Greenland

Of all the obscure places in the world, Greenland, the largest island in the world, is suddenly in the news.  It came up because Pres. Trump suddenly tweeted that he wanted to buy it for the USA.  Its not so absurd as it sounds and as the Danish PM said it is, after all it has the lowest population density of any country in the world with barely 60,000 people, mostly in the capital of Nuuk, that is closest to Canada.   It has incredible resources of hydroelectric power and mineral resources, much of it hard to extract because of the cold.

It was discovered by the Norwegian Vikings in the 10th century and in the Saga it was called “Green” in order to attract settlers.  Leif Erickson sailed from Greenland to Canada 500 years before Columbus “discovered” America.  Most of the population are Inuit (known to us as eskimos) and Danish settlers.  It became a Danish colony in 1814 and became autonomous (self-governing) in 2008, although it is not considered a sovereign country and is still a province of Denmark. Pres. Truman soon after WWII and amidst the Cold War was the first President to consider buying Greenland, but a large US base was established at Thule in southern Greenland and has been there ever since.

Pres. Trump was due to begin a State visit to Denmark in two weeks, but after the Danish response to his suggestion to buy Greenland, he took offense and has cancelled the visit.  This is unfortunate since Denmark has been a good ally of the US for a long time.  These imaginative ideas that Trump gets and publicizes are not so stupid, since buying Alaska from Russia turned out be a bright idea after all, not to mention the Louisiana purchase from France.  I bet they’d like to have them back.

Advertisements

Who Needs Enemies Here?

I strongly support our government’s decision to bar those enemies of Israel, US Congresswomen Tlaib and Omar, from visiting our country. As such I strongly disagree with the wholly negative analysis by the editorial staff of The Jerusalem Post, including: “Tlaib and Omar Outsmart Israel” by Herb Keinon, “Dem Leaders Disappointing decision,” by Omri Nahmias and “Why Israel errs in barring Congresswomen,” by David Brinn.  Surely such analysts could find something positive about this decision?  If the Government had allowed them to enter Israel they would only have used their visit for anti-Israel propaganda purposes that would have had long-term consequences.  This is the dignified way to go, we have shown them we have sovereignty and we will not allow them to use us as the object of their negativity and derision. This was the right decision.(this was published as letter to the editor in The Jerusalem Post, today)

Further, when Tlaib specifically asked the Minister of Interior to allow her to enter the West Bank in order to visit her grandmother who is 91 years old, purely on humanitarian grounds, he agreed.  I think this was also the right decision, since she gave an undertaking not to carry out any pro-boycott propaganda while here.  But, after he approved her visit she turned around and rejected it, saying she would not be controlled by the occupation.  This is nonsense, since she had already stated she would not carry out political activities while here on a  purely humanitarian visit.  Obviously she got cold feet, and was probably told by her extreme left buddies that it would not look good for her if she came and cooperated with the hated Israel in any way, even for a humanitarian reason.

Good riddance, I say.  Who needs such enemies here, the whole point of having sovereignty is that we can decide who we want to allow in or not.  every country does it, so why should we let in enemies to make propaganda.  Think of them as liberal fascists, even if they are members of Congress.  Its true Pres. Trump put pressure on PM Netanyahu not to let them in, but once again Trump was right.  Never give any advantage to our enemies.

American Tragedy

The two mass shootings yesterday in the US at El Paso, Texas that killed 20, and Dayton, Ohio that killed 9, have become a regular feature of American life.  So far in 2019 there have been 248 mass shootings in the USA and 246 people were killed and nearly 1,000 wounded.  That comes out at more than one shooting per day.  They are spread all over the USA, surprisingly perhaps the majority of shootings occur in the East, South, Mid-West and West coast, but very few in the former frontier region of the Western US.   In other words the statistics follow the population density.  The number and distribution of shootings were very similar in 2018.   So the argument that this is a result of the American “frontier mentality” is nonsense.

More and more people are armed, and in some States it is now legal for teachers to carry guns, but this has in no way decreased the incidence of attacks, most of which do not occur in schools.  The only sensible way to tackle this American tragedy is to prevent guns getting into the hands of people who have anti-social tendencies.  In other words prevention is the best approach, and that can only be attempted by doing thorough checks into the mental state and affiliations in social media of all persons applying for guns licences.  There have to be tough laws.

The counter argument is that all Americans should have the “right to bear arms,” but in a civilized country that contains not a few racists and crazies, that right is an illusory one.  Second, that there are so many guns available in the US that it is pointless trying to control them, because a dedicated killer can obtain guns illegally.  But, that is simply giving up and letting the killers get away with it.  At least don’t make it easy for them.  And if law enforcement was doing its job, the cost and access to illegal weapons would not be so easy.

It is no surprise that at least one of the shooters was a loner found to have racist views and to have written an on-line manifesto proclaiming that he was going to kill Mexican immigrants to the US.  If law enforcement was active in scanning social media they might have been able to prevent the El Paso shooting.  It is futile and dishonest to blame these shootings on Pres. Trump, on the contrary, his election in the first place was an indication of the feelings of a majority of Americans that the US is being flooded by illegal immigrants, without any apparent sign of previous Administrations doing anything effective about it.  Indeed the Obama Administration encouraged such immigration, as some left-liberal Democrats are still doing. 

