter.
The Taiwan Act allows Washington to establish “relations” with Taipei separately from Beijing and allows the United States “to provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character,” but does not make a military commitment to defend Taiwan’s independence. No military treaty exists between Taiwan and America.
The White House soon issued a statement to the media reassuring the world once again that Biden’s remarks did not create a new military commitment for America.
“As the President said, our policy has not changed. He reiterated our One China policy and our commitment to peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.
He also reiterated our commitment under the Taiwan Relations Act to provide Taiwan with the military means to defend itself,” the official said.
“One China” is a phrase used to mean several different policies. In the United States, it is used to mean the policy of not recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign state and maintaining diplomatic relations with Communist China. China used the term “One China principle” to mean that Taiwan is a province of China, which is a far broader interpretation than America’s.
Taiwan uses the term “One China” to mean that it – the Republic of China – is the only legitimate Chinese state in the world and the communist People’s Republic in Beijing is a political aberration.
This is not the first time that Biden has seemingly fabricated a military commitment to defend Taiwan. In November, Biden was forced to clarify his comments after he said that Taiwan was “independent” from China.
“We are not encouraging independence,” Biden said, repeatedly saying that “nothing” would happen on the issue of Taiwan.
In October, the White House also walked back his rhetoric on Taiwan after he said the United States would act to defend Taiwan if China invaded.
“Yes, we have a commitment to do that,” he said, in a remark nearly identical to Monday’s.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki reassured reporters at the time that Biden did not mean to signal a change in policy.
T“here has been no shift. The President was not announcing any change in our policy nor has he made a decision to change our policy,” she said. “There is no change in our policy.”
++++++++++++++++
I continue to maintain, Iran is the greatest near term threat after Biden.
+++
U.S. – Israel Military-to-Military Relations Heat Up
by Seth J. Frantzman, The Jerusalem Post
Gen. Michael E. Kurilla (l), Commander, U.S. Central Command, met with IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Aviv Kohavi (r) to discuss Iranian nuclear threats and other regional matters.
On Thursday morning, an error in identification caused Israeli air defenses to launch interceptors in the North. Alarms were heard in several communities. Analysts believed a drone flown by Hezbollah might have been the culprit, but it all turned out to be a false alarm and apparently a mistake.
Two days before, however, Hezbollah had indeed launched a drone and Israel had to down the threat.
The context is that Israel is seeing some tensions growing with Hezbollah and Iran in Syria. These two issues are related because Iran is a growing threat to Israel and continues to plot against Israel. This week Defense Minister Benny Gantz flew to the US to meet with American officials. His trip came as the new head of US Central Command flew to Israel to meet with Israeli counterparts.
IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Aviv Kohavi met with US Army Gen. Michael Kurilla, and according to the IDF the two participated in important meetings and briefings. This included a meeting attended by the head of the Strategic Planning and Cooperation Directorate, Maj.-Gen. Tal Kelman, the head of the Intelligence Directorate, Maj.-Gen. Aharon Haliva, and the head of the Operations Directorate, Maj.-Gen. Oded Basiuk.
“The meetings discussed the joint challenges of the IDF and the US Armed Forces, first and foremost being the Iranian nuclear threat and Iranian regional entrenchment throughout the Middle East. The senior officials also discussed operational cooperation between the two militaries and opportunities for expansion in light of the IDF’s realignment to the US CENTCOM area of responsibility,” the IDF said.
Kurilla observed the largest military drill in decades, “Chariots of Fire,” tailored to rising threats from Syria via Iraq to Iran.
Kurilla also observed the large-scale ongoing drill called Chariots of Fire. This is the largest drill in decades, reports have said. It comes as Israel is rolling out new technology related to a program called Edge of Tomorrow. All of this looks tailored to the rising threats that stretch from Lebanon to Syria via Iraq to Iran.
This is a “large-scale exercise, which is focused on a month-long campaign, and demonstrates updated operational plans, adjusted military capabilities, new combat methods, including practicing operational cooperation with the US Armed Forces,” the IDF said.
Kohavi said that “at the conclusion of the exercise, the Israel Defense Forces’ readiness for a campaign will be at its peak.” He highlighted the importance of close cooperation with the US.
The Kurilla visit is actually the second high-level CENTCOM visit in the last weeks. Two weeks ago Maj.-Gen. Scott Benedict, director of strategy, plans and policy of the United States Central Command, visited Israel.
“The meetings incorporated discussions regarding common challenges of the two militaries in the Middle East. Also discussed were the operational and intelligence cooperation between the two militaries,” the IDF said.
