RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/01/righteous_anger_vs_politics_as_usual.html

There is anger and then there is righteous anger. Peter Finch yelling out the window, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore.”

From Iran, Iraq, and Lebanon, where parts of a whole are coming undone, to Hong Kong to Puerto Rico to France and Venezuela, people are mad as hell.

Consider Lebanon. Independent in 1943, but occupied by Syria from 1975-2005, and brought into Iran’s orbit through the creation of Hezb’allah in the early 1980s, the same constellation of politicians have held power since the end of the civil war in 1990. Americans appear to worry most about the security implications of Hezb’allah, a U.S.-designated terror organization with its own army and a drug/weapons/money racket in South America, pulling strings in Beirut. And worry, too, about the U.S. armed and trained Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF), working alongside and sometimes in cooperation with Hezb’allah. Hassan Nasrallah calls the LAF “a partner.”

But how did Lebanon come to this point and why are people angry now?

Multiethnic and multicultural, Lebanese politics are sliced into sectarian segments; you are Druze or Shiite or Maronite Christian. The government has no national commitments, only confessional ones, which makes it easy to set one group against another, leaving the best-armed and richest on top, i.e., Hezb’allah. That is also a recipe for corruption — take care of your own and the devil take the rest, also the devil is the rest.  Lebanon ranks 147th out of 183 countries in Transparency International’s Corruption Index. There are 6-7 million Lebanese (numbers vary widely because so many live abroad). Government debt is $89.5 billion and interest payments consumed 48 percent of domestic government revenues in 2016. The debt-to-GDP ratio is 151% with an annual growth rate of negative 0.2 percent for 2019. The Lebanese pound has lost more than 60 percent of its value in recent weeks on the black market. 

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15414/sweden-welfare-crisis

Within a generation, Sweden’s third largest city, Malmö, will have a population in which the majority of people are of foreign background. How will integrating immigrants take place then, and which group will be integrated into which?

At the same time, many children born in Sweden learn Swedish so poorly that they cannot really speak it, because there is not enough Swedish spoken in some preschools and grade schools. This change is unfolding at a rapid pace.

It is not just Swedish society that will look radically different within a decade. The Swedish welfare state, which has been the hallmark of the Swedish state around the world, is also changing or possibly even being phased out.

The Swedish welfare state has often been praised by the left in the United States. After the migration crisis of 2015, however, when Sweden was flooded by Syrian refugee claimants, Sweden is now facing a welfare crisis that threatens the entire Swedish welfare state model.

Sweden had 9.7 million inhabitants in 2015, before it received 162,000 asylum seekers. 70% of those asylum seekers came from Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq. 70% of those asylum seekers were also men. The migration crisis created an unsustainable financial and social situation that caused the Swedish political establishment to rethink its stance on asylum migration, which, until then, had been extremely liberal.

Asylum migration has continued, nevertheless. Between 2016 and 2018, more than 70,000 additional migrants have applied for asylum in Sweden, and more than 105,000 asylum migrants have been granted asylum.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/01/after_his_behavior_at_davos_did_prince_charles_snub_pence_in_jerusalem.html

Although it’s hard to imagine now, back in the 1960s and 1970s, Prince Charles had a sort of glamour about him, a mixture of sophisticated playboy and Prince Charming. He was good looking(ish), athletic, and handled himself well at state affairs. His stock went up even higher when he married Lady Diana, a vapid young woman who wore clothes well and managed to catch the world’s imagination.

They were an ill-suited couple. He fancied himself an intellectual and she was a publicity-hungry, walking emotional wound. Their marital battles revealed him to be a sleazy, entitled, unkind, boring, pompous, unfaithful lout. When Diana died, Charles re-fashioned his image. He was the good father to his boys, and he got to marry the woman he loved, the horsey, but good-natured, Camilla.

Camilla or not, Charles is still a pompous, hypocritical boor. His latest unpleasant behavior involves climate change and, possibly, Vice President Pence. When it comes to climate change, Charles made obeisance to the shrill, neurotic Greta Thunberg and endorsed plans to destroy the world economy — but he still doesn’t think the socialist belt-tightening that goes with climate change applies to him (emphasis added):

Prince Charles demanded global green taxes as part of a radical push to tackle climate change in a seminal speech at Davos today.

The Prince of Wales met Greta Thunberg at the Word Economic Forum after flying in to Switzerland on a private jet – but did not hold talks with Donald Trump.

Charles even sounded like the 17-year-old Swedish activist as he asked VIPs: ‘Do we want to go down in history as the people who didn’t do anything to bring the world back from the brink? The only limit is our willingness to act and the time to act is now’.