It is self-defeating for liberal Blacks and Jews to support the immigration of poor Central American economic migrants on sentimental grounds.  The situation has gone way beyond that and the fate and future of the US is at stake.  As happened in the UK, where immigration from the former British Empire and the EU have become such a burden, there comes a point at which mass immigration cannot be allowed to continue.

Mueller’s Testimony

I watched part of Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller’s testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.  Although he insisted that he could not say anything that was not in his written Report to the Attorney General of the Dept. of Justice, it immediately became clear that the Democrats on the Committee were insistent on drawing their own conclusions from what was stated in his Report, while the Republicans were insistent on dismissing parts of his Report.  It also became apparent that Mueller himself was not as sharp as many expected, he mumbled and bumbled quite a bit.

In particular, the Republicans pointed out that his legal remit was to investigate occurrences of “collusion” (not a legal term) between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives (in Vol 1), but it was not to investigate the issue of “obstruction of justice” by the President (in Vol. 2).  Further, since he knew, according to DOJ legal decisions that a sitting President cannot be prosecuted, he had no reason to investigate the President’s behavior, since as a prosecutor he could not then render a decision to prosecute.  And the remit of the Special Prosecutor was only to give a prosecutorial decision on the matter investigated.  Therefore, his decision to include matters of “obstruction of justice” and to not come to a prosecutorial decision was completely “inappropriate,” to use the word of former Independent Prosecutor Ken Starr who investigated Impeachment against Pres. Bill Clinton.  Starr further said that all of Vol. 2 of the Report should not have been included.  Further, Mueller’s statement that he could not “exonerate” the President of obstruction of Justice is legally meaningless, because “exonerate” is not a  legally meaningful term.

It was clear that since Mueller found no case of “collusion,” the Democrat’s shifted strategy and focused exclusively on the “obstruction of Justice” aspect of Mueller’s Report, which shouldn’t have been investigated in the first case.   In his Report Mueller reported many instances in which in his opinion, Pres. Trump tried to obstruct Justice. But, let me ask you, anyone, if you thought you were being investigated and that this investigation was beyond the scope of the Special Prosecutor’s remit, and biased, wouldn’t you also dispute his investigation.

In fact, of the 16 Attorneys Mueller hired, all were registered Democrats, not one Republican or Independent, and 6 of those were directly implicated in supporting Hillary Clinton and giving large donations to her campaign.  Only one of them, Peter Strozk, was dismissed when this became public through incriminating e-mails.  Nevertheless, Mueller in his Report did not find that Trump actually in any of the cases did “obstruct Justice.”  In fact, almost all the citations of such obstruction were from press reports, mostly from the New York Times. Trump merely spoke to people about the case and tried to persuade people of his own opinion.  That is not obstruction of Justice, and Mueller clearly says that he could not come to a decision that it was.  Starr also said that the contention that anyone but the President would be charged with obstruction of justice based on this evidence, is “nonsense.” Also, at no point was Mueller fired or pressured by the White House and his Report was arrived at “unencumbered.”  So what’s all this about, pure partisan politics!  “Let’s get Trump (the democratically elected President of the USA) by any means possible.”  

Let me predict, there is certainly nothing impeachable in Mueller’s Report and the Democrats will be punished at the next election for pursuing this matter well beyond its lifespan.  As we say “flogging a dead horse”. It stinks!    

Is Pres. Trump a Racist?

There is no greater insult to a person and especially a President than in this time of political correctness to label them a “racist.”  But, that is what the Democratically controlled House of Representatives have done in a resolution condemning Pres. Trump as a racist for remarks he tweeted and stated on several occasions.  In these remarks he stated that the four Congresswomen who have become symbolic of the far leftist trend in the Democratic Party, namely Congresswomen Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and Ayanna Pressley, should go back to their own countries!

This was an ill-conceived remark, that sounds racist and ignorant, and one that I heard on many occasions when I was growing up in England.  The irony was that I had been born in England and the people saying this were against the establishment of a Jewish country to which I could go!  These experiences have made me very sensitive to such remarks.  What the President said also hardly applies to these four individuals, since three of them were born in the USA and only one, Ilhan Omar was foreign-born, in Somalia, a failed state that Trump has labelled a “shit-hole.”

Calling themselves “four women of color” (Hispanic, Black, Somali and Palestinian), the four women gave a press conference on Monday lambasting the President as racist and calling for him to be condemned and even impeached.  If I were a completely neutral observer I might see this whole episode as a typical political maneuver by a Republican President to draw a very clear distinction between himself and the Democratic Party.  As predicted the Democratic Party rallied around the 4 women, thus giving the electorate a clear choice between himself and the Democrats.  In effect they swallowed the bait!

But, I want to make a clear distinction between what Pres. Trump said and what those English racists were saying to me many years ago.   What was said to me was outright anti-Semitic and racist.  But, what Pres. Trump said to the four Congresswomen was that they should go back to their own country if they didn’t like the USA, and then he quoted comments they have made sharply criticizing the USA.  One of them Ilhan Omar was quoted as having been happy that al Qaeda attacked the USA on 9/11 and that it deserved it. So Trump’s is a qualified racist remark, in other words not just “go back,” but “go back if…..”.

Furthermore, there is no doubt that at least three of the four women (AOC, Omar and Tlaib) have made outrageous anti-Semitic and anti-Israel remarks.  And let’s be clear anti-Semitism and denying only the Jewish people the right to a Homeland is racist!  So as the lines have been sharply drawn and one has to choose sides, I choose Pres. Trump rather than the racist extremists he chooses to confront!

Today it was reported that Rep. Tlaib introduced a bill into Congress to support the BDS boycott of Israel, and she also announced she plans to visit Israel and the Palestinian territories.  If I were in charge of the Israeli Govt. I would refuse her entry on the grounds that she is a known and declared enemy of the State of Israel.

Great Things are Happening

I lose my concentration on the news for a few moments and look at the great things I miss:

  1. The G20 Summit: The G20 meeting took place in Osaka, Japan, and as usual concentrated on economic matters.  Particularly the US-China tariff stand-off took center stage.  After a meeting between Pres. Trump and Pres Xi of China, it was announced that further talks would go ahead and Trump agreed to hold off major decisions affecting Huawei, the Chinese telecom giant.
  2. Meeting with Chairman Kim: After the G20 meeting Trump flew to S, Korea for a meeting with Pres. Moon, but a tweet saying that he would be prepared to meet with N. Korean Pres. Kim resulted in a positive response from Pyongyang and lo and behold they met over the demarcation line.  It was a historic meeting with Trump being the first US president to set foot in N. Korea.  Further meetings were agreed.
  3. The Democratic Debates:  I (fortunately) missed most of the Democratic debates, each with 10 candidates.  I felt sorry for Biden , who was put on the defensive by Kemala Harris for simply saying that he had worked with two former southern segregationists.  He was only trying to show that he is able to bridge divides, but he got caught in the holier-than-thou politically correct trap used by liberal-leftists.
  4. The Ascension of Boris Johnson: It appears that Boris Johnson will be elected leader  of the Conservative Party and hence PM of the UK, replacing Theresa May.  This will be the subject of future blog posts.
  5. Hong Kong Demonstrations:  The attempt by Carrie Lam the PM of Hong Kong, to introduce legislation to transfer prisoners to mainland China for trial sparked the outbreak of another round of demonstrations in Hong Kong, that last night led to violence.  The demonstrators took over the legislative building and trashed it.  What will China do about this?

As for me I attended my great-grandson Ro’i’s third birthday party. and today I am going to pick up my new car.   Very nice.

Blackmail Works

Whether we like it or not blackmail works.  When Pres. Trump said he would enact a 5% tariff on all goods coming into the US from Mexico, unless the Mexican Govt. took action against the caravans of  Central Americans (from Nicaragua, Honduras and Guatemala) transiting Mexico to come to the USA, many people were shocked.  How can you treat an ally like that, a friendly country that has terrible problems?  But, the fact is that it worked, it got the Mexican govt.’s attention and they came up with a plan that satisfied the US.  They have sent hundreds of Mexican border police down to the borders of Mexico with the Central American countries and are now preventing the passage of illegal migrants across the borders.

People forget that according to international law, the first country a migrant enters (in  this case Mexico) they are supposed to be registered and apply for asylum there.  Only those with legitimate reasons for needing asylum to stay in a country are supposed to be allowed to enter and stay permanently, and they have to have a good reason, such as fleeing persecution or war.  This in not the case with the vast majority of Central American migrants, who are almost exclusively economic migrants that no country is required to accept. But, the host country is required to process every migrant to make sure no legitimate asylum seeker is turned away.

But, when a family arrives with children, the issue becomes a humanitarian one, you cannot turn children away because the migrant needs to be processed and because of the huge numbers at the US border this process takes a long time, even years.  So families were being allowed to enter.  In order to avoid this happening the US tried (under Pres. Obama) to separate children from parents, but under Pres. Trump this procedure was banned by the court.  But the numbers of families with children have grown, because they think children will get them in, and many adults are now appearing with unrelated children.  In order to put a stop to this unregulated flow of hundreds of thousands of migrants and their numbers growing all the time, Pres. Trump needed to act and he did. 

Other cases of blackmail include Pres. Trump using tariffs to try to pressure China and the EU from using unfair trade practices.  And Boris Johnson, who Pres. Trump likes, has come forward with a plan, that he will not pay the b$63 that the UK will owe the EU in order to carry out Brexit.  He has said that he will not pay the fee unless the EU agrees to a sharp Brexit with guarantees for the UK.  In other words, let’s negotiate a deal that includes the amount of this fee, that PM May was prepared to pay.   So Boris Johnson is taking a leaf out of Pres. Trump’s book.  It may win him the leadership of the Conservative Party and the Premiership of the UK.