Gantz warned that the quantity of strategic weapons in the hands of Iranian proxies has increased significantly in the past year.
Gantz said this week that “Iranian proxies are attacking oil reserves, airports and civilian facilities. Iran itself is conducting attacks via its Quds Force. It is developing operational systems throughout the region, equipped with accurate capabilities including cruise missiles, surface-to-surface missiles and UAVs, capable of reaching thousands of kilometers. The quantity of strategic weapons in the hands of Iranian proxies has increased significantly in the last year: in Iraq there are hundreds of weapons, in Yemen the number has also increased, and the Houthis hold dozens of weapons.”
He discussed an attempt by Iran to fly drones from Iran over Iraq toward Israel. The drones were downed, but he revealed they had parachutes attached that might have been for the purpose of delivering weapons to terrorist organizations in Gaza or in the West Bank.
“The mission failed, and the UAVs were intercepted in Iraq.”
Reports previously had said the US intercepted the drones. Gantz also noted that “in Syria, too, attempts continue to be made to transfer and produce accurate weapons. Israel will continue to thwart these efforts and face any threat to its citizens and the region.”
What this tells us is that CENTCOM cooperation with Israel is key. Gantz is in Washington to discuss cooperation.
Meanwhile, Syria is heating up as well. Reports in foreign media said there were airstrikes in Syria on May 13 that struck a site near Masyaf. Subsequent reports showed images, published by Israeli intelligence firm ImageSat International, of a site allegedly struck by Israel on Friday, which show its complete destruction. Reports said that for the first time an S-300 was fired at the jets involved in the attack. It was not clear whether it was a Syrian or Russian S-300. Russia had supplied Syria with S-300s after a 2018 incident in which Syria used S-200s to target Israeli warplanes and ended up shooting down a Russian plane by mistake.
The issue here that is important is that the field in Syria may become more complex. If Russia is giving the Syrian regime hints that it should use S-300s, that could affect policy. On the other hand it could be a one-time event.
The context of the Central Command visits and Gantz going to Washington seem to indicate that more is going on. The Iranian regime has an economic crisis and is facing protests at home. In Iraq there is failure to form a government, and anti-Israel incitement has led to a new proposed law that would punish those backing normalization with Israel. The Syrian regime is also seeking to weigh what might happen in the wake of recent elections in Lebanon. Hezbollah is also concerned now that it might be losing influence in Lebanon.
With the world focused on Ukraine, Iran and its proxies may seek to raise tensions with Israel.
All of this is a toxic mix because countries and terrorist groups know that the world is focused on Ukraine. It could be that Iran and its proxies are seeking to raise tensions with Israel. This could come amid a more complex battlefield in Syria, as well as increased Israel-Central Command cooperation.
One piece of the puzzle that still lacks clarity is whether Israel will increase its work with the naval component of Central Command, known as Navcent.
A recent briefing by V. Adm. Brad Cooper discussed how Navcent wants to focus on the Red Sea and how it wants to use more unmanned surface vessels. Israel is an expert at unmanned systems, such as drones, and the technology that drives them.
Cooperation concerning the Red Sea would be good for Israel, amid rising threats from the Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen. Israel has done a drill with the US, Bahrain and UAE in the past. It would be a good time for Israel to begin more work with Navcent.
Seth Frantzman is a Ginsburg-Milstein Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum and senior Middle East correspondent at The Jerusalem Post.
+++++++++++++++++++
Snerdley is seeking money to support 80 black Republicans running for election (edited:)
+++
My Fellow American:
80 Black Americans running for Congress is a big deal… Knowing those 80 are running as Republicans is a gamechanger.
You read that right. There will be over 80 Black candidates running as members of the Party of Lincoln this year!
his is a stark change from just a few years ago. The reason is simple - New Journey PAC's efforts are convincing more Black voters to vote for freedom!
This high number of Black GOP candidates means we need to double our efforts to reach out to Black Voters and show them how their values are GOP values. But in order to do that, we need your help with a $25, $50, or $100 donation today.
RushMy name is James Golden, but you may know me as Mr. Snerdley, former call screener and producer for the late, great radio legend Rush Limbaugh. I worked for Rush for almost 30 years, and I learned a lot sitting beside him every day.
Rush taught me to strike while the iron is hot. And I’m telling you that there’s never been a better time to bring Black Americans to the Republican Party than right now!
Biden’s approval rating among Black people has dropped over 30 points in just 12 months. And the easiest way to get Black voters to consider a Republican candidate is when that candidate looks just like them.
That’s why I need your help to capitalize on this moment.