He then begged delegates, including wealthy global business leaders: ‘This is why I need your help, your ingenuity and your practical skills to ensure that the private sector leads the world out of the approaching catastrophe into which we have engineered ourselves.’

Speaking just 24 hours after President Trump used his speech to reject environmental ‘prophets of doom’, Charles called for new eco-taxes, greener fuels and hydrogen-powered planes by 2030.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/01/interesting_things_are_happening_in_iran_following_soleimanis_death.html

When President Trump ordered the military to strike Qassem Soleimani, a legitimate military target responsible for the deaths of hundreds of troops, Democrats were up in arms. How dare Trump bait the Iranians by striking someone so close to Ayatollah Khamenei? They were certain that Trump had just ignited World War III.

Republicans were more confident that the strike would, at the very least, remove a dangerous character from the Iranians’ forty-year-long war against America and, at the best, topple the regime. This last belief was based upon the fact that the Iranian regime is fragile now that Trump walked away from Obama’s terrible Iran Plan and reinstated sanctions. The economy is collapsing and people all over Iran are coming out in protest. After forty years of a repressive theocracy, the Persian people, a people accustomed to beauty and life, have had their fill of Islam’s cruel puritanism.

Michael Ledeen, an experienced foreign policy observer, thinks that the Republicans may have been correct because there are strange doings in Iran – all good if one wants to see that abysmal regime collapse:

The elimination of Qassem Soleimani has produced surprising results. It turns out that the United States received intelligence on Soleimani’s movements from a variety of sources, some within his Iranian Revolutionary Guards Quds Force, others from Israel’s vaunted intelligence apparatus. 

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15474/libya-erdogan-muslim-brotherhood

The concern now is that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan will use the failure of international mediators to end the fighting to intensify his support for the GNA, thereby strengthening the position of the numerous Islamist militias that are backing the UN-backed body.

Mr Erdogan was an ardent supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood when it held power in Cairo, and there is mounting concern, especially in Europe, that the Turkish leader has now set his sights on establishing a similar regime in Libya.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s decision to intervene militarily in the Libyan conflict not only raises the prospect of the conflict entering a new and more dangerous phase; it also promises to provide a significant boost for the Islamist militias that are vying to take control of the country and establish a Muslim Brotherhood-style government in Tripoli.

Mr Erdogan’s justification for sending Turkish troops to Libya, which has the backing of the Turkish parliament, is to provide support for Prime Minister Fayez al-Serraj, the head of the UN-backed Government of National Accord (GNA).

The GNA is under enormous pressure as a result of the offensive being undertaken by General Khalifa Haftar, the rebel Libyan leader who, with the backing of Russia, France and the United Arab Emirates, has overrun large swathes of the country and is now attempting to seize control of the Libyan capital.

The strength of Gen. Haftar’s position was graphically demonstrated earlier this week when Haftar’s forces seized control of Libya’s vital oil production facilities on the outskirts of Tripoli, a move that has cut output to almost zero.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15467/eu-stance-iran-mullahs

It is worth noting that, the EU did announce a positive step. In light of the revelations concerning Iran’s assassinations plots, minor sanctions were imposed on sectors of the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence, as well as on Saeid Hashemi Moghadan, the deputy intelligence minister.

However, these do not go nearly far enough, particularly if the EU is inclined to continue its support for the JCPOA.

It is incumbent upon the EU to stop softening its tone toward the Islamic Republic, and instead join the Trump administration in imposing maximum pressure on the ruling mullahs of Iran. The more the EU appeases the Iranian government, the more it empowers it to pursue aggressive and terrorist activities.

The European Union really needs to do two things as soon as possible: stop criticizing the Trump administration for its Iran policy, and halt its appeasement policies toward the ruling mullahs of Iran who have committed some of the worst crimes against humanity, not only in Iran but abroad.

On January 19, 2020, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and French President Emmanuel Macron reiterated their commitment to keep Iran nuclear deal alive. Europe has been working to implement a special purpose vehicle that will allow countries to continue trading with Iran, despite US sanctions, known as INSTEX.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15475/us-regime-change-iran

Aiding the Iranian people to oust the regime does not, however, require the US to launch a full-fledged war with the Islamic Republic.

On the contrary, a four-pronged strategy of maximum pressure — involving continued financial pressure on the mullahs; helping local forces expel Iranian proxy groups from Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen; supporting the Iranian protesters through a robust social-media campaign promising a future without repression and terror, and using appropriate military force to deter and protect our interests — would get the job done without troops on the ground.

