Tag Archives: Japan

COULD SEVENTY BE “IT” FOR THE US?

flags-collage-of-three-flags-flags-of-eu-uk-and-usa-together

Tuesday February 21st marks a special anniversary that will most probably be overlooked.

It happens to be the 70th anniversary of the United States replacing Great Britain as the world’s number one power.

After fighting two world wars, Britain was faced with three major international crises all at once.

The new British Labour government had already announced plans to give independence to India, after two centuries of British rule.   This led to turmoil on the sub-continent between Hindus and Muslims.   British troops tried to keep the peace.

At the same time Palestine exploded.   In 1946 Jewish nationalists blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, British military headquarters in the mandated territory, killing 91 people.

The first two problems occurred on British territories; the third was in Greece, where communists were trying to take over the country.

At the same time, Britain was broke, following the two major global conflicts of the first half of the twentieth century.   Early in 1947, economic problems at home meant that Britain could no longer allocate funds to the conflict in Greece.   They decided to inform Washington to see if America wanted to take over.

“On Friday, February 21st” the Secretary of State General George C. Marshall, left the State Department early to attend the bicentennial celebrations of Princeton University and receive an honorary degree.   Then the British Embassy telephoned to say it had two urgent notes.”   As these notes were urgent, Dean Acheson, the Under-Secretary of State, asked the Embassy’s first secretary to deliver them rather than wait until the Monday.   “Recalling this episode in later years, Acheson wrote, “They were shockers”.”

“It was not being asked to provide aid to Greece that was shocking. The State Department was already preparing a plan for aid.   It was the fact that Britain was pulling out and proposing to hand over responsibility.   After all, the US Joint Chiefs of Staff had advised the previous year:   ‘The defeat or disintegration of the British Empire would eliminate from Eurasia the last bulwark of resistance between the US and Soviet expansion . . .  Our present position as a world power is of necessity closely interwoven with that of       Britain , , ,

“This was a momentous change.   For two centuries Britain had been the dominant power in the eastern Mediterranean.   Now it seemed to be surrendering that role in two key countries.   It is often said that Americans lack a historical sense that Europeans have, but on this occasion it was the Americans who saw the historical significance of that moment.   To British ministers, battling from day to day to keep the country’s head above water, this seemed to be just a temporary retrenchment in one area.   None of them appeared to see any larger implications in the decision.   The American view was put in grandiloquent terms by Joseph M. Jones, who was in the State Department at the time:   ‘Reading the messages, Hickerson realized, as had Henderson before him, that Great Britain had within the hour handed the job of world leadership, with all its burdens and all its glory, to the United States.” (“Picking up the reins,” Norman Moss, 2008, page 64, italics mine).

The whole world did not recognize the change immediately,   It was to be another ten years before it became clear to all.   At the end of 1956 the Suez Canal crisis showed that London could not do anything without American support.   Soon afterward, the US was encouraging Britain to dismantle its empire and then to join the European Union (then the European Economic Community).

US vs EU

It’s ironic then that, over the weekend, at the Munich Security Conference, “leading German foreign policy experts” called “on the EU to reposition itself on the world stage, replacing the United States as the West’s ‘torchbearer.’   Since Washington’s change of government, the United States no longer ‘qualifies as the symbol of the West’s political and moral leadership, according to Wolfgang Ischinger, Chair of the Munich Security Conference.   It is therefore up to Europe ‘to make up for this loss.’”   (GermanForeignPolicy.com)

That’s easier said than done.   But the EU could be the world’s dominant military power for the simple reason that it is the world’s biggest trading power.   That’s the main reason why the US took over from Great Britain.   Economic power = military power.   The US is struggling economically which is one reason why President Trump is demanding the Europeans pay more for NATO.   Of course, the Europeans have their own financial problems, but they have an urgent need to protect themselves from both Russia and Islamic terrorism.   If they are going to have to pay more for defense, why not go-it-alone?   Especially when they no longer have confidence in American leadership.

One of the first superpowers, Babylon, was predicted to last “seventy years” (Jeremiah 25:12 & 29:10), illustrating how seventy is a significant number.   In Psalm 90:10, Moses was inspired to write that “our days may come to seventy years,” the lifespan of many human beings. Perhaps more significantly in the rise and fall of nations is the fact that, after seven decades, most people have forgotten everything. Few today remember World War II.   Few remember that Baron Ismay, Secretary General of NATO from 1952-55, described the alliance as intended to “keep the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down.”   In the current debate on the future of the alliance, this has been completely forgotten.

Dismantle the alliance and two things will happen:   1) the American president will no longer be “the Leader of the Free World;” and 2) Germany will become the undisputed Leader of Europe (she already is economically).   On the 70th anniversary of America’s ascendancy, the Munich conference saw nations actively discussing the end of America’s pre-eminence.

President Trump in Washington and Vice-President Mike Pence, who addressed the conference, may see themselves as being in the lead, calling the shots, insisting on changes within the alliance; but the other member nations have the choice of forming their own military alliance, which will not be led by the United States.

As with the change seventy years ago, it may take a while to fully emerge, but this is the direction we are heading in.   On Sunday, Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel, announced she is seeking closer ties with Russia to bring about the defeat of ISIS.

It might be good for Washington’s new leaders to take a lesson from the great nineteenth century German Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck, who once observed that a great power, to survive, must be “one of three” in a world governed by “five.”   Note the following:

“Of the five original great powers recognized at the Congress of Vienna, only France and the United Kingdom have maintained that status continuously to the present day, although France was defeated in the Franco-Prussian War and occupied during World War II.   After the Congress of Vienna, the British Empire emerged as the pre-eminent power, due to its navy and the extent of its territories, which signaled the beginning of the Pax Britannica and of the Great Game between the UK and Russia.   The balance of power between the Great Powers became a major influence in European politics, prompting Otto von Bismarck to say “All politics reduces itself to this formula:  try to be one of three, as long as the world is governed by the unstable equilibrium of five great powers.”   (“Great Power,” Wikipedia)

In 1914, the German and Austrian empires went to war with the British, French and Russian empires.   Germany was one of two in a world governed by five.   The Germans lost.  They repeated the same mistake in World War II, when Germany and Japan were the two, in a world still governed by five.   The three opposing powers were Britain, America and Russia.   Again, the Germans lost.

The five major powers right now are the EU, China, the United States, Japan and Russia (a great military power, but not so great economically).   The US remains in alliance with the countries of the EU and Japan, making it one of three in a world governed by five.   If the EU separates from the US, that will reduce America to being one of two.

This all may seem incredible with almost daily news of set-backs in the EU.   France and Holland may leave after elections early this year; Greece and Italy have serious financial problems, which may affect the euro.   But the fact remains that Germany dominates the continent and Germany is putting together a European military force to rival America’s.   The Munich security conference showed the will is there, boosted considerably by the change of administration in Washington.

Daniel 2:21 says that God is behind the rise and fall of nations.   “And He changes the times and the seasons; He removes kings and raises up kings.”   It could be, that after seventy years, the American Era is coming to an end. Munich this weekend showed that many want to see that happen.

Something to think about as the US passes its seventieth anniversary!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

BABY HAYDEN UPDATE and WORLD NEWS

Saggital craniosynostenosis, first column normal.
Saggital craniosynostenosis, column a normal.

It’s been a tough week.

Our 8-month-old grandson Hayden had major cranial surgery on Wednesday of last week. The technical name for the condition was saggital craniosynostenosis (see diagram above – Hayden wasn’t quite as pronounced as that).   He was in the operating theater for seven hours and remained in the hospital for seven days.   The surgery was to reshape his head.   Without it, seizures could likely start as his brain could not grow sideways, only forwards and backwards, resulting in a football shaped head.   We were informed that one in every 2,000 babies needs the surgery.   I’d never heard of it until a few weeks after he was born.   The surgery was performed at the University of Michigan’s Mott Children’s Hospital, the best in our state.   It’s about 75 miles from our home.

As is often the case with surgery, things did not go entirely as planned.   He lost so much blood he needed a blood transfusion.   In the days following surgery, he could not keep food down.   Additionally, although the surgeon said that he would not feel much pain as there are no nerve sensors in the skull bones, the pediatrician said on the third day that he was clearly in pain.   His face remains swollen and he spends most of the day and night crying.   My wife gave our daughter a break last night and held him in her recliner while he slept.   He cannot lie down in a cot yet.

It’s good to have him home, but it’s going to take a while for him to fully recover.  The swelling must go down.   So must the pain.

We’re very thankful that the surgery is available.   A generation or two ago he may not have survived very long.  It’s marvelous what medical science can do nowadays.

I would like to also thank you all for your prayers and concern during this difficult time.

—————————————————————————–

Hopefully, medical science will soon find a way to stop “old” people falling.  I fell on the ice this morning while taking Hayden’s two older brothers to school.   As they are both aged four, they naturally wanted to look at the “owie” on my knee.   I refuse to give them the morbid satisfaction of seeing me fall again!

—————————————————————————-

CNN’S DETERIORATION

After dropping them at school I came home to write this column.   Yesterday, after taking them to school (which I do most days), I went to McDonald’s to wait for Leeson, who is only in school for three hours.  I ordered a hot tea (I’ve got them trained!) and sat down with my laptop to read and write.  CNN was showing on the television, thankfully muted.   Whenever I looked up at the screen, they were “bashing Trump.”

Today, at home, I thought I would try CNN International, which is broadcast from London.  It’s always been a better channel than CNN.  They have an “International Report” at 10am,   that was also devoted to “Trump bashing,” though they did include a brief “Breaking News” item about a serious bomb blast in Baghdad, which killed at least 48 people.

CNN’s audience has been shrinking, with viewers lost to Fox and Fox Business Network.

Critical analysis is needed of this (and every) president, but non-stop, one-sided, often personal attacks on President Trump take away from the network’s credibility, which has been seriously eroded in recent months.   No wonder people are switching to Fox.   No wonder, also, that millions of households have “cut the cord” and no longer have cable, saving an average of $100 a month.

—————————————————————————

CHANGING DYNAMICS   (NEWS YOU WILL HAVE MISSED IF YOU WATCH CNN)

From Der Spiegel:

Germany must stand up in opposition to the 45th president of the United States and his government.   That’s difficult enough already for two reasons:   Because it is from the Americans that we obtained our liberal democracy in the first place; and because it is unclear how the brute and choleric man on the other side will react to diplomatic pressure.   The fact that opposition to the American government can only succeed when mounted together with Asian and African partners — and no doubt with our partners in Europe, with the EU — doesn’t make the situation any easier.

So far, Germany has viewed its leadership role — at least the leadership understanding of Chancellor Angela Merkel and Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble — as one that is by all means in opposition to the interests of other European countries.   Whether Schäuble’s austerity policies or Merkel’s migration policies, it all happened without much co-coordination and with considerable force.   It is thus somewhat ironical that it is Germany, the country that is politically and economically dominant in Europe, that will now have to fill in many of the gaps created by America’s withdrawal from the old world order, the one referred to by former German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer as “Pax Americana.”   At the same time, Germany must build an alliance against Donald Trump, because it otherwise won’t take shape.   It is, however, absolutely necessary.

It is literally painful to write this sentence, but the president of the United States is a pathological liar.  The president of the U.S. is a racist (it also hurts to write this).  He is attempting a coup from the top; he wants to establish an illiberal democracy, or worse; he wants to undermine the balance of power.   He fired an acting attorney general who held a differing opinion from his own and accused her of “betrayal.”   This is the vocabulary used by Nero, the emperor and destroyer of Rome.   It is the way tyrants think.

(Klaus Brinkbaumer)

————————————————————————–

New German President anti-Trump

German parliamentary assembly has elected Frank-Walter Steinmeier to become the country’s next president by an overwhelming majority.   Mr. Steinmeier, Germany’s former foreign minister, strongly criticised Donald Trump during the US election campaign.
 
(The President of Germany is a figurehead with similar powers to the British monarch.  He is elected by parliament.  His role is largely ceremonial but he has a great deal of influence.)
————————————————————————————

German army to be anchor for small Nato partners

By EUOBSERVER

German defence minister Ursula von der Leyen meets Friday in Washington for the first time with her new American counterpart James Mattis ahead of Nato defence ministers’ meeting in Brussels next week.   The longer-term strategy would turn the Bundeswehr into the leading Nato army in Europe, with small countries integrating their military forces into the German command structures, reports German daily FAZ

—————————————————————————-

CHANGES AHEAD IN EUROPE

  • A growing number of Europeans are rebelling against decades of government-imposed multiculturalism, politically correct speech codes and mass migration from the Muslim world.
  • Europe’s establishment parties, far from addressing the concerns of ordinary voters, have tried to silence dissent by branding naysayers as xenophobes, Islamophobes and neo-Nazis.
  • “This disruption is fruitful.   The taboos of the last few years are now fully on the agenda: illegal immigration, Islam, the nonsense of open borders, the dysfunctional EU, the free movement of people, jobs, law and order.   Trump’s predecessors did not want to talk about it, but the majority of voters did.   This is democracy.” — Roger Köppel, editor-in-chief of Die Weltwoche, Switzerland.

(Gatestone Institute 1/22)

——————————————————————————-

US DIVISIONS

As with the EU, the cracks in the USA seem far beyond hairline fractures.   Many sense the country could come apart.   It did once before.   And could Southerners and Northerners have detested each other much more than Americans do today?   (“Is the Left playing with fire again?”  Pat Buchanan 2/14)

—————————————————————————–

BORROWING FOR US GOVT TO BECOME MORE DIFFICULT

In the age of Trump, America’s biggest foreign creditors are suddenly having second thoughts about financing the U.S. government.

In Japan, the largest holder of Treasuries, investors culled their stakes in December by the most in almost four years, the Ministry of Finance’s most recent figures show.   What’s striking is the selling has persisted at a time when going abroad has rarely been so attractive.   And it’s not just the Japanese.   Across the world, foreigners are pulling back from U.S. debt like never before.

From Tokyo to Beijing and London, the consensus is clear:  few overseas investors want to step into the $13.9 trillion U.S. Treasury market right now.  Whether it’s the prospect of bigger deficits and more inflation under President Donald Trump or higher interest rates from the Federal Reserve, the world’s safest debt market seems less of a sure thing — particularly after the upswing in yields since November.   And then there is Trump’s penchant for saber rattling, which has made staying home that much easier.

(Newsmax  2/13/17)

————————————————————————–

YEMEN – NEXT US WAR

Yemen shapes up for US-Iran military clash

Eight armies are fighting for dominance in Yemen, a country of 25 million inhabitants:  The Iranian-backed Houthi insurgents, together with a breakaway force, are battling the army loyal to President Abdulrabbuh Mansur Hadi, which is supported by Saudi, Egyptian and UAE military forces and their hired legion of Colombian mercenaries.   Iranian Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) elements, most acting as advisers to the Houthi rebels, intervene actively from time to time.   Last October, they conducted missile attacks on US vessels on the Red Sea from shore batteries.   In response, the US Navy on October 9 and 12 knocked out those batteries and the radar stations that were manned by IRGC teams.   Tehran countered by deploying to Yemen long-range Shahed 129 drones carrying Sadid-1 rockets and sowing sea mines around the international Bab Al-Mandeb Straits.   US President Donald Trump’s sharp warning on Friday, Feb. 3, after just two weeks in office, that Iran was “playing with fire” and the fresh round of sanctions he clamped down were galvanized by Iranian aggression in Yemen and the Red Sea as much as by its ballistic missile test.   And indeed, the deployment of the USS Cole destroyer to the strategic Red Sea Straits of Bab Al-Mandeb on the same day turned the compass needle toward the potential arena, should the escalating tension between the US and Yemen explode into a military encounter, such as a US special operations force going into Yemen to strike IRGC targets. (Debka file)

FOLLOW-UP

Hillary and donald

After my post “Hate will never win,” at least one website stated that I support guns in church.   This is not the case.   Jesus Christ said: “They that live by the sword shall die by the sword.”  (Matthew 26:52).  I do not feel it is appropriate for people to carry a weapon in church.  I will, however, add that I do feel this is a matter of personal conviction.

Forty years ago my wife and I lived in Rhodesia where I worked as a District Officer in the Ministry of Internal Affairs.  This meant that I worked in the administration of tribal areas under a District Commissioner.   Although the area we lived in was relatively peaceful, there was a civil war going on and we were allowed to carry guns to defend ourselves.   District Officers had the most dangerous job in the country – many were killed including my predecessor Ian Fyffe and a colleague Jimmy Souter.

I chose not to carry a gun, based on the scripture quoted above.

————————————————————————

On the same website, it was suggested that I support Donald Trump against Hillary Clinton.   For the record, I do not support either.

Mr. Trump sees Islam as the problem in the attack on a gay nightclub in Orlando.  Mrs. Clinton blames guns.   Note the following comment from Tuesday’s Wall St Journal:

The Choice 
“As the presidential campaign unfolds, Americans will get the chance to decide, in the wake of the Orlando shooting, what kind of approach they favor to combat jihadist terror.   This election’s two candidates, more than any other presidential contenders in the era of terrorism, present starkly different profiles on the subject, notes our Washington bureau chief Gerald F. Seib.   Donald Trump appeared to hint Monday that President Barack Obama may be sympathetic to radical Islamists he said inspired the gunman in the nightclub attack.  Mr. Trump also criticized both the president and Hillary Clinton for what he claims are lax immigration laws that contributed to the rampage.  Mrs. Clinton, meanwhile, pushed for stricter gun laws, including the reinstatement of a ban on the sort of assault weapons used by the Florida gunman.  (WSJ “The 10-Point” by Gerard Baker, 6/14/16)

Why does it have to be one or the other?

I remember some years ago a Canadian MP (Member of Parliament) explaining to an American audience the difference between a republic and a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary system.   In the United States, on every issue, he explained, the country quickly divides, with both sides running rapidly towards the barricades.   In the Canadian system, on the other hand, both sides start opposed, but gradually work toward the center to achieve a compromise.

America is the only country in the western world where parents and grandparents have to worry on a daily basis about their children and grandchildren going to school.   I called the school of one of my grandchildren recently, concerned about security. I was partially reassured, but only partially.   I do think more can be done, within the parameters of the Second Amendment, which reads:   “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”  At the time this was written, the threats were both foreign and domestic.   That remains the case today and would include ISIS and those inspired by ISIS, like Omar Mateen.

The right to bear arms goes back a thousand years – it is not peculiarly American.

It was a medieval English king who first ordered that every male over the age of 14 carry a lethal weapon to defend himself against the French.   For centuries the law required that all males do four hours of archery practice after church on a Sunday.   Again, this was because of the threat from France.   English colonists had the right to bear arms before the American Revolution, which would not have happened if the people could not carry guns.   In the French and Indian Wars they had to protect themselves against the Indians – and the French!   Today, the threat is more from radical Islamists and domestic terrorists.   People need to be able to defend themselves, but a balance has to be struck.   Adam Lanza and Omar Mateen – and others — have shown the need for this.

Mrs. Clinton is right on this issue – and may win the election because of her stance.   People are scared and may think that banning assault weapons will stop terror attacks.

But, having said that, I believe that the greater problem lies in our immigration policies.   On this Trump is right.   Something needs to be done.   As if to emphasize this point, an ISIS terrorist went to the home of a French couple barely 24 hours after the attack in Florida, shot dead the man and stabbed his partner to death, all in the presence of their three-year-old son.   On the same day, a 54-year-old Muslim immigrant seized hostages at a Wal-Mart in Amarillo, Texas, holding them for two hours, before he was shot.  Together with the massacre in Florida, the only factor common to all three incidents was the Muslim factor; yet the public is being told the first was due to homophobia and the latter was a “work-related incident.” At least the French admitted the involvement of ISIS.   When are we in the US going to wake up?

When Mrs. Clinton and President Obama ridicule Trump for his stance on Muslim immigration, they are showing an appalling ignorance of history.   Islam tried to conquer the West a number of times in previous centuries.   We are now living through the latest Islamic expansion into the West, made possible by the naivety of political correctness.   The two liberal leaders are also hiding the fact that their best friend and closest advisor, respectively, are both Muslims and that the Clinton Foundation receives a lot of donations from the Middle East, surely a conflict of interest.

 

———————————————————————-

While we are on the subject of Muslim immigration, I mentioned in a recent blog, “Confusion Reigns,” that Japan has not got a problem with Islamic terrorism because they don’t allow Muslim immigration.

Within 24 hours of my posting the article, the BBC had a segment on Muslim immigrants to Japan.   The BBC was critical of the fact that Japan was not doing enough to help refugees by taking in Syrian and other immigrants.   It was mentioned that, in 2015, Japan only took in 24 Muslims.   I checked with another source that said it was 27.

It should be noted that Germany took in one million in the same year (not all Muslims), and is expected to take in a further half a million this year.   Additionally, Chancellor Merkel is ready to give 80 million Muslim Turks visa free travel within the EU.

So Japan has taken in some Muslims, but hardly enough to threaten the security of the country.  In fact, it’s hardly enough for a single mosque!

———————————————————————–

Since my last posting, it has been revealed that Omar Mateen was a “closet gay,” who regularly frequented the nightclub he attacked.   I am reminded of an article in “Science” magazine written in the late 90’s.   The article showed that scientific research done on heterosexual males showed that the more anti-gay men were, the more likely they were to have the problem themselves.   I have often thought of that article in the 17 years since I read it, as I’ve listened to religious leaders and others rant about homosexuals.   “Methinks they protest too much.”   My apologies to Shakespeare and Queen Gertrude (Hamlet, Act III, Scene II)!

 

CONFUSION REIGNS!

 

Captain America

Last Sunday evening I was humbled.

I decided to take all four granddaughters to the latest “Captain America” movie, which began at 7.15pm.   I sat there through over two hours of film, not comprehending what was going on.   I was totally bewildered.

Leaving the movie theater at 10pm, we all drove home in my daughter’s RV.   It was very dark outside.   I was driving as all the girls are 9, 10 and 11.

Suddenly, a voice in the back yelled out, “Will my dad be up this late?”

I shouted back, “Which dad?”  Two of the girls belong to our son, Kurt, and two to our daughter, Alix, and her husband, Mike.   And they all have similar-sounding voices.

“MY dad!” was the response.

Again, I asked, “Which dad?”

This time, two girls shouted back,  “OUR dad!”

“Look,” I said, “I can’t see who is asking and there are two dads here. There’s Kurt and there’s Mike.  Which dad do you want?”

This time, the response was clear.   “Kurt.”

Silence followed for a few seconds, then I heard our nine-year-old granddaughter, Elena, turn to her sister and cousins and observe: “I’ve heard that when people are old, they get very confused!”

—————————————————————————

Perhaps there is some truth to that.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is a few years older than me and said something last week that showed she is very confused.   Either that, or she was deliberately misleading people.

She said in a speech that Donald Trump’s call for an end to Muslim immigration would increase terrorism.

If this is true, how does she explain Japan?   They have received no Muslim immigrants – and have experienced no Islamic terrorism!

—————————————————————————

There was no mention on any news program of the religious background of the man who killed the UCLA Professor a few days ago.   Earlier, he had also murdered his ex-wife.   A “hit list” found at his home showed he intended to kill two professors but the other one was gone for the day.

The man, Mainak Sarkar, was a Bengali immigrant.   Bangladesh is a Muslim country.

Once again, we see the need for a complete overhaul of the rules relating to immigration and naturalization.   Confusion (Babylon) has been the result of the last fifty years when it comes to immigration.

————————————————————————–

There’s also a lot of confusion over in England, too, over the EU Referendum taking place on June 23rd, less than three weeks away.   The debate has gotten nasty and the country remains very divided.

It’s becoming the norm for foreign leaders to butt in.   US President Obama, Mrs. Clinton, and Donald Trump have all expressed their opinion.   Mr. Trump has brought forward his visit to the country by two days, now arriving the day before the vote, rather than the day after.   The head of the International Monetary Fund, the German Chancellor, and European Union bureaucrats are all warning of disaster if the country leaves the EU.

Although there are peripheral issues, the fundamental question is: do the British people want their country administered from London or Berlin?   75 years ago, Winston Churchill knew the answer.   Does England need another Churchill to figure it out?

A very important secondary question is: do the British people want their country to remain British, or become a European mix?   The EU’s open borders have led to millions of people from other EU countries flooding into the UK, for its more generous welfare benefits and it’s better economy.   There’s nothing can be done about this as long as they remain in the EU.

The future of the UK is certainly at stake.

The worst possible result is a close vote, with the majority of Scots voting to “Remain” (in the EU) and the majority of English voting to “Leave.”   This would lead to Scotland calling for a second referendum on independence from the UK.   Going it alone could work with help from Berlin and Brussels, the capital of the EU.

It would mean the end of the United Kingdom.

In today’s world where only money seems to matter, I don’t think anybody really understands the full implications of this. “Grey hairs are here and there upon him, and he knows it not.”   (Hosea 7:9).

It’s not just the elderly who are confused!

——————————————————————————-

A final comment on the US presidential election comes from our 11-year-old granddaughter, Paris, who was half-watching the news with me.   Following the usual five-second sound bite from both Trump and Hillary, she suddenly asked:   ‘Why do we have to have a president anyway?   Whey can’t we be like other countries, with a king or a queen?”

After watching this election, it’s no wonder she’s confused!

 

IS DONALD TRUMP A FASCIST?

trump-fascist.sized-770x415xt

I would be amused if it wasn’t so serious.

The venerable (!) New York Times carried a front-page news story on Sunday that had “Trump” and “fascism” in the title.

Fascism is defined as follows:  an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.

Donald Trump has many faults, but he can hardly be called a “fascist.”

Fascist countries in World War II included Germany, Austria, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Hungary, Croatia and Japan, all of which invaded other countries or practiced genocide, or both.   I can’t see that happening under Mr. Trump.

The US constitution has been in effect for over 200 years.  Except for a major hiccup known as the Civil War, it’s worked quite well.   The checks and balances in place have been quite effective.   It will be hard for a President Trump (or a second Clinton) to rule in an authoritarian manner, no matter how authoritarian the candidate might sound now.

The NYT should be careful what it writes (that would require a change in editorial policy in itself!) and not be frightening people.

Other media outlets in the last few days have chosen to use words like “Trump” and “violence” in the same sentence, when covering Trump rallies.   But, please note, the violence is caused by those opposed to Trump.   TV coverage shows most have been immigrants who fear he will send them all back to their country of origin.

Instead of throwing gasoline onto the fire, why can’t our TV news programs and the New York Times, show where the Republican presidential candidate is wrong.   They could actually do this in an intelligent debate.   Admittedly, less people would be inclined to watch, so ratings would suffer, which is what it’s all about.

But Mr. Trump needs to be pinned down on foreign policy, especially. His understanding of international relations could result in the US losing its allies, in which case the President of the United States would no longer be “the Leader of the Free World.”   His proposals on trade could actually make things a lot worse.   A history lesson on the 1930 Smoot-Hawley Act would be a good place to start.

There are some good reasons not to vote for Donald Trump; just as there are good reasons not to vote for Hillary Clinton.   The moniker (no pun intended):   “crooked Hillary” is not without merit.    Check out the book “Clinton Cash” by Peter Schweizer:   “The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich” (2015).

Neither candidate would have made it under a parliamentary system.

If there are good reasons not to vote for either Trump or Hillary, then perhaps it’s time not to vote at all!

——————————————————————————-

Alex Haley’s novel “Roots” was turned into a highly successful 1977 TV mini-series.   A new version is showing on The History Channel this week.

The original series did not improve race relations.

Supposedly, Haley traced his ancestry back to The Gambia.

Some years later, research by a historian proved that Haley could not have done that.   In fact, his book was not a novel based on fact, but, simply, just a novel.   Of course, when this was revealed it was on page 17 of the New York Times!

So far, we have not been told that the new series is also fiction and that Haley could not trace his genealogy back very far.

Whether it only makes racial tensions worse remains to be seen.

The slavery depicted in “Roots” was horrible.   So is the slavery of today.   According to UNESCO a few years ago, slavery is now back in every single African nation.   When will one of our television companies make a series on that?

——————————————————————————-

Race relations are set to deteriorate further in South Africa after the country’s parliament passed a Land Reform bill that will enable the president to effectively confiscate white-owned farmland to promote equality.

“South Africa has passed a bill criticized by some opposition parties and farming groups that allows the compulsory purchase of land in the public interest.

The bill, approved by parliament on Thursday, will enable the state to pay for land at a value determined by a government adjudicator and then expropriate it for the “public interest,” ending the willing-buyer/willing-seller approach to land reform.”  (Al-Jazeera, 27th May.)

This may seem progressive in western countries, but it’s actually a big regressive step backwards.

White South African farmers have been highly productive commercial farmers.   That is, they farm on a massive scale.   Black African farmers, by contrast, are subsistence farmers.   They just grow enough for their own families.   It’s a cultural difference.

When President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe confiscated white farmland almost twenty years ago, food production in the country plummeted and the nation’s economy was shattered.   Within a few years, the country was bankrupt and its money worthless.

It will take a while for South Africa to reach that point, but it will come.

The difference between Zimbabwe and South Africa is that the former was helped by South Africa’s agricultural produce during its man-made famine.   South Africa has no such neighbor.   Its people will starve.

COMMON SENSE, WITH TACT

Donald Trump Muslims

After Donald Trump’s call for a temporary halt in allowing Muslims to move to America, there has been a great deal of “moral outrage,” as CNN called it.   Prominent members of the liberal intelligentsia have been appearing on the various news channels.   Accusations of Trump being “un-American” are constantly being yelled out, even though America had no Muslims in its infancy and few until a change in the immigration laws fifty years ago.

Donald Trump has called for a ban on immigration to the United States by Muslims.  TV talk programs seem to have discussed nothing else since his controversial call Monday, which he referred to as “common sense.”

The liberal media, plus almost all politicians of both major parties, have condemned Mr. Trump and called him a “racist” and lots of other bad names.

Methinks they protest too much!   Why are they so determined to see so many Muslims in America?

Let’s consider the facts ……

The US is the leading nation of the western world.   The country has experienced a number of terrorist attacks by Muslims, including San Bernardino, Boston, Chattanooga, Garland, Fort Hood and 9-11.

The number two economy in the western world is Japan, with 130 million people.   Japan has not had a terrorist attack perpetrated by Muslims.   Japan has a very strict immigration policy, which does not encourage Muslims to move there.   Could there be a connection?
Mr. Trump lacks tact, a quality he needs and one that needs to be brought into this debate.

I remember a conversation with a member of the diplomatic service in an African country some years ago.   My wife and I were enjoying our visit to his country and I expressed the hope that they would have more tourists, which would boost their economy.   I told him that one thing they could do to help encourage tourism was to abolish the visa requirement for tourists.

He responded that the country had to require a visa, at a cost of $100, before any tourist could visit.   He explained that it was reciprocal. In other words, because the US insisted people from his country must get a visa to enter America, his country had to insist on visas for Americans.

The US requires peoples in many countries to get visas, to screen them before they visit and to weed out those who might visit and stay to look for work.

But my point is that visa requirements are reciprocal.

Can’t we do the same when it comes to immigration?

We should apply the same rules to people wanting to come to the United States, as their countries apply to Americans who go there.

As none of the 57 majority Muslim countries allows Americans to immigrate into their countries, we would effectively achieve the ban on Muslims Mr. Trump wants, but do it more tactfully.   The ball would be in their court!

Yes, there are Americans living in Muslim countries.   Some are married to locals in those countries, while some work there on contract, providing skills their economies need; but none have permanent resident status and will never be allowed to apply for citizenship.  Muslim nations know that Muslims and non-Muslims just don’t mix!

Quid pro quo.   Problem solved.   With tact, Mr. Trump!

There was also a lack of tact in the White House when Josh Earnest, White House spokesman, described Mr. Trump’s comments as “fascist,” forgetting that the most famous Democratic president of all, Franklin Roosevelt, interred Japanese, German and Italian Americans during World War II.

Meanwhile, a great deal of ignorance has been exposed in the media on this issue.   A number of news people have told us that Mr. Trump’s suggestion goes against the constitution.   It’s difficult to justify such a statement when there were no Muslims in the country at the time the constitution was written.   It wasn’t until after the Civil War that Muslims first came on the scene and the first mosque was built in Chicago as recently as 1929.

Nihad Awad, Executive Director and Founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, likened Mr. Trump’s comments to those of Nazis against the Jews, asking:  “Haven’t we learned anything from history, Mr. Trump?”   This blatant double standard went unquestioned.   It was a perfect opportunity to raise questions about attitudes toward Jews shown in some Muslim countries and during the Holocaust.

On the same day that this dominated the news, TIME magazine announced its choice of “Person of the Year.”   This year’s choice is Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany, who opened Germany’s doors to allow in one million migrants this year, the equivalent of the US taking in four million.   The decision has already resulted in negative repercussions that must be borne by the German people.

The question arises – why is the media so determined to see the end of the European races?   At the same time as ridiculing Trump, most news sources are seen praising Frau Merkel for her decision.

Whatever you may think of Mr. Trump’s call to halt Muslim immigration at this time, Americans should be thankful the issue has been raised for one simple reason – any more attacks could easily result in a violent backlash against Muslims by other Americans. The population needs to be thoroughly educated on the religion and its goals toward the United States so that a responsible debate can take place.

 

 

 

 

MORE OBSERVATIONS

Hiroshima

It seems as if our ancestors did nothing right.

The latest example is the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima seventy years ago August 6th.

70,000 people were killed instantly while another 70, 000 died of severe burns within weeks.

The BBC World Service (radio) led with a longer than usual report from Hiroshima.  One of their veteran correspondents concluded his report by asking when the United States is going to apologize for what it did seven decades ago.

Particularly disturbing was that a group of university students from Princeton were in Hiroshima for the commemorations yesterday.   Those that were interviewed all thought the US should apologize. One even went so far as to say that the US, as the world’s leader, should set everybody an example by dismantling its nuclear weapons, then the others would follow!   Fortunately, he is too young to run for president!

If you had any doubts, it’s clear what young people are being taught in schools – the slant is always anti-American.   The US is always to blame.   Well, not just the US – we will come to that later.

For the record, the dropping of the bombs (a second one was dropped on Nagasaki three days later) ended World War II in the Pacific.   Before the atomic bombs there was no hint that the Japanese would surrender.   The US would have lost a further 100,000 men, an estimate of how many would die fighting their way to Japan through the jungles of the Philippines and other islands.   In addition, thousands of sailors would have died.   The USS Indianapolis was sunk just a few days before Hiroshima, with the loss of almost a thousand men.

A second benefit of the bomb is that, seventy years later, no country has used an atomic or nuclear device since.   What happened in Japan seventy years ago has made world leaders hesitate before starting something that would lead to massive retaliation on them.

This is likely to change as Mideast nations, starting with Iran, get the bomb.   India and Pakistan could also use theirs against each other.

————————————————————————–

Which brings us to the other nation everybody likes to bash, including Generation Y.

At the time the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, the British were still ruling India, which included Pakistan and Bangladesh.   After two centuries, they were about to withdraw from the sub-continent.   Now, there are increasing calls for reparations. The Oxford Union (Oxford is one of Britain’s two most famous universities) debated the issue last month and voted in favor of reparations. The Indian prime minister has added his own view, demanding the British pay up.

What is interesting here is that the leaders of India’s independence movement did not call for financial reparations – and they were in a much better position to know if reparations were called for.

But they were also aware that the British were responsible for laying a solid foundation throughout India – including one of the best railway systems in the world, a solid infrastructure, parliamentary government, the rule of law, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, the English language, which India’s first prime minister described as “India’s window to the world” and a first-class military, which had served the British Empire well.   In addition, the British kept the peace on the North-West Frontier, where the Taliban, al-Qaeda and, now, ISIS, are active.

Those early leaders were content to build on these strengths.   They did not demand reparations, though they did ask for aid.   That aid is still coming from Britain and other western nations, even though India itself is quite wealthy.

The current Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, should be thankful for British rule.   Without it, India’s democratic system would not exist and he would not be in power!

India has the potential to become the greatest economic power in the world.   The country is only diminished by calls for reparations, as if they can’t take care of themselves.   To use an analogy, all of Britain’s offspring have been independent adults for fifty plus years – isn’t it a little embarrassing to go back home and ask for money?

—————————————————————————-

Talking of the sub-continent, a fourth blogger has been murdered in Bangladesh for his comments on Islam.   The religion of peace clearly is not big enough to handle criticism!

______________________________________________________________

Little attention has been given to President Obama’s decision to alter the Oath of Allegiance, taking into account Islamic beliefs.

According to the Middle East Forum: “On July 21, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced some “modifications” to the Oath of Allegiance that immigrants must take before becoming naturalized. The original oath required incoming citizens to declare that they will “bear arms on behalf of the United States” and “perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States” when required by the law. Now the USCIS says that “a candidate [to U.S. citizenship] may be eligible to exclude these two clauses based on religious training and belief or a conscientious objection.”

Why is this “necessary”?

Because, although Islam allows Muslims to fight for a non-Muslim country, it does not allow believers to fight other believers.   In other words, American Muslims are not going to be helping in the fight against radical Islamic extremism. In effect, they will be helping the other side!

—————————————————————————

What does it say about us when more attention is given to the hunting death of a lion in Zimbabwe than to the selling of baby body parts in restaurants?

Richard Weikart’s “From Darwin to Hitler”, shows the progression from the Theory of Evolution down to all the sins that plague the western world today.   Abortion, the murder of innocent children unable to defend themselves, is a sin before God.   We can dress it up as “a woman’s right to choose”, or a “female health issue”, but murder is murder and should be called such.

The prophet Isaiah put it well when he said that “The whole head is sick, And the whole heart faints. From the sole of the foot even to the head, There is no soundness in it” (Isa 1:5b-6a).

We can’t think straight any more.

If King David were alive today, he would no doubt be languishing in a prison somewhere for killing lions in his earlier role as a shepherd! (I Samuel 17:34-36).

From now on, I shall refer to him as ‘David, the lion killer.”   It’s just another way of showing how ridiculous political correctness is.

—————————————————————————-

BW Reunion Group
Back row standing: Simone (Carol Johnson) Albert, Carol (Wooten) Boyer, Alan Boyer, Susan and Colin Lauchlan, Phil Shields, Mark and Donna (Pattemore) Rhodes, Steve and Denise (Branham) Acerra, Richard and Annette (Weatherley) Forkun. Sitting on chairs/couch: Anita Wickham-Becker, Melvin and Diane (Hoot) Rhodes, Patricia (Kingsmore) Hayward, Carole (Beeston) Shields, Suzy Blackwell, Carl Hayward. Sitting on floor: Leo and Jane (Patterson) Van Pelt, Lowell Blackwell.

On a more uplifting note, Diane and I spent last weekend with old (and I mean old) friends from Bricket Wood, the English campus of Ambassador College, that closed down in 1974.

Apart from a few spouses, everybody present attended BW in the early seventies.

Although we are all now in different churches or no church at all, it did not detract one bit from the spirit of unity, friendliness and love that we all felt.

All people who profess to follow Jesus Christ should remember what He said was the identifying sign of real Christians:  “By this shall all men know you are my disciples, that you love one another.” (John 13:35)

We hope to do this again sometime!  (No pressure, Tricia!)