Oct 112023
 

Les idées pour baisser les coûts sont nombreuses, mais il est impossible d’évaluer leur efficacité car nous ne savons pas exactement où et comment l’argent est dépensé.

Proposition

La Confédération mandate l’Office Fédéral de la Statistique pour réaliser une étude annuelle des finances de la santé. Pour ce faire, tous les assureurs fourniront à l’OFS les données détaillées permettant de chiffrer individuellement chaque prestation : acte, médicament, prime, franchise, remboursement, quote-part, etc. Une analyse avec une granularité aussi fine permettra une compréhension des finances de la santé qui était impossible jusqu’alors.

Avantages

Il serait possible de chiffrer rigoureusement les économies réalisables pour chaque mesure proposée. Ceci permettra de :

  • Piloter la politique de la santé avec précision, sans inconnues.
  • Abréger les débats, actuellement basés sur des suppositions d’économies.
  • Prendre des décisions rapidement, en sachant exactement les conséquences.
  • Choisir les mesures qui généreront les plus grandes réductions des coûts.
  • Ecarter les discussions autour de mesures clairement insignifiantes.
  • Identifier les distortions dans les prix.
  • Détecter les abus.
  • Faire des découvertes inattendues, par exemple : Autour du Lac des Quatre Cantons, le médicament X est prescrit 3 fois plus que la moyenne, pourquoi ?

Objections prévisibles

Cela coûtera cher

Les coûts de la santé en Suisse en 2021 étaient de CHF 827 par habitant et par mois, soit CHF 86’344’000’000. Même si l’étude initiale coûte quelques millions, c’est insignifiant en regard des économies potentielles.

Violation du secret médical

L’OFS spécifiera comment les données seront agrégées, vraisemblablement par localité, âge et sexe du patient. Il serait ainsi impossible d’identifier un individu.

Ces données appartiennent aux assureurs

Une donnée est générée quand une personne subit un traitement ou paie une prestation ; cette donnée appartient à celui qui la crée. Individuellement elle lui est personnelle, agrégées elles appartiennent à la collectivité. Les assureurs hébergent ces données, ils n’en sont pas les propriétaires. Par ailleurs, ces données existent déjà chez les médecins, les pharmaciens et les hôpitaux ; c’est simplement plus efficace de les récolter auprès des assureurs.

Divulguer ces données serait déloyal pour les assureurs

Si tous les assureurs doivent participer, aucun ne serait (dés)avantagé. S’ils n’ont rien à cacher, ils n’ont rien à craindre.

La quantité de données serait ingérable

Supposons que tous les habitants sont en traitement permanent et qu’il faille une page A4 pour décrire le traitement de chacun, chaque mois. 9’000’000 d’habitants × 12 mois × 3’000 octets = 324 GigaOctets. Une clef USB de 512 GigaOctets coûte CHF 31.

Copyright © 2023: Maurice Calvert

Feb 182020
 

Some years ago I was working for a large multi-national corporation. One morning I received an email from the CIO, addressed to the entire company, explaining a botched SAP rollout. The corporate-speak was some of the best that I have ever read; I reproduce it here, unaltered save for anonymisation, with my translation into layman’s English.

On June 1, we reached go-live with Dressing, Sauces and Oils North America (DS&O) on the TC3 instance of our SAP solution.

On June 1st we forced go-live of our half-baked SAP solution on DS&O, simply because we were so over-budget that the only other option would have been to scrap the project.

Since go-live, DS&O has experienced significant issues with the solution that are impacting the business’ operations and financial reporting.

Since go-live, the business has been losing money like a leaking sieve, because our ‘solution’ was a complete and utter disaster.

This is unacceptable for DS&O and for us.

DS&O have said clearly: “Make it work or die”. For us, ill-engineered solutions are the norm.

To be trusted partners, Global IT commits to fully supporting our businesses … so, we will do what’s needed to stabilize performance for DS&O.

SAP consultants will be brought in, at 3’000$ a day, to criticise the implementation and spend a king’s ransom on new servers that will make the problem worse.

To that end, Andrew Brown, our SAP lead and a member of the CIO leadership team (LT), will personally spearhead the effort to review all factors that could be contributing to the instability.

Andrew’s balls are, in theory, on the table to get this working. In reality, at 3’000$ a day, he doesn’t give a flying fuck, and anyway he has a new client ready to shaft just down the road.

This includes looking at business processes, operations, data as well as assessing the actual solution itself.

We will re-hash the miserable initial requirements analysis and lay the blame squarely with the consultants that are no longer with us.

We want to fully understand the root cause to thoroughly address the issue for DS&O and add to important learnings.

I heard ‘root