The goal of US policy on Iran, really to exert “maximum pressure,” should be the change of the mullah-led regime in Tehran before it is armed with nuclear weapons, becomes the hegemon of the Persian Gulf and commands much of the world’s oil and gas. Iran is already seeking to take over Iraq, OPEC’s second-largest crude oil producer, with the fifth-largest oil reserves, in the world.

But helping to spur the end of the Iranian empire — or, at least, keeping its power in check — cannot be accomplished without a clear knowledge and understanding of the nature of the regime.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15448/france-jews-murder

“In France, perpetrators of anti-Semitic attacks claim insanity to elude justice. The mental illness defense has become more prevalent when it comes to hate crimes in France. And it seems to be working.” — Shirli Sitbon, Haaretz.

Muslim anti-Semitism has long been ignored in France.

“The situation is not under control.” — Celine Pina, Le Figaro.

Paris, April 4, 2017. Sarah Halimi, a 66-year-old Jewish woman, is thrown from her third-floor balcony or window. Her body lands in the building’s courtyard. Her murderer first had tortured her. Neighbors had heard screams and called the police. Nine officers came, but when they heard through the door a man shouting “Allahu Akbar”, they ran downstairs to wait for reinforcements. When Kobili Traoré finally surrendered, he said, “I killed the sheitan” (Arabic for “Satan”). While torturing his victim, he said, he had recited verses from the Qur’an, and the Qur’an had “ordered him to kill a Jew”. He said he had spent the previous day in a nearby mosque. He was placed in a mental institution, where he told the psychiatrist who examined him that he smoked marijuana.

The murder was not mentioned in the newspapers. A French Jewish organizations spoke of a “distressing anti-Semitic crime” and organized a silent demonstration in front of Halimi’s building. It was only then that a few articles were written. The French presidential election was about to take place, and journalists from the mainstream media apparently did not want to speak about an anti-Semitic murder committed by a Muslim.

The judge assigned to the case, Anne Ihuellou, at first refused to acknowledge that the murder had been a hate crime. It took the Halimi family’s lawyers more than six months to get her finally to concede, on February 27, 2018, that the motive for the murder had in fact been anti-Semitic.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15468/china-hegemonic-objectives

It [the deal] does not prevent China from its pursuing its aggressive designs on the South and East China Seas, where it is positioning itself to challenge the U.S.’s role as protector of the world’s sea lines of communication…

Cambodia’s concession to China includes a 99-year lease for 20% of its coastline. This arrangement provides China with the ability to keep Vietnam’s granting of access to the U.S. Navy in check.

Of equal, if not greater, significance is China’s purchase of territory overlooking the potential maritime chokepoint, the Panama Canal Zone.

The other [Chinese acquisition] is a 99-year lease of Australia’s Port Darwin, where U.S. Marines train for six months of each year. This means that China will be able to document American military exercises and collect ship signal emissions from U.S. combatants.

This pattern of China’s investments in some 20 ports around the globe should be of great concern to the Free World.

The recent signing of the first stage of a trade pact between the United States and China should not mask what appear to be Beijing’s ultimate hegemonic ambitions.

Phase 1 of the deal, which went into effect on January 19, includes a partial reduction of current — and cancellation of planned — tariffs; a Chinese pledge to increase American agricultural imports; and an agreement from Beijing to address Washington’s concerns about U.S. technology being transferred to China by American companies doing business there, and about intellectual property theft.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15413/china-tibet-dialogue

China has persisted in doing inestimable damage to Tibetan identity, language, culture and ecology. Communist China has destroyed more than 6,000 Tibetan monasteries on the Plateau, and Beijing’s destructive activities in Tibet continue unabated. Since 2009, at least 156 Tibetans have immolated themselves in protest against Chinese rule.

It is not only the Dalai Lama, however, who needs to push for complete Tibetan independence. All liberal democracies that uphold the value of freedom need to do so, as well.

The US Congress recently introduced the Tibetan Policy and Support Act of 2019, which seeks to impose sanctions and a visa ban on any Chinese official who interferes in the selection of a successor to the current Dalai Lama, and which requires the establishment of an American consulate in Lhasa.

The next step for the US administration in its negotiations with Beijing should be to insist on total Tibetan independence.

Tibet’s spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, apparently hoping to ease the tension that has existed between Lhasa and Beijing since 1949, recently expressed interest in “explor[ing] the same channels of communication” with the Chinese government that he had established in the past.