Taiwanese Say Taiwan Representation at China’s National Congress Was Simply Beijing Propaganda

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF CNN)

 

Many Taiwanese Say Taiwan Representation at China’s National Congress Was Simply Beijing Propaganda

Taiwan-born delegate of 19th CCP Congress, Lu Li’an. Chinese state-owned Xinhua photo.

Mainland China and Taiwan have a rocky relationship. Taiwan is a de facto political entity that has operated independently from mainland China since 1949, when the Kuomintang forces were defeated by the Communists in the civil war and retreated to Taiwan. Beijing has never recognized Taiwan’s independent status and vows to one day “reunite” China and reclaim the territory.

So at first glance, it might seem unusual that Beijing arranges for Taiwan representatives to attend the National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) every five years.

However, the presence of Taiwan delegates at the event is intended as a political demonstration of Beijing’s “one China” principle. In the past, these so-called Taiwan representatives were born in mainland China.

In a break with tradition, the chosen Taiwan delegate at the 19th National Congress held in October 2017, Lu Li’an, was actually born and educated in Taiwan — before she went to China to work as a professor.

Nevertheless, many Taiwanese saw her participation as inane, given that Taiwan is not ruled by China, and a political move meant to pressure Taiwan into accepting Beijing’s understanding of the “one China” principle and suppressing the pro-independence movements in Taiwan.

Since Taiwan has been colonized by different countries throughout its history, Taiwanese defectors are not unheard of. Lu is not the first person (and will not be the last one) leveraged like this. Yifu Lin, for example, who served as the chief economist and senior vice president of the World Bank from 2008 to 2012, swam to mainland China in 1979 when he was a military officer in Taiwan.

While Lu’s presence at the CCP’s National Congress was largely considered a joke in Taiwan, it did touch on the the serious issue of nationality for Taiwanese working in China. Taiwanese law prohibits  Taiwanese from establishing a residence or holding a Chinese passport, or taking positions in the CCP, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, or the Chinese civil service. Given that Lu holds a Chinese passport and became a delegate at the CCP’s National Congress, the Taiwan government decided to revoke her citizenship.

At the same time, Taiwan’s National Security Bureau also announced that they will examine the status of another 19 Taiwanese who have taken positions in the CCP or the People’s Liberation Army.

‘If you upset Taiwanese before you join the [CCP], what use are you’?

To further fire up the discussions in Taiwan, two Taiwanese graduate students from Beijing University publicly declared that they wanted to join the CCP not long after the National Congress.

One of them did so in a letter published on Guancha, an online news and comments aggregator. In it, he claimed that he wants to join the CCP because speech freedom is limited, thought is monopolized, and democracy is controlled by a few people in Taiwan.

The student’s letter was widely condemned in Taiwan, given that Taiwan is ranked 45 and China is ranked 176 in 2017 World Press Freedom Index and Taiwanese voted to choose their president and legislators directly.

Given that Beijing’s goal is to eventually regain control over Taiwan, Joyce Yen, the founder of publishing house Ars Longa Press, explained on Facebook that these two students won’t benefit the CCP like Lu does:

Please notice that [Lu Li’an] did not apply to be a delegate. It is Sha Hailin, the director of the United Front Work Department in Shanghai, who introduced her for this position.
To be chosen as an example for this position, her outlook and communication skills are seriously evaluated.
Regarding those two Taiwanese students who claimed to join the Chinese Communist Party, aside from their background, their outlook and communication skills are too far below the standard. Do they think that the Communist Party would like you only because you say good things about it?
Wrong answer! […] If you upset Taiwanese before you join the Chinese Communist Party, what use are you to their United Front?

The United Front Work Department is one of five departments directly under the CCP’s Central Committee which orchestrates soft power policies at home and abroad. It has a bureau that works on the “one country, two systems” political relationship between China and the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macao, and recruits the pro-China Taiwanese.

Yi-Luo People, a mainland Chinese exchange student in Taiwan, argued on Facebookthat the Taiwan-born Beijing University students were motivated by material interest to denounce Taiwan:

When they say they are selling Taiwan, it is actually Taiwan’s independence movement on sale. When the pro-independence movement in Taiwan becomes stronger, Beijing will pay more and more to build up a united front in Taiwan.

[Quote from the writer’s letter to local media outlet] “As a Henan-born Chinese, it is obvious that I cannot get what they get from the Chinese Communist Party even if I shamelessly sell out my homeland. It is the same for anyone born in Beijing, Shanghai, Sichuan, or Guangdong. What Taiwanese differ from us is that Taiwan is a de facto independent country and has its own government, military, and diplomatic interactions with those Euro-American countries no matter how Beijing claims it to be part of China.’

‘I love Taiwan, and I love China as my home country, too.’

Putting border politics aside, the controversy surrounding Lu has put many Taiwanese in a difficult situation. While neither Taiwan nor China allows dual citizenship, quite a number of Taiwanese working in mainland China or couples married across the Taiwan Strait have attained citizenship in China. If they are forced to choose between the two, they must either give up their work in mainland China or conform to Chinese patriotic sentiment, which expects a person to love the country more than their homeland.

Even CCP delegate Lu Li’an faced criticism from mainland Chinese patriots when she told a Taiwanese reporter during the CCP Congress that “I love Taiwan, and I love China as my home country, too.” Her answer was viewed by some mainland Chinese as “politically incorrect”. A Weibo user called “Lazy-fish-play-in-Weibo” explained the logic of Lu’s critics:

People who [criticized Lu’s answer], Lu’s response “I love Taiwan, and I love China too” does not sound right. They don’t like the word “too” because they interpreted “too” as the second place. Which means she had not put China in the first place. Secondly, she seems to separate Taiwan from China. […] This author even prepared a model answer for her. S/he suggested Lu say, “I love China, and I love Taiwan as part (or a province) of China, [or] I also love Taiwan because it belongs to China.”

After Tsai Ing-Wen, who is the leader of Taiwan’s pro-independence party, won the presidential election in 2016, Beijing cut off diplomatic dialogue with the Taiwanese government and pressured other countries to end their relations. On the other hand, China’s United Front Work Department has tried very hard to win support from elites in Taiwan. Recently, China’s Fujian Province claimed to open 1,000 positions in universities for Taiwanese academics to apply. To apply or not to apply for the positions — the choice will be both personal and political.

Trump And Clinton’s Are Proof Sexual Harassment And Sexual Assault Mean Nothing

DONALD TRUMP AND BILL CLINTON ARE NEON PROOF THAT SEXUAL ASSAULT/HARASSMENT MEAN NOTHING

(SEXUAL ASSAULT IS NOT A REPUBLICAN NOR A DEMOCRATIC ISSUE: IT IS A LEGAL AND A MORAL ISSUE!)

As about every one here in the U.S. know, and probably in all other countries as well, if you are very rich, well-connected, or are in a powerful job, you can treat women like insignificant sex toys. Ever since that well-connected Hollywood Producer finally got called out for his sexual crimes and this “#ME-TO” group got started a few days afterword, it seems that everyday more people are being called out for these crimes. In our society we tend to think of men sexually pushing themselves onto women and I believe that in probably 90+% of the real world cases are such, men against women. Yet folks we must also realize that there are cases of powerful women ‘forcing’ themselves sexually on some men and upon some other women. Also there is the reality of men ‘forcing’ themselves sexually on other men. There are some gay men and some gay women who are guilty of these crimes also.

 

In our society we have known for many decades that men, and women, are being raped while in prison. In our society it is so bad that people make jokes about when a guy gets sent to prison that his rear end is going to be getting torn up. Folks this is not funny, it is not humorous, it is mentally and morally sick! Back in 1978 I worked as a state prison guard for about two weeks in Illinois. I had a couple of family members in State Prisons before but I wanted to have a better understanding of what they had to live through, other than just from the ‘visiting’ room. I never witnessed a rape while I was there but I did hear some guards laughing about ones that they had ‘set up’ against some prisoners, they thought such things as prisoners getting gang raped was hilarious. I know that when I was in my early 20’s that I had several times that gay men tried to insist that they could force their wishes on me even though I had made it very plain that I was totally straight and told them to leave me alone or they would end up getting hurt. Unfortunately, there were several times that I had to make my point more clear to them when they refused to leave me alone.

 

Now, I would like to get to the headline of this article, people like Bill Clinton and Donald Trump and we should add in others like George H.W. Bush and his ‘little me’ George W. Bush. Even well before Bill Clinton of Donald Trump were elected President most everyone should have know that these two men were nothing but sexual predators, yet both major political parties endorsed these two criminals to lead their party. Think about it, millions of men and women voted for them anyway. Right now Mr. Trump should be in a federal prison cell, right next to Bill Clinton. Think about this issue also please, both of their wives know exactly what their husbands are and yet they are still married to them and still support them. Now lets talk about the disgusting old fart George H.W. Bush. Folks evidently he is still, even from his wheelchair, sexually assaulting women, and his wife Barbara is standing right next to him in some cases, just smiling. Now, the reason I think that ‘Little Me’, George W. Bush belongs in this scum pile. Do you remember when he was President and he was at a gathering of World Leaders in Europe when he came up from behind the seated German Chancellor Angela Merkel and started massaging her shoulders and upper back? Do you remember how she yelped because she had no idea this moron was either behind her nor that he was fixing to physically put his hands upon her? For George W. to have so casually done this to a woman in such a camera filled event, what do you think he does to women, whom he doesn’t even know, where the cameras aren’t at?

 

Friends, until the people of the United States physically force these perverts to be put into prison for their sexual assaults, they will continue. If we the people do not right now force these people out of their positions and insist on long prison terms for them and for their wives (because they are accessories to their crimes in some cases) as they just go along with the flow per say, these crimes are only going to get much worse. Right now if you are paying any attention to the National News stations we are seeing the proof of what I am saying here today. Examples of our First Lady, she just stays totally silent, obviously ‘living the life style’ is more important to her than her own personal integrity or the lives of the women her husband molest. Look at how Hillary Clinton is acting about all of these men being brought out into the open! She is only verbally attacking the men whom are Republicans and she is staying quiet about the accused Democrats and about her own husbands continuing assaults on women. Donald ‘the Fraud’ Trump, do you notice how he will blast accused Democrats yet stay totally silent about this anti-Christian dude in the Alabama Senate race as well as being totally silent about the dozens of women that he has sexually assaulted himself? And speaking of this child molester in Alabama how even his wife is verbally and physically ‘standing behind her man’?

 

Just as I was getting ready to close this letter to you a ‘Yahoo notice’ just popped up on my computer saying the following “President Trump discounts assault accusations against Republican candidate Roy Moore, saying Alabama voters ‘don’t need a liberal’ in that Senate seat”, end of quote. Remember, Mr. Moore is a former DA and a former Alabama State Supreme Court lead Judge. Also notice these facts, this fraud we have as our Nations ‘top Cop’ (Attorney General) Jeff Sessions held the Senate Seat Mr. Moore is trying to fill. Mr. Sessions has personally know Mr. Moore for decades down in Alabama, is this why the Attorney General isn’t having him arrested and put into prison? Is this a case of the ‘good ole boy system’, especially being they are of the same ‘anti-Christ’ political party? Folks, I am not a Democrat either, they have proven themselves over and over to be just as bad or even worse that their Republican bedfellows. Either ‘We The People’ stand up as one and physically throw these pieces of trash out of ‘Our Government’ or we as a Nation deserve to have these pieces of trash as our ‘Leaders’. My personal bet is that the Democrat Doug Jones will win the Senate seat in Alabama on December 12th then hopefully that will be the start of sweeping the human feces’ out of Our Political System, the business world and out of Hollywood. If not, we have no one to blame but ourselves!

 

 

China’s Fickle Government Whines About Neighbors Democracy: Constantly

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE HINDUSTAN TIMES NEWS AGENCY)

((oped) THE PEOPLE OF TIBET AND PRADESH DO NOT RECOGNIZE CHINA AS THEIR SOVEREIGN SO IT IS THEY WHO NEED TO QUIT WHINING, AND SHUT UP THEMSELVES!) (trs)

China objects to Pres Kovind’s Arunachal trip, says bilateral ties at ‘crucial’ juncture

China claims Arunachal Pradesh as part of south Tibet and routinely criticises India if its leaders visit the state.

INDIA Updated: Nov 20, 2017 23:22 IST

Sutirtho Patranobis
Sutirtho Patranobis
Beijing, Hindustan Times
President Ram Nath Kovind at the valedictory function of 40 years of celebrations of Vivekananda Kendra Vidyalaya, Arunachal Pradesh, at Indira Gandhi Park in Itanagar on Sunday.
President Ram Nath Kovind at the valedictory function of 40 years of celebrations of Vivekananda Kendra Vidyalaya, Arunachal Pradesh, at Indira Gandhi Park in Itanagar on Sunday. (PTI)

China on Monday strongly criticised President Ram Nath Kovind’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh, saying Sino-India relations were at a “crucial moment” and that New Delhi should not complicate the dispute.

“China firmly opposes the Indian leader’s relevant activities in the relevant region,” foreign ministry spokesperson Lu Kang told a regular briefing.

“The Chinese government (has) never acknowledged the so-called Arunachal Pradesh,” Lu said, responding to a question from the Chinese state media on Kovind’s visit to the northeastern state.

China claims Arunachal Pradesh as part of south Tibet and routinely criticises India if its leaders visit the state.

Read more

Barely two weeks ago, Beijing had criticised defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman’s visit to the state.

The official Xinhua news agency went on to describe Arunachal Pradesh as being “illegally” established in areas of the Tibet Autonomous Region.

Kovind had said on Sunday that if the northeast is the crown of the country, Arunachal Pradesh is the “jewel in the crown”. The President was on a four-day tour of the northeast.

On Monday, Lu continued the tirade.

“China and India and are in the process of settling this issue (border dispute) through negotiation and consultation, and seek to reach a fair and reasonable solution acceptable to all. Pending final settlement all parties should work for peace and tranquillity,” Lu said.

“China firmly opposes the Indian leader’s relevant activities in the relevant region,” he said, adding: “China and India’s relations are at a crucial moment and we hope India could work in the same direction and maintain general picture of bilateral ties and refrain from complicating border issue.”

Lu also said India should “work to create favourable conditions for border negotiations and for the sound and stable development of bilateral ties”.

Read more

The Xinhua report said, “The so-called ‘Arunachal Pradesh’ was established largely on three areas of China’s Tibet – Monyul, Loyul and Lower Tsayul – which are currently under India’s illegal occupation.”

It added, “In 1914, British colonialists secretly instigated the illegal ‘McMahon Line’ in an attempt to incorporate into India the above-mentioned three areas of Chinese territory. None of the successive Chinese governments have ever recognised this line.”

Meanwhile, an official statement from China on last week’s border dialogue between officials of the two countries said it was in the “fundamental interest of both countries to maintain the healthy and stable development” of bilateral relations and this is the “common expectation of both the region and the international community”.

Diplomats from the two countries met in Beijing on Friday for the 10th round of the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on India-China Border Affairs (WMCC), initiated in 2012 with a focus on maintaining peace along the frontier.

It added that in the next phase, the two sides will continue to implement the important consensus reached by leaders of the two sides.

Both The Democratic And Republican Parties Are Anti-Christ Parties!

THE DEMOCRATIC AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTIES ARE ‘ANTI-CHRIST’ PARTIES!

(I FIRST PUBLISHED THIS ARTICLE ON SEPTEMBER 4TH OF 2016, TWO MONTHS BEFORE THE U.S. ELECTIONS.)

(THE CURRENT EVENTS HERE IN NOVEMBER OF 2017 IN ALABAMA WHERE A POLITICAL CANDIDATE ‘ROY MOORE’ WHO HAS A 40+ YEAR HISTORY OF SEXUALLY ABUSING VERY YOUNG GIRLS IS BEING ALLOWED TO CAMPAIGN FROM THE PULPIT OF A BAPTIST CHURCH. FOLKS, THIS IS VERY DETRIMENTAL TO,  THE OPPOSITE OF THE TEACHINGS OF JESUS CHRIST. CHRISTIAN CHURCHES AND EVEN PEOPLE WHO CALL THEMSELVES CHRISTIANS WHO ARE BACKING SUCH A PIECE OF ‘LUKE WARM WATER’ ARE WALKING UP TO THE CROSS AND SLAPPING CHRIST IN THE FACE BY THEIR ACTIONS!) (trs) 

When I was a young child back in the 1950’s-60’s I was raised in a family who believed in the Democratic Party. My parents were folks who believed in the reality that working people if they wanted to be able to financially survive needed Union protections. They also believed that the Republican Party was solely for the wealthiest people and was clearly anti-working people. They also believed that the Democratic Party, because they cared about the poor was the party that the Churches backed. I never remember going to a Church that had a Republican Minister simply because the Republicans agendas were in direct contrast to the love, kindness and sharing teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

In 1973 the U.S. Supreme Court with their ruling on ‘Roe v Wade’ abortion ruling seemed to change the political map within the Churches. The teachings of abortion within the Scriptures are definitely anti-abortion yet almost all of the Churches and their Ministers remained as Democrats because they could not transcend over to a Party (Republicans) who were against basically all of the teachings of Jesus about how we should all treat each other. Yet, my question is how can a Church, a Minister, or their congregation openly or even behind closed door’s back abortion? How can you say you or a Minister (that word means, Servant) say you are a Christian (follower of Christ) and at the same time back abortion?

 

What I do not understand is why the people who say they are Christians have not created a third National Party! The Democratic Party strongly backs a woman’s “right” to have an abortion at any time during a pregnancy. The Republican Party wants to end all abortions seeing them as the murdering of over a million children here in the U.S. each year. So, Republicans have garnered the “conservative Christians” into their camp because of the abortion issue. This is even though the Republican Party Platform is still strongly anti-working people, and anti the people having the right to work under Union protections.

 

I am a registered voting Independent because I see both Parties as crooked and pure evil. When the people go to the polls this November we just like every other election know that either a Republican or a Democrat is going to win at every level of Government. To vote for anyone else is nothing more than a protest vote that has no effect on who actually wins the elections, it will be a Democrat or a Republican. So, just like this November we Voters are having to consider which one of the two Evils win. Especially concerning the Presidency this year, which Evil is less Evil, that is what we have to look forward to. For either of these political parties to claim to be close or closer to God is total BS. Evil is still Evil, neither of these Political Parties has the endorsement of the Scriptures of God, so how can anyone who calls themselves a Christian or Jewish endorse or support either of these Demonic structures? I used the title of them being anti-Christ, I am not saying that either Parties leadership is ‘the anti-Christ’. What I am saying is that both Parties policies are in direct indifference to the teachings of God’s Holy Scriptures, thus both Parties are Anti-Christ!

The unbearable hypocrisy of Roy Moore’s Christian rhetoric

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF CBS ‘THINK’)

(OPED: FAKE CHRISTIANS, PEOPLE LIKE MR. MOORE AND DONALD TRUMP ARE THE EPITOMY OF ‘LUKE WARM WATER CHRISTIANS’, JUST LIKE THE FAR RIGHT OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, IT IS THESE ‘FAKE CHRISTIANS’ WHO ARE DESTROYING THE REPUTATION OF CHRISTIANITY!) (trs)

Rev. Dr. William Barber The unbearable hypocrisy of Roy Moore’s Christian rhetoric

This isn’t Christianity, it’s an extreme form of Republican religionism.

Image: Embattled GOP Senate Candidate Judge Roy Moore Attends Church Revival Service At Baptist Church In Jackson, Alabama Jonathan Bachman / Getty Images

A disturbing pattern has emerged since the Washington Post first reported that four women accused Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore of offenses ranging from the creepy to the criminal. People in Gadsden, Alabama, where Moore worked in the District Attorney’s office three decades ago, say it was “common knowledge” that Moore pursued teenagers when he was in his 30s. Locals told the New Yorker that they recall being told that the local mall banned Moore for the same reason.

Accusations of criminal assault are difficult to prove in court and the statute of limitations in these cases has since passed. But Republicans outside of Alabama have started to back away from Moore following the allegations; They have chosen to believe the accusers.

Moore’s base, on the other hand, continues to support him despite the evidence. For many of them, this is a matter of faith. Jerome Cox, the pastor of Greenwood Baptist Church in Prattville, Alabama, told NBC News he would be supporting Moore because “he’s done a lot of good for the state of Alabama… Everything else is for the Lord to sort out.”

Related

This is not Christianity. Rather, it is an extreme Republican religionism that stands by the party and regressive policy no matter what. It’s not the gospel of Christ, but a gospel of greed. It is the religion of racism and lies, not the religion of redemption and love.

It is unlikely that any of Moore’s accusers can definitively prove that he sexually assaulted them 30 years ago (a point the defiant former judge knows well). But even before these allegations made national headlines, it was clear that Moore’s policy agenda endangered the children of Alabama and this nation. This man, who wants to be Alabama’s next Senator, wants to repeal Obamacare, making it health care inaccessible for millions, in Alabama and elsewhere. He has said Islam is a “false religion” homosexual conduct “should be illegal.” and curtail equal protection under the law for gay and transgender people. Moore supports a tax plan that would hurt the poor and working poor.