VideoIn 2020, our efforts not only increased the Black GOP vote overall, but we were instrumental in getting Burgess Owens and Byron Donalds elected to Congress, and just last year, we brought our influence to Virginia where Winsome Sears became the first Black Lieutenant Governor in that state!
I don’t have to remind you all the reasons why we need to take back the House from Pelosi and The Squad. We have a perfect opportunity to elect a huge number of Black GOP candidates and increase the number of Black voters within the Republican Party.
The only thing hindering us is money, pure and simple. We don’t have large corporate donors. We only have grassroots, freedom-loving Americans like you.
With your help, the New Journey PAC’s success will be through the roof! Better than 2020, and Nancy Pelosi will be beside herself when she sees countless Black Votes electing Black Republicans!
Donate today and let’s make this plan a reality!
For a New Journey,
James Golden, AKA Bo Snerdley
James Golden, AKA Bo Snerdley
Founder, New Journey PAC
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A contrary view regarding Biden's Taiwan, remarks.
+++
Let Biden Be Biden: He’s Right on American Support for Taiwan
This is actually the third time his staff walked back a Biden statement.
By Larry Kudlow
Many years ago, when I was a child working for Ronald Reagan, conservatives used to yell, “Let Reagan be Reagan.” I thought it was pretty cool. The Gipper would say stuff he believed in, but it was so shocking to the Beltway swamp, and even to some who snuck onto the Reagan staff, that those swamp rats would whisper to the press that Reagan didn’t really believe it, or that he didn’t say it.
They’d try to walk it back. Like with, “Tear down this wall.” Reagan not only said it, he believed it. Or the “evil empire.” Well, Reagan said it and believed it, no matter what some of his RINO staffers claimed. Reagan would say stuff like, “lowering marginal tax rates will rejuvenate the economy and would pay for themselves.”
But then, the Reagan RINOs in the White House would whisper to the liberal media, “Oh my gosh, he didn’t really mean that, because we know tax cuts will create big deficits.” Of course, the liberal media would get out their megaphones and echo the RINOs. But wait a minute, there are two things Reagan loved and achieved: He brought down Soviet communism and he slashed taxes. And it worked. The economy boomed, and the Soviets evaporated.
Now, I never thought I’d say this, but I’m going to argue: “Let Biden be Biden.” Alright?
During a joint press conference with the Japanese prime minister, Fumio Kichida, President Biden was asked if America would be prepared to defend Taiwan if a Chinese attack occurred. Okay, get ready, the president answered: “Yes.” He actually got it right. The meds must’ve been working.
And Mr. Biden went on with a very good answer: “That’s the commitment we made. We agree with the ‘one China’ policy. We signed on to it.... But the idea that, that can be taken by force, just taken by force. It’s just not — it’s just not appropriate.” Well, good. I agree.
President Xi of China has said he wants to take over Taiwan. He’s said it many times. Like Vladimir Putin wanting to take over Ukraine, Georgia, Belarus, and maybe the Baltics. Mr. Xi runs a vicious dictatorship. No freedom. No free speech. A tightly controlled, state-run economy. No respect for human rights. Concentration camps for Uyghurs. Destroyed Hong Kong’s democracy and free-market economy.
Taiwan, on the other hand, is a free country, with free speech, free elections, and free markets. It’s one of the semiconductor centers of the world. And they like America.
So, Mr. Biden is right, but his staff’s trying to walk it back. This is actually the third time they’ve walked back a Biden statement. And Mr. Biden has said this a bunch of times.
Last October, during a town hall, he said the U.S. would come to Taiwan’s defense if China attacked. His people walked it back. Last August, Mr. Biden said the U.S. would respond with military support if Taiwan, Japan, or South Korea were invaded, and the staffers again walked it back.
As you undoubtedly know, I have not been a supporter of President Biden’s policies at home or abroad.
But not only is Mr. Biden instinctively right on this, his logic is also correct.
Under the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, the U.S. is required to ensure Taiwan has the military resources to defend itself. And the so-called one China policy has never accepted the principle that Taiwan is part of mainland China.
So, on this very specific point, regarding American support for Taiwan, I say, let Biden be Biden. Mr. Biden is right, and it’s the right time for him to say what he said.
From Mr. Kudlow’s broadcast on Fox Business News.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Is the Bennett government shooting itself in the foot to appease radical Palestinians? It would appear so. The results are already known. Feed bullies and you increase their appetite.
Soft heads and bleeders never learn.
+++
Israel is breaking its own windows
The Israeli government must reassert its sovereignty and control, starting with the Temple Mount.
By Douglas Altabef JNS
The columnist Melanie Phillips has suggested that governments should fight anti-Israel hate and anti-Semitism through the adoption of the successful though controversial law enforcement strategy known as Broken Windows Policing (BWP).
BWP holds that the police should pay close attention to minor infractions that tend to be ignored or given low priority. Law-enforcement arrests and prosecutes the perpetrators, on the assumption that those who commit minor crimes are likely to commit more serious crimes.
Phillips makes a good case for a BWP attitude toward those who demonize the State of Israel and the Jewish people. She is likely correct that minor actions, often justified on free speech grounds, will lead to more serious and violent acts.
Call it the civilizational slippery slope.
It is ironic, then, that the Israeli government and its law enforcement authorities are, in many ways, breaking their own windows.
It is the government that now commits the “minor” infractions when it comes to the state’s need to assert sovereignty and project sovereign control. It is our own government that invites Palestinians and disloyal Israeli Arabs to go down the slippery slope of ever-increased demands, dissent and disregard for the situation here.
How does the government do this? By appearing to be empathetic, reasonable and opposed to provocation, they signal that having dispensed with the symbolic, it behooves our adversaries to press for more and more concrete concessions.
The refusal to sing “Hatikvah” at a university conclave is akin to fare-jumping in a subway station. To reroute parades or, still worse, prohibit flags to be paraded, is akin to a vandalized wall.
Why would those who hate us ever stop and say, “Well we got what we wanted, now let’s get with the program”? In a neighborhood with an Arab culture that is well attuned to the realities of power—who has it, who does not exercise it—reasonable gestures mean just one thing: he who makes the gesture is weak.
And weakness is to be exploited.
One need not be a statistician or a reporter to have a strong sense that social control has broken down in Israel. Brazen acts like rock-throwing, harassment of passengers on buses, and, of course, murderous terror attacks have become daily events.
The deadly riots in May of last year opened a huge scar of distrust and suspicion, as Arab neighbors took up arms against Jewish neighbors in a replay of the Hebron riots of 1929.
Why did these riots happen when they did? That their timing coincided with widespread rocket attacks by Hamas only added to the sense that a fifth column was at work, that these riots were intended to be a kind of Hamas on the home front.
Hamas had just declared victory by “defeating” the Jerusalem Day Flag March, which the government saw as yet another “provocation.” Might the rioters have sought to capitalize on an atmosphere of concessions, of turning the other cheek, as it were?
Sheikh Jarrah rioters succeeded in their campaign to intimidate the Supreme Court into its decision to let the squatters stay on, even when the law is clear that their presence is illegal. Every Jew here knows that, if the parties were reversed, the Jewish squatters would now be squatting in prison.
Where Israelis see reasonableness as an attempt to tamp down the flames, Palestinians and other Arabs see the concessions as another milestone victory, yet another stepping stone that is certain to lead to others.
Nowhere is our government’s policy of breaking its own windows more apparent than its stance on the Temple Mount. The humiliation of Jews who seek to ascend and connect with the most sacred site in Judaism is seen both as a religious victory and a major incentive to press the Muslim advantage.
The refusal to take a serious stand on Muslim violence and rioting, and the unwillingness to accord Jews anything close to parity on the Mount, have sent Muslims the very logical message that violence pays.
The larger message, however, is that victory on the Temple Mount, which means Muslim control, will lead to Jewish concessions elsewhere.
How does the government not see this? In the case of the Temple Mount, they have not just broken windows, they have knocked the whole building down.
Palestinians have concluded, with good reason, that our government will not “pay the cost to be the boss.” And it is just as reasonable for them to speculate where else they might find such a lack of resolve.
To exercise control and project strength on the Temple Mount would be a powerful replacement for broken windows by our government. It will come at a cost because the government has accrued a lot of interest in allowing everyone else—the Waqf, the King of Jordan, and now, even Hamas—to see themselves as the one in charge.
But we must start to replace those windows we ourselves have broken. To exert strength and control on the Temple Mount would have a very powerful and positive ripple effect. This exertion of strength must be our highest priority.
It is high time to stop breaking our own windows and for us to foster a much-needed national renewal. Our future depends on it.
Douglas Altabef is the chairman of the board of Im Tirtzu, Israel’s largest grassroots Zionist organization, and a Director of the Israel Independence Fund. He can be reached at dougaltabef@gmail.com.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
New weaponry.
+++
American Special Forces to Receive Powerful New Machine Gun
(NewsReady.com) – US special operations forces are looking forward to new machine guns that shoot farther and hit harder than current ones. Two companies are competing to supply the new weapons, and the military wants the first guns in soldiers’ hands by 2024.
Since the 1960s, the US military has steadily made its weapons smaller and lighter. The lightweight M16 has been replaced by the shorter M4 carbine, while the M60 machine gun gave way to the smaller-caliber FN Minimi. Following years in Afghanistan fighting insurgents armed with old-fashioned but powerful weapons, the Army has now backtracked.
The current 5.56mm weapons will be replaced by the 6.8mm XM5 rifle and XM250 light machine gun, both manufactured by SIG Sauer. Now, the race is on to replace 7.62mm machine guns used by special operations forces.
The military wants a new machine gun about the same weight as the current M240 — the specification calls for a maximum of 24 pounds — but chambered in .338 Norma Magnum. This terrifying cartridge has 4 times the power of 7.62mm NATO, plus better long-range accuracy. A .338 trial gun managed to hit individual targets at 1,950 meters fired off its built-in bipod. At that range, an M240, mounted on a heavy tripod, can only provide area fire. The new round is also much better at penetrating body armor, a vital capability on modern battlefields.
The competing guns are the Lightweight Medium Machine Gun, developed by General Dynamics, but now owned by True Velocity Ammo, and the SIG Sauer Lightweight Machine Gun, an enlarged version of the XM250. Both of these have similar target effects to the massive and ancient .50 Browning M2, but weigh in at less than the M240. Hopefully, one of them will be in production for our troops in the next two years.
+++++++++++++++++++
Will Sussmann fall on his own sword to protect Hillary because he fears the consequences?
+++
Clinton Lawyer Used Status in Attempts To Discredit Trump and Manipulate Elections
Hillary Clinton. Just the name alone evokes a wide variety of emotions in the American people, but the most heard reaction is to simply call her evil. From former Secret Service agents who remember her during Bill’s time in office to Veterans who worked K-9 guard duty for her overseas, to her constituents of NY. Her cold, lifeless, and conniving eyes and rigid movements make her seem more like a corpse than a human.
The people she has working for her are just as dishonest and untrustworthy. Michael Sussmann is an attorney who worked for Clinton’s 2016 campaign and became a privileged and high-powered person rather quickly. He misused these connections within the FBI to try and destroy President Trump’s election hopes. He didn’t play games either, he knew exactly what he was trying to do, and did everything he could to make it happen.
With opening arguments being delivered in Washington, prosecutor Brittain Shaw painted the story of Sussmann and his activities. How he met with the FBI’s top lawyer on September 19th, 2016, intending to provide him with false tips alleging computer communication between Trump’s business and the Russians. Allegations that were later investigated and found to be false.
Shaw told the jury, “The evidence will show that this is a case about privilege – the privilege of a well-connected D.C. lawyer with access to the highest levels of the FBI.” Sussman took advantage of his connections and chose to “use the FBI as a political tool.” As she reminded them “the FBI is our institution. It should not be used as a political tool for anyone.” She’s right too. The mission of the FBI isn’t to be the private investigators for the rich and powerful. It isn’t there to help swing elections for politician
Instead, they are there to help ensure elections stay free and untainted. They want to see the American people elect their chosen officials, not just somebody the left already chose before the first ballot was cast. Unfortunately for Sussmann, he doesn’t seem to believe this when he made that meeting. Sitting down with then-FBI General Counsel James Baker, he was trying to pass along allegedly secret communications between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank. This included not just words, but thumb drives with the data on them.
When pressed about his connections, Sussmann told him he wasn’t passing along information based upon a singular client, but rather two clients: Clinton’s presidential campaign and Rodney Joffe. In this scenario, Joffe is a technology executive who oversaw all the research linking Alfa-Bank with the Trump Organization. Sussmann’s attorney doubled down on this kind of information.
Attorney Michael Bosworth claimed “no one told him to go. No one authorized him to go.” He also attempted to discredit Baker, claiming that because he didn’t record the calls or even document these meetings that he certainly must be wrong, “Mr. Baker’s memory is as clear as mud.” Unfortunately for him and his client, there is no legal requirement to document such findings.
He might not feel it yet but being honest about the Clintons and how they using him as a pawn to go after Trump will not go well for them, despite their thinking it will. Sussmann is going to be forced to tell the truth at some point. Then again, he seems to be prepared for the consequences and is ready to fall on his sword for the Clintons. It’s too bad he won’t just own the mistake and instead will lie to try and gain a lighter sentence. Might be nice for the American people to learn the true level of depravity this woman is capable of.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment