Featured post

Why can't everyone condemn Hamas?

Following Hamas' atrocities in Israel, the media are awash with commentary, so I will keep my comments short. I am shocked by the willin...

Wednesday 17 April 2024

Carpe Diem

Are we at the crossroads? Can we take the opportunity granted by recent unwelcome and unprecedented events to correct for the evil that we have seen seep into our world community? Is it time to seize the day?

The unwarranted launch of 300 airborne weapons by Iran aimed at both military AND non-military targets in Israel has opened a door. A door that was heretofore shut due to the likely condemnation of Western World sensibilities. Had Israel attacked Iran directly even despite the multiple attacks instigated by Iran against Israel but committed by its puppet armies, it would have been regarded as provocative and condemned. 

However, after the massive attack on Israel directly from Iran the game has changed. This was the first direct attack on Israeli territory from Iranian territory. The shadowboxing veil has been dropped, at least for this attack. Iran was trying to provide a disproportionate response to Israel's attack on a senior military personnel meeting in an annex to Iran's embassy in Damascus. Israel's attack had been a serious blow & embarrassment to Iran. For Israel, these were very valuable military targets, in particular one of the organisers of the Oct 7th Hamas massacre.

After Iran's attack, Israel has vowed to respond. No doubt Iran had expected this but hopes it is 'proportional', or limited. And the Western World has again lectured Israel about its likely response calling for it to be 'restrained'. Some of Israel's allies have threatened (USA, UK) and even ceased (Canada, Belgium) arms shipments. So much for so-called 'allies'.

Yet, having survived the massive attack by Iran, virtually unscathed, Israel has a singular opportunity to attack Iran without incurring the condemnation of the Western World. Of course, no matter what it does there will be some countries that will condemn it, but there is a clear moral right for Israel to respond.

There are many ways that Israel could respond. They can be broken into three categories

  1. A short sharp proportional response  A relatively mild but sufficient response to show that it will always respond to an attack. This would be a response against military infrastructure only, but of sufficient intensity and value to give Iran a 'bloody nose'. Given Iran's attack had been thwarted any successful destruction of military bases would be a lesson, proving Israel to be more capable than Iran
  2. A consequential economic attack A militarily simple but economically consequential attack on Iran's critical infrastructure. This could be oil pipelines, Oil refineries, oil export terminals, electricity power stations, water supplies, maritime terminals, etc. While these are soft targets, and not strictly military they would expose Iran's vulnerability and most importantly enlist the Iranian population into condemning the Islamist regime.
  3. An all-out re-establishment of deterrence As a final option, Israel could go 'disproportionate' with a direct attack on Iran's nuclear facilities and eliminate a major threat to the entire Middle East and the World. A successful attack on Iran's nuclear facilities would be welcomed by the world, and would, if successful, give Iran more than just a bloody nose, it would seriously embarrass the regime and elevate Israel. It would also prevent a potential nuclear catastrophe should Iran develop multiple nuclear weapons or even if not deployed would prevent Iran from being elevated above its neighbors as a nuclear weapon state.

While option 1 would most likely be allowed to pass without another attack from Iran, the other options would most likely have further consequences. The most likely being another barrage of rockets from Hezbollah, perhaps a full war, or even force Iran into a direct open war with Israel. 

There are high costs to any of these options. Although no immediate response to the first, it will leave Israel weaker and encourage further adventurism from Iran. In the long term maybe the higher cost options are preferable.

If Churchill had won the day in the early1930s and the Allies had attacked Germany before it built its formidable army, it would have saved 50 million lives!

In that case, Chamberlain won and the world lost.

Today Israel's decision may also have a heavy price.

Of course, these are nothing more than guesses. But we will see in the coming days.

 The consequence of this latter would be I see a couple of different approaches;t can respond by attacking military infrastructure

Tuesday 9 April 2024

Uncontrolled immigration causes social division!

In what has proven to be a prophetic presentation, a younger Douglas Murray pinpointed the consequences of uncontrolled immigration. In his Oxford debate some 10 years ago on the topic "Immigration is Bad for Britain", Murray spoke of the dangers of uncontrolled, rapid immigration.

He noted that 
  • Before the rapid immigration that started in the 1990's Britain was a far more homogeneous and socially united country
  • Despite there being some immigration benefits there is a downside as well. Some studies prove that the cost of migration is greater than the benefits they bring
  • The greatest cost is the impact on social cohesion. The introduction of large numbers of individuals who share a different set of values than the rest of the country invariably leads to divisions and competition between conflicting values
  • As a result values that defined what it meant to be British including, the institution of Western Judeo-Christian moral code, the belief in Law and Order, and the institutions of Parliament, have been gradually whittled away with competing ideas from cultures that do not share these value.

Given what has happened to Britain in the past 30 years his words are prophetic.

British culture is not what it was, and Britain has indeed lost its social cohesion.

This is a warning for many people in the world where rapid immigration has created enclaves of people with values different from the countries they have adopted.

Nothing highlights this breakdown in values more than the recent anti-Israeli marches with many migrants (first or second generation) not only protesting against Israel but openly condemning and even burning the flags of the country which they had adopted.

Douglas Murray saw this coming, we should have listened!

(If you wish to hear the whole debate see it here ; 


Sunday 7 April 2024

Who is to blame?

We have seen this story before. A bank robbery has gone wrong, the police have the bank surrounded with the 4 would-be-robbers holding twenty hostages. The police negotiator using his best patient and compliant manner has offered food, and has calmed the trigger-happy gunmen. The barter is simple, they want their freedom in exchange for the freedom of the hostages. As always it is a long and complex negotiation. Lots of pizza is delivered. The delivery man is an undercover cop, who sizes up the locations of the gangsters, the hostages and the layout. The SWAT team is already on site, ready and eager to get their hands on the bastards, but the negotiator holds them off feeling he can avoid bloodshed. 

It has taken 10 hours and everyone is tired and edgy. A gunshot rings out. Something has happened. The SWAT team is given the go-ahead to bring the stand-off to an end.

Flash-bangs, gun fire, sniper action, and all is over in just a minute. The result?
All gunmen were shot, 18 hostages were safe, but one hostage had been shot by one of the robbers, and another was shot and killed when a SWAT team member aiming at a gunman accidentally shot a hostage.

So who is to blame for the death of the hostage? Not who caused the death but who is to blame? The law is clear on this. If someone is killed during a felony the perpetrator of the felony is responsible and will be charged with murder.

So why am I raising this?
Apply this to the recent accidental deaths of aid workers in Gaza. Who is to blame? Israel has accepted that it was responsible for the deaths, and has taken action to punish the perpetrators. But who is to blame for the deaths?

In a court of law, it would be Hamas. So it should be in all our minds. Had Hamas not broken the peace on Oct 7, none of the deaths would have occurred.

World opinion is being manipulated for various reasons that I won't get into here. So all the more we need to maintain moral clarity. In Gaza there would be no civilian deaths, no widespread damage to infrastructure, no upheaval in the daily lives of citizens and no food shortages had Hamas not started a war by massacring innocent civilian Israelis and taking many hostage. Hamas started the war, and every death including the death of the aid workers, is on their head.

Friday 5 April 2024

At last, excess deaths are being investigated

Change comes slowly, but sometimes it does eventually come. In an Australian first, the Australian Senate has voted to establish an enquiry into the sudden and dramatic increase in excess mortality in recent years. From a baseline of -3% in 2020, the Australian Bureau of Statistics has reported excess mortality of excess mortality of  1.6% in 2021, 11.7% in 2022, and 6.1% in 2023. These relatively small percentages represent very large numbers and are statistically significant. The variation in mortality is normally very low. 

While this is being investigated in Australia it is not just an Australian phenomenon, it is worldwide. 

I have posted on this many times so I won't repeat the background. Please review these posts if you have not been following the story; Why are our leaders ignoring the unexplained rise in Non-COVID mortality?, and Examining Excess Mortality Beyond COVID: A Call for Open Discourse - updated 3 October, and Excess deaths debate 16 January

In any case the following link to Ben Fordham's show on Radio 2GB gives a good background.

It is late, but well worth doing. After all who knows what new demon is being cooked up in Virology labs around the world. We need to understand what has happened and make more sensible decisions next time.

Sunday 31 March 2024

Global cancer concerns

Cancer has been in the headlines of late. That may be somewhat of a limp opener, given for many of us touched by the dreaded disease it is never far from our thoughts. Yet when two members of the British Royal family are diagnosed with cancer withing weeks of each other, it is not exactly normal. Sure it could be just a coincidence. Maybe. But is it? Hasn't cancer suddenly had a resurgence? It seems more prominent people and more young people are being diagnosed with fast-developing and advanced cancers. Now admittedly I am somewhat conditioned, due to my scepticism, to look for anything that blames the mRNA vaccines, so take my 'gut feel' with a healthy dose of doubt. But it seems I am not the only one noticing this.  
Dr John Campbell recently posted a short video on the subject on Youtube titled "Global Cancer conerns"

In the video he raises the question 'Why is there a surge in cancers?" and "Why is it not being actively investigated?" Good questions indeed.

And then I also came across this article in Trial Site News, "Cancer in USA Down in 2020, Then Surges After Mass Vaccination—Is there a Connection?

Coincidence? Mmm. there seems to be a lot of smoke. Let's watch this space.