In short, Moore’s political agenda presents a credible threat to millions of vulnerable people in America. Yet Moore claims to be the moral and Christian candidate, using religion as U.S. slave masters did before him to justify actions which fly in the face of Christ’s teachings. Like segregationists, Moore imagines the struggle for equality in America as a story of loss. At a revival meeting earlier this week, Moore complained that he was being persecuted. He also lamented the fact that the courts took prayer out of schools in 1962 and made a cryptic and confusing reference to “new rights” created in 1965, the year the Voting Rights Act was signed. Some members of the congregation responded, “Amen!”

Subscribe

Let our news meet your inbox.

SIGN UP

 Workers remove a monument of the Ten Commandments installed by Roy Moore in the Alabama Judicial Building in 2003. Tami Chappell / Reuters File

As one who survived abuse by a stranger in my own childhood, I feel deep empathy for the women who have come forward to name and confront their abuser. At the same time, my soul grieves as a Christian minister for people who are fed such a distorted view of Christianity and racism that they are willing to support Moore no matter what. I have heard the confessions of abusers: I know that people who are broken and hurting in their own souls hurt people and rally others to join them out of deep pain. But I am deeply troubled by Moore’s determination to wrap his own painful policies and pain-causing ways in the theological claim of being like Christ.

There is nothing Christian about the policies Moore has supported. They are as immoral as the terrible abuse he so vehemently denies. While he wants to compare his plight to the suffering of Jesus, there is no biblical basis for policies that hurt poor people and children.

As well as he knows his Bible, Roy Moore never quotes from the more than 2,000 verses that exhort us to care for the poor, the sick, and the stranger in our midst. He has apparently overlooked the prophet Isaiah, who said to men like Moore in his own day: “Doom to you who legislate evil, who make laws that make victims — laws that make misery for the poor, that rob the destitute of their dignity, exploiting defenseless widows, taking advantage of homeless children” (Is.10:1-4).

National Republican leaders who claim the moral high ground while renouncing Moore now are like the Republicans who spoke out against white supremacy after Charlottesville, condemning the “hate” but never repenting of white nationalist policy. Their moral outrage rings hollow because it renounces Moore based on his personal patterns but says nothing about the disturbing pattern of his policy agenda.

What is happening right now in Alabama matters for the soul of the nation. Anyone who has any influence must help blacks, progressive whites, and Latinos; gay and straight; Christians, Muslims, Jews, and all who want to move our country forward to get out and vote. This is no time to retreat or remain idle. We must stand up for truth in the public square and reclaim our political and faith traditions which have been hijacked.

Rev. William J. Barber, II is President of Repairers of the Breach and author of The Third Reconstruction. At the invitation of local clergy, he is in Alabama this weekend preparing for the “Poor People’s Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival.”

Robert Mueller Is The Worlds Best Hope For Survival: Imprison Trump

Trump Is The Biggest Idiot The World Has Ever Seen In The White House: And The Most Dangerous

 

The world that we all live in is a very dangerous place, I think that almost all of us would agree with that reality. One thing that the ‘free world’ has been able to do is to at least somewhat rely upon has been the steady hand of the American President. Even when the American people did not agree with the political parties in power I think that at least we felt that our President wasn’t stupid enough to start a nuclear war while we were sleeping. With this current President do you really feel like he has the people’s best interest at the center of his intentions?

 

Donald Trump has made it plain that he believes that he is the smartest and the most important person in the whole world, he has said this several times. During the campaign, he often bragged about how he knew more about the events in the Middle East than what the Generals knew. We all knew that he was/is a total egomaniac and we all knew that he is a habitual liar. This is one of the things that we knew he had in common with Hillary, so us voters had to choose between which total fraud and crook we wanted to have as our next President. Trump pretty much removes any possible doubt about how totally ignorant he is about pretty much every issue in the world. Personally, I cannot stand Hillary Clinton but the one thing, and probably the only thing that she grades higher on that Trump is that at least she is smart, Trump has proven himself to be mentally unhinged, his stupidity is a huge part of what makes him so dangerous to the whole world.

 

As a devout Christian, I cannot condone hoping that he would do the world a huge favor and just fall over dead. I have come to the reality that what I hope will happen is that Robert Mueller can hurry up and charge Donald Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, Ivanka Trump, and Jarred Kushner with as many felonies as possible as quickly as possible. I totally believe that they are guilty of fraud, tax evasion, tax fraud, lying to Congress and a whole slew of other crimes that some Congressmen have detailed in their attempt to impeach this moron. This includes their working with the mass murderer President Putin of Russia in his helping Trump win the 2016 election. President Putin, unlike Donald Trump, is not stupid. Mr. Putin would know that the best avenue to steal the election for Mr. Trump was to not only to have ‘fake news’ stories put all over the T.V., Radio, and the internet but the real goal was to tap into the election systems of some of the states. By turning three or four of the state elections that the Democrats/Hillary took for granted that they would win, states like Florida, Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and or Michigan that Mr. Trump would win the Electoral College count even though he would still lose the actual vote count. I personally believe that within the next ten years at the most, this fact will come out into the open.

 

I believe that if Mr. Trump has not gotten us into a nuclear war with North Korea and with China by the time that the 2018 elections are held next November that the Republicans will lose both the Congress and the Senate and once that has happened the fickle frauds in the Republican Senate will go ahead and vote to impeach the fraud. But, I am hoping that Mr. Mueller is able to get the White House Swamp cleared out well before twelve months from now. Of course, this is saying that there even is a White House twelve months from now. I believe that if this idiot is still in Office twelve months from now, there may well not be. I do not believe that the Republicans in the Senate have the testicles at this time to join the Democrats to do what the whole world needs them to do and that is to impeach him before he gets the whole world glowing.

In Zimbabwe, an anxious wait to see if Mugabe will return after military takeover  

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE WASHINGTON POST)

 

In Zimbabwe, an anxious wait to see if Mugabe will return after military takeover

 Play Video 2:48
What to know about the military takeover in Zimbabwe
On Nov. 15, Zimbabwe’s military took control of the country, detaining President Robert Mugabe. (Amber Ferguson/The Washington Post)
 November 15 at 7:41 PM
 After ruling Zimbabwe for nearly four decades, leading the country from the triumph of its independence struggle to economic collapse, the world’s oldest head of state became a prisoner of the military he once commanded.Robert Mugabe, 93, was detained along with his wife, according to a military announcement Wednesday. The move appears to end one of Africa’s most controversial political dynasties while raising questions about what might come next — military rule, a transitional government or a settlement that would allow Mugabe to return to power.

No matter what happens, this appears to be a watershed moment for Zimbabwe and southern Africa, which have suffered from the tumult of Mugabe’s reign, even as his hold on power sometimes seemed unshakable.

Zimbabweans awoke early Wednesday to a televised announcement from an army general promising that there was “not a military takeover,” although Mugabe had been detained and armored vehicles were rolling into Harare, the capital.

Despite the assurances, the events bore all the signs of a coup. Troops were stationed around the city. The army took over the television station. The army spokesman, Maj. Gen. Sibusiso Moyo, said in his televised statement that “criminals” in Mugabe’s regime were being targeted. Although there was little indication of violence by Wednesday night, many residents of the capital remained paralyzed — unsure whether they should celebrate Mugabe’s ouster or prepare themselves for a new era of undemocratic rule.

The commander of Zimbab­we’s military forces, Gen. Constantino Chiwenga, made the move as a struggle over who will succeed the country’s elderly leader came to a head.

Mugabe led the country to independence from Britain in 1980, fighting in a guerrilla war that put an end to white minority rule. Upon becoming president, he galvanized the population with fiery speeches promising that “Zimbabwe will never be a colony again.”

But that mantra lost much of its power in recent years, as Mugabe’s presidency was marred by allegations of corruption, nepotism and repression. Zimbabwe went from being one of Africa’s wealthiest nations to a country reeling under one of the highest inflation rates in modern history, its currency so devalued that it had to print a $100 billion note.

Mugabe recently purged some key officials from the ruling party, ZANU-PF, paving the way for his 52-year-old spouse, Grace, to succeed him. Many see that move as a major miscalculation, alienating Mugabe from the civilians and military leaders on whom he had long depended.

As of Wednesday night, the fate of Mugabe and his wife was unclear. Neither had released a statement.

South African President Jacob Zuma, who announced that he was sending high-level envoys to Harare, said that he had spoken to Mugabe and that he is “fine” — albeit confined to his home.

“Mugabe and his family are safe and sound, and their security is guaranteed,” Moyo, the Zimbab­wean general, said in the televised statement. An armored vehicle blocked the road in front of Mugabe’s offices as soldiers milled around.

“We are only targeting criminals around him who are committing crimes that are causing social and economic suffering,” Moyo continued.

The statement was played over and over on state television and radio, but no more details were provided. Rumors spread that a number of cabinet ministers had been arrested. At least one, Finance Minister Ignatius Chombo, was taken from his home by soldiers, according to an aide.

But the military remained tight-lipped about Mugabe, his wife and other members of Mugabe’s inner circle.

“We are not saying these names now,” said Overson Mugwisi, a spokesman for the Zimbabwe Defense Forces.

World leaders were monitoring the situation. The British foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, said that “nobody wants simply to see the transition from one unelected tyrant to a next.”

The U.S. State Department refrained from calling the action a coup but said Washington was “concerned by recent actions taken by Zimbabwe’s military forces” and called on authorities to exercise restraint.

For decades, Mugabe had a reputation as an unwavering critic of many Western policies and international institutions. His supporters hailed him for actions such as the seizure of white-owned farms. Although the farms were meant to be given to black families, many ended up in the hands of Mugabe’s close associates, and within years a large number had fallen fallow because their new owners had no background or interest in farming.

On the streets of Harare, the news of the military takeover was greeted with cautious optimism by many.

“We are happy that we are going to have another leader,” said a man in Harare’s Chitungwiza neighborhood who called himself Yemurai. “Even if it’s going to be another dictator, we accept a new one. Look, we are jobless, hungry and poverty-stricken. All we want is something different.” Like most people interviewed, he spoke on the condition that his full name not be used.

But some people worried that the military intervention could lead to violence.

“This is a disaster,” said Baxon, a man from the Glen View area. “Solving one problem by creating another. We don’t want another war, but it seems we are headed that way. We have heard there are people in the army not in agreement with what Chiwenga did.”

But there were mounting signs that Mugabe’s former allies were quickly turning against him.

Victor Matemadanda, secretary general of the powerful War Veterans Association, thanked Chiwenga for intervening and said Mugabe should be dismissed.

“We will be recalling President Robert Mugabe as the first secretary of the party and the head of state for the crimes he has committed,” Matemadanda said in a news conference.

In Harare’s central business district, residents said all seemed normal.

Across the country, Zimbabweans exchanged frantic text messages asking for updates, debating whether Mugabe had finally been toppled.

Political analyst Mike Mavura said it was important for the ­military to say this was not a coup for reasons of international legitimacy.

“We are not in the 1960s and 1970s anymore, when coups in Africa were left, right and center — I think they are trying very hard to appear progressive,” he said. “However, of interest to democracy, the elections scheduled for next year, will they take place?”

Zimbabwe’s political crisis reached a boiling point last week with Mugabe’s dismissal of Vice President Emmerson Mnangagwa, clearing the way for Mugabe’s wife to succeed the leader.

Mugabe told supporters he had dismissed Mnangagwa for disloyalty and disrespect, as well as using witchcraft to take power. Mnangagwa later fled to South Africa.

The move exacerbated divisions in the ZANU-PF party, where the youth faction is firmly on Grace Mugabe’s side, while many older veterans of the struggle against white rule look to Mnangagwa. As a former defense minister, Mnangagwa has strong support in the military.

Political commentator Maxwell Saungweme said by phone that the military will probably try to pressure Mugabe to step down in favor of Mnangagwa as acting president.

“But this plan may not pan out, as Mugabe might resist this. So the whole thing may be messy,” he warned.

Didymus Mutasa, a former presidential affairs minister who was fired by Mugabe in 2014, said he hoped that the military takeover would “help us start on a democratic process.”

Zimbabwe was once a breadbasket for the region, but its economy and especially the agricultural sector have suffered in recent years.

Meanwhile, Mugabe was seen as being increasingly under the influence of his wife, who is also known as “Gucci Grace” for the rumored extravagance of her foreign shopping trips. The country’s per-capita gross domestic product is $1,008, according to the World Bank.

In recent weeks, there have been signs of an increased sensitivity to criticism of the government. Four people were detained for booing Grace Mugabe at a rally, and an American woman was arrested for allegedly tweeting insulting comments about Mugabe.

Schemm reported from Addis Ababa, Ethi­o­pia. Brian Murphy in Washington contributed to this report.

The day Palestine gave up

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE TIMES OF ISRAEL)

 

ANALYSISARAFAT MISREAD THE ISRAELIS. ABBAS MISREADS THE PALESTINIANS

The day Palestine gave up

In last month’s reconciliation agreement, Abbas handed his legacy into Hamas’s keeping, and Hamas revealed that it is strong enough to drag its people to war, but not to freedom

Haviv Rettig Gur

File: Palestinians protesting in Gaza, November 12, 2012. (Wissam Nassar/Flash90)

File: Palestinians protesting in Gaza, November 12, 2012. (Wissam Nassar/Flash90)

On November 1, against all expectations, Hamas officials dismantled the checkpoints the organization maintained inside the Israeli-controlled crossings on the Israeli-Gazan border.

It was a dramatic step. No longer would Palestinians leaving Gaza for Israel or the West Bank face questioning by Hamas intelligence officials about their business. No longer would Palestinians entering Gaza face the exorbitant import taxes and other fees imposed by Hamas.

That bears repeating. In taking this step, Hamas, a group choked on almost every side by enemies foreign and domestic, willingly surrendered a lucrative source of income that fed many millions of shekels each year into its coffers.

More startling still: it was a step beyond what Hamas was strictly required to do at this stage under the reconciliation agreement signed with the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority in Cairo last month that handed some control over Gaza to the PA.

A Hamas security man walks inside a border checkpoint building after it was decommissioned at the northern entrance of the Gaza Strip just past the Israeli-controlled Erez crossing, on November 1, 2017. (AFP Photo/Mahmud Hams)

It is not enough to simply say these actions are part of “reconciliation.” Hamas’s commitment to “national reconciliation” has never extended this far in the past. What changed? What could possibly drive Hamas to surrender part of its rule over Gaza and renounce vital sources of influence and money?

Winners and losers

At first glance, it is Fatah, not Hamas, that appears the clear winner from the agreement. In the reconciliation deal, Fatah regained a foothold in Gaza for the first time since its forces were summarily routed from the Strip in 2007.

The advantages for Fatah are many. Its chief, PA President Mahmoud Abbas, now has an answer to the complaint occasionally heard from Israeli officials that he cannot negotiate a peace agreement because he neither controls nor represents half of the Palestinian body politic. Similarly, his standing on the world stage is boosted by the sheer fact of movement. There is a crack in the status quo. If Fatah and Hamas can reconcile, some diplomats have quietly suggested, perhaps wider gulfs, such as those separating Israelis and Palestinians, can also be bridged.

The ability to show progress also has financial implications. Incorporating Hamas into a new PA government would probably cost the PA dearly, as some countries and international institutions would find it difficult to fund Palestinian agencies linked to Hamas or its officials. On the other hand, if Fatah can incorporate Hamas sufficiently for “reconciliation” to be realized, while maintaining a firewall between Hamas and aid-receiving institutions, the takeover of Gaza could yet turn out to be a financial boon. International assistance to Gaza all but dried up under Hamas. If it picks up again under PA auspices, there’s a lot of money, institution-building and political capital to be gained for Fatah.

Palestinians in Gaza City wave Palestinian and Egyptian flags to celebrate the reconciliation agreement between Hamas and Fatah in Egypt, October 12, 2017. (AP Photo/Khalil Hamra)

And what has Hamas gained for all that? The answer, ironically, is that the very things it lost are its most significant gain.

When it seized Gaza from Fatah in 2007, Hamas declared that the takeover validated its vision of an Islamic Palestine, that its rise against all odds, against the express wishes of the PA, Israel and much of the international community, proved that these opponents, for all their immense power, could be pushed back, and that pious Muslims could find themselves on the ascendant in their wake.

Hamas’s troubles may have begun when it made the mistake of believing its own propaganda. In the name of its pious devotion to the cause, it drove Gaza from one ideological clash to another, dragging its long-suffering population not only into repeated rounds of war with Israel, but even, inexplicably to outsiders, into the bloodstained mess of the civil war between the Egyptian army and the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas’s one-time patrons and ideological forebears.

Palestinian children fill jerrycans with drinking water from public taps in the southern Gaza Strip, June 11, 2017. (AFP/SAID KHATIB)

Facing an Israeli blockade from the start of Hamas’s rule in 2007, as of 2014 Gazans found themselves under a ruthlessly tightening Egyptian one as well — the Egyptian army’s response to Hamas’s meddling. And beginning in 2017, Abbas’s PA began imposing its own financial stranglehold, denying the Hamas-led government in Gaza funds from the PA for the provision of basic services such as electricity.

Hamas could blame and bluster, but it was becoming increasingly difficult for it to argue it was leading Gaza to a better place.

Hamas’s political leadership has spent the past 10 years attempting to prove that the movement was more than a narrowly conceived paramilitary organization. By 2017, its military wing, which took control of the organization with the rise of Yahya Sinwar in the last internal elections in February, had concluded that the attempt to expand Hamas’s agenda and vision beyond the narrow confines of its guerrilla war against Israel had become a trap, a distraction. It saddled the organization with the thankless monotonies and shackling responsibilities of civilian leadership. It was suddenly in charge of the economic wellbeing, health, education and safety of millions — and for what?

A Palestinian man blows fire as Gazans gather at an intersection to celebrate the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, on August 26, 2014, in Gaza City. (AFP/Roberto Schmidt)

And so both sides in the reconciliation deal believe they are gaining something important. Fatah restores some of its lost privileges and powers after 10 long years of embarrassment in Gaza. Hamas sheds the distracting albatross of civilian rule that so diminished its standing and, many feel, set it up for failure.

Misunderstandings

Abbas’s predecessor, former Fatah leader and Palestinian Authority founder Yasser Arafat, passed away in 2004 having watched his efforts come to ignominious failure. His PA all but crushed, and with much of the post-9/11 West, usually so sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, exasperated at the Palestinian resort to the mass-killing of Israeli civilians, Arafat’s bitter end led to a reexamination of his fundamental strategy by the Palestinian elite.

US President George W. Bush listening to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, left, speaking at a joint news conference following their talks about the Middle East peace process at Bush’s ranch in Crawford, Texas, April 11, 2005. (J. Scott Applewhite /AP Images/JTA)

By the time of Arafat’s death, the man who had destroyed him, who had humiliated him by demolishing part of his Muqata headquarters building in Ramallah with him inside, who had sent Israeli forces marching into Palestinian population centers with one purpose: to capture and dismantle the terror groups and end the wave of suicide bombings detonating in Israeli cities – that man, Ariel Sharon, had become the most popular Israeli leader in decades. Sharon attained that popularity through a simple expedient: amid a wave of detonating pizzerias and mass-murders of Israeli children, he ended the decade-old experiment of negotiating with Palestinian leaders on the assumption that they were capable or willing to offer peace.

Arafat’s failure, and Sharon’s parallel success, drove home something important about the nature of that failure. It was in large part a failure to understand Israelis.

Arafat spent those final years of his life apparently believing that the relentless campaign of bombings and shootings that began in 2000 would convince the Israelis that the Palestinian spirit was indomitable and ultimately irresistible, that they could never be safe in this land and so, eventually, were destined to lose the long war between the two peoples.

A Palestinian woman walks past a portrait of Yasser Arafat at the start of celebrations marking the 13th anniversary of his death, in the West Bank city of Ramallah, on November 9, 2017. (AFP Photo/Abbas Momani)

But Israelis drew the opposite lesson from that experience: according to countless and exhaustive polls, most Israelis concluded from that violence that Palestinian politics could not resist the temptation to transform any gains at the negotiating table into a staging ground for violent jihad against Israeli civilians. Palestinian demands were thus unfulfillable, because they did not end at the Green Line. It did not matter if one found a Palestinian moderate and began negotiating with him. There would always be Arafats, Marwan Barghoutis and Yahya Sinwars in the wings preparing to turn any peace gains into further and deadlier war.

Most Israelis came to believe, in other words, that Palestinian violence was not susceptible to policy or concession, that there was nothing they could afford to give to the Palestinians that would end it — and that therefore it was up to the Israelis themselves to take the necessary steps to crush the Palestinian capacity for violence.

The point here is not to argue that this mainstream Israeli belief is correct. Palestinian society and politics are complex, and Palestinian attitudes have themselves changed over the years. Whether this Israeli view is objectively true is a judgment call, one usually made with insufficient evidence either way. The point here is simply to note that this is what mainstream Israelis have come to believe about the Palestinians — and that this belief carries strategic implications for the Palestinian future.

The Palestinians have yet to recover from Arafat’s miscalculation about Israeli psychology, his misreading of how Israelis would respond to the terrorism of the Second Intifada. They have yet to regain the economic integration and political potential that once drove the Palestinian economy and thrust its cause upon the world stage.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meets with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas at a peace conference in Washington, D.C. on September 2, 2010. (photo credit: Moshe Milner/GPO/Flash90)

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (left), and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meet at a peace conference in Washington, DC, on September 2, 2010. (Moshe Milner/GPO/Flash90)

Yet, ironically, it was in the 13 years since Arafat’s death, under the less-than-inspiring, less-than-competent rule of his heir Mahmoud Abbas, that the Palestinians engaged in an even more fundamental miscalculation. Arafat misunderstood the Israelis. Abbas misunderstands the Palestinians.

Abbas has spent most of the years since 2004, the year when Arafat’s strategy of violence might be said to have begun its long, slow, comprehensive collapse, pursuing the alternative policy he had long championed: replacing Palestinian terrorism with internationalism, replacing a type of pressure that cost Palestine its allies and any gains it had made under the Oslo process with a different sort of pressure geared toward restoring those allies and augmenting those gains.

His policy, in short: to throw the Palestinian cause at the feet of the world.

But Abbas’s internationalization strategy rests on two unexamined assumptions. First, that the Israeli resistance to withdrawing from the West Bank is a relatively weak sentiment, weak enough to be swayed by international opprobrium or sanctions; second, and despite all evidence to the contrary, that his fellow Palestinians would play along with the strategy.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas addresses the United Nations General Assembly at UN headquarters, September 20, 2017, in New York City. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images/AFP)

Abbas grasps that the two Palestinian strategies — violence and internationalization — counteract each other: that terrorism bolsters Israeli resistance to withdrawal, and so fatally undermines the capacity of international pressure to deliver results. Yet this understanding has only ever expressed itself at the tactical level. Abbas’s security services have spent much of the past 10 years cracking down on Palestinian terror groups in areas controlled by the PA.

Abbas’s problem, however, extends far beyond the piecemeal challenge of preventing the occasional act of violence. Among Palestinians, the violent “resistance” is no mere tactic employed by a small handful of violent extremists. It is a fundamental pillar of their narrative of national liberation, a vehicle for reclaiming the dignity lost by their history of dispossession, a crucible that for many lends the sheen of redemptive theology to their long suffering.

This vision of a violent reclamation of national honor is reified in Hamas, funded by cash from Qatar, Iran and elsewhere, and sustained by the religious leadership of Palestinian society in most Palestinian towns and villages. Indeed, it often seems to be the only narrative left standing that still teaches Palestinians that they have agency in deciding their fate, or that victory against immovable Israel is even possible.

After Arafat’s death, Abbas turned away from the tactic of terrorism, but never seems to have given serious thought to the strategic problem posed by the reservoirs of ideology and identity that still lionize that violence in the Palestinian body politic.

Palestinian supporters of Fatah and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (portrait) gather in Gaza City as Abbas addresses the 72nd United Nations General Assembly at UN headquarters in New York, September 20, 2017. (AFP Photo/Mahmud Hams)

In the end, Abbas lives in a kind of ideological purgatory. He cannot pursue the violent strategy he has watched fail so spectacularly, nor can he acknowledge the flaw at the heart of his diplomatic strategy — the sad fact that Israelis who could not be frightened off by waves of suicide terrorism are not likely to be dislodged by waves of international tut-tutting. Worse, the trap is permanent. Israeli recalcitrance is shored up against foreign pressure by the very expectation of more waves of terrorism. The one Palestinian strategy fatally undermines the other.

And so he is left trying to sell Palestinians on the shallowest of the strategic visions available to them, and they know it. (A recent poll found that 67 percent of Palestinians want him to resign, a result that surprised no one.) Salvation will come from New York and Geneva, he insists, even as Israelis remain distinctly unimpressed by his international efforts. And the longer salvation is delayed, the more he is identified with yet another drawn-out failure of the Palestinian national movement.

Albatrosses

In the unity deal struck between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority last month, Abbas effectively swallowed into his PA, into his vehicle for restoring Palestinian dignity by — not to put too fine a point on it — ignoring the causes of Palestinian self-defeat, the very architects of that defeat, the party most responsible for the hardening of Israeli politics against Palestinian aspirations.

And, as might be expected, he has done so without any capacity to control what Hamas does or says in Palestine’s name. Hamas, after all, seems eager to surrender every instrument of sovereignty it possesses in Gaza – except the one that matters: its armed wing will remain intact, and under its control.

This was not Hamas’s “red line,” as some commentators suggested, implying that Hamas was being magnanimous with its other concessions. It was the original point and purpose of the entire exercise of reconciliation. Hamas could not give up its military wing because it was in the process of becoming its military wing, shorn of the extranea of civil politics.

The leader of the Hamas terror group in the Gaza Strip, Yahya Sinwar, waves as he arrives for a meeting with the Palestinian Authority’s prime minister and other officials in Gaza City on October 2, 2017. (AFP Photo/Said Khatib)

It is no accident that in the delicate days leading up to the November 1 transfer of Gaza’s border crossings to the PA, Hamas leaders took painstaking care to assure their Fatah counterparts that, more than anything else, they should not fear the continued existence of a separate Hamas military.

The nation is “still in the throes of our national liberation efforts,” and therefore “we cannot surrender our weapons,” Sinwar himself said on October 25. But, he assured, “our weapons must be under the umbrella of the [Fatah-dominated] Palestine Liberation Organization.”

“The weapons of the Qassam Brigades [Hamas’s military wing] belong to the Palestinian people,” he added for good measure. They were meant “to be used for the liberation effort, and not for internal conflict.”

Those words, meant to soothe the nerves of Fatah officials who understand how small is their victory if Hamas retains its 25,000-strong military, were a signal of the tension within Fatah over the reconciliation. Indeed, just a week earlier, Sinwar was decidedly less magnanimous: “Disarming us,” he quipped, “is like Satan dreaming of heaven. No one can take away our weapons.”

Fatah leaders are not stupid; they understand that their retaking of Gaza is coming at the cost of liberating Hamas from its civilian responsibilities and freeing it to better lead the military side of the Palestinian agenda. They are worried.

Some analysts have suggested that Hamas will still be able to play “spoiler” to any peace initiative. This is true, of course, but it was also true before the reconciliation.

Members of Hamas’s military branches take part in a military parade in Gaza City on July 26, 2017. (AFP Photo/Mahmud Hams)

What worries Fatah is not Hamas’s ability to spoil peace talks. Hamas has won something more important in Palestinian terms. By granting it a reprieve from its civilian rule in Gaza, and thus unshackling it from responsibility for the consequences of its narrative, Abbas has ensured that no matter what he says or does, it is Hamas and its ilk, the proponents of sacred, violent resistance, who will tell his story. They are now the emancipated bearers of the only Palestinian narrative actively being told in Palestine, a narrative whose basic tenets Abbas has not even attempted to challenge.

Abbas’s entire vision and legacy now lie at Hamas’s feet. He can never crush them enough, nor suppress their narrative about Palestinian resistance sufficiently — in part because he believes much of it himself — to win the war of ideas. He has now backed himself into the unenviable corner of trying to push ahead with his internationalization strategy while an unfettered Hamas operates without the slightest check to undermine him.

And he did it to himself, all for the paltry benefit of restoring the lost dignity of Fatah’s 2007 collapse in Gaza.

Hamas’s leaders are surely breathing easier now that the responsibility for Gaza’s desolation is being lifted from their shoulders. But for them, too, the reconciliation comes at a vast price. Hamas has effectively acknowledged that it is unable to steer the territory under its control to freedom and prosperity. The hard-bitten tacticians of its military wing may scoff at such considerations, but that doesn’t make them unimportant. In its abdication of civil leadership, Hamas reveals its own underlying strategic weakness, a weakness it shares with its new ally Hezbollah. Both groups are powerful enough to drag their nations into war, but not ideologically flexible or curious enough to be the bearers of better days.

Hamas has acknowledged that it cannot build a Palestine where Israel has withdrawn. It no longer even wants to.

READ MORE:

An Alabama state official is citing the Bible to defend the Republican U.S.

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF TIME.COM)

 

By Calvin Woodward / AP

November 10, 2017

(WASHINGTON) — An Alabama state official is citing the Bible to defend the Republican U.S. Senate candidate accused of sexual advances on girls. State auditor Jim Ziegler says “Mary was a teenager and Joseph was an adult carpenter,” suggesting that Roy Moore acted in a divine tradition if he, in fact, made sexual advances toward a 14-year-old girl.

Theologians and pastors, among others, expressed revulsion that Mary and Joseph would be used to counter allegations of sexual misbehavior with a minor. They also said Ziegler got the facts wrong and ignored the cultural context of the time in which Jesus lived.

“If this is evangelicalism, I’m on the wrong team,” the evangelical commentator Ed Stetzer wrote in Christianity Today. “But it is not. Christians don’t use Joseph and Mary to explain child molesting accusations.”

Moore, a 70-year-old former state Supreme Court justice, flatly denied allegations of decades-old sexual advances on girls, published Thursday in a Washington Post story. The accounts by multiple women prompted Republican lawmakers to say he should end his candidacy for the Dec. 12 special election if the allegations are true. “I have never engaged in sexual misconduct,” Moore said Friday.

But Ziegler was dismissive about the fuss. “There’s just nothing immoral or illegal here,” he told the Washington Examiner. “Maybe just a little bit unusual.”

Rev. Jim Martin, editor at large of the Jesuit magazine America, tweeted Friday that “comparing the allegations against Roy Moore in any way to Joseph and Mary is disgusting.” Martin said: “We have no idea about the exact ages of either the Virgin Mary or St. Joseph at the time of their betrothal or marriage.”

The Bible does not state the ages of Joseph and Mary, agrees Margaret M. Mitchell, a professor of early Christian literature and the New Testament at the University of Chicago Divinity School.

Under ancient norms and apparently under first century Roman and Jewish law, she said, it was apparently common for girls 12 and older to be betrothed, though practice varied by region, social class and more.

She said the earliest text to mention Mary’s age is “The Infancy Gospel of James,” which she describes as “a clearly legendary text that is trying to expand on the gospel accounts.” That non-authoritative text placed Mary’s age at 12 when she conceived and it cited supposed evidence of her enduring virginity to demonstrate she conceived Jesus without sexual intercourse.

Similarly, Mitchell said by email, “We have no idea how old the historical Joseph was, though a tradition that he was very old developed in the second century and beyond.” The point of that, too, was to support the idea of the virgin birth — Joseph perhaps being too old to impregnate Mary.

Such theories were “fanciful expansions on the Gospel narratives,” Mitchell said. But they add a “veneer of solemnity … that may allow a modern Christian like Mr. Z (Ziegler) to gloss over what it means for a 12 or 14 year old girl to be viewed as and used as a sexual vessel.”

Martin, in tweets, said: “Joseph is often depicted in art as older than Mary, in fact, considerably older, so as to make him seem less ‘sexualized,’ and to emphasize Mary’s virginity. But, in fact, both Mary and Joseph could have been the same age.”

Leigh Corfman told the Post she was 14 when Moore first approached her and took her to his home twice, the second time touching her over her bra and panties and having her touch him over his underwear. The Post quoted three other women who said he pursued them when they were 16 to 18 and he was in his early 30s. He denies the women’s reports and says he won’t quit the race.

If the Bible is not clear on the subject, the law is: Alabama’s legal age of consent then and now is 16 and adults cannot touch children sexually or entice them into a home for that purpose.

Trump Says U.K. First, Putin Says Iran First, Xi Says Egypt First

Trump Says U.K. First, Putin Says Iran First, Xi Says Egypt First

 

Before you freak out, or, think that I have done flushed my brain down a toilet I need to let you know that, no, of course they didn’t say any such a thing. So, why did I say such things in the headline? There are two simple reasons, first, to draw your attention to the article, two, to make people think a little bit. The first is self-explanatory. Now, concerning the second of the two reasons. Anyone who reads my articles knows quite well that I believe that Donald Trump is the biggest idiot and the biggest ass to sit in the Oval Office since Andrew Jackson back in the first half of the 18 hundreds, and friends, that is really saying a whole lot because we have really had a lot of trash as Presidents in our Nations History.

 

There are many people, it seems mostly Democrats, who think that it is a horrible slogan that Mr. Trump came up with during his primary run, “America First.” Here is where I have to say that you folks who are ragging him over this slogan, you are quite goofy yourself. What the heck was the man suppose to say, England First, or Mexico First? Just what do you think any politician at any level, of any country, should do? If President Putin at the next Russian election started putting out propaganda saying that the Russian people and government need to start putting Iran, or Syria first, do you think that even in Russia that he would win the election? Possibly even worse, it would probably get him shot. Even as powerful as President Xi Jinping is in China if he came out with a policy saying China is going to start putting Egypt or North Korea before the people of China do you honestly believe that he would live five more years to finish out his term?

 

What I am getting at is that you folks here in the U.S. that are whining about Mr. Trumps ‘America First’ slogan are showing the world just how big of dummies you are. Also, the U.S. Media outlets who fall in line with such ignorance help fuel Liberal stupidity in European countries and in a few other Nations as well. For politicians and for the people of every Country on Earth, if you are not putting your country first, then you are truly a traitor to every person in your Country. For we folks who are Christians or Jewish, we all need to look at the teachings of Scriptures. You should know very well that we are supposed to cater to the needs of our families first and once our families are secure and safe, then we are to be charitable from the inside out. By this, I mean our family, our community, then outward, such as our County, our State, our own Country, then the world. We are to take what we really need from our own work, our own earnings, then use the rest to help others. This is where we are told not to hoard, not to store up for many years ahead for ourselves, but to use the extra that we have to help others. This is why we are told that charity covers many sins.

 

Even though I know that Donald Trump doesn’t have a clue about the teachings of the Bible it does not mean that everything he says is incorrect, most everything, but not all things. As our President, Mr. Trump is supposed to ‘Put America First’, if he is not doing so, then he is a traitor to the American people. Unfortunately, I personally do not believe that this ‘slogan’, to him, is anything but a slogan, something he thinks his voter base wants to hear. Personally, I have no doubt of any kind that Donald Trump, his Dad, and his adult kids, as well as his son in law Mr. Kushner, have done, or will do, anything except and ONLY, put themselves first, always! Yet in U.S. politics, do you honestly expect anything except selfishness?

PccWebWorld

A Captive Unit Providing Web & IT Solutions

Moon Clippers

Music ,fashion,talent,life skil

Jana's Mummy

Finding Sanity Through Blogging

Chasing Jameson

The Adventures of Motherhood

silkroad-online pharmacy

Overseas best cheap pharmacy

Les méditations du marcheur solitaire

Où allons-nous par cette route où nous marchons depuis des temps si longs sans demander à personne où elle mène ?

%d bloggers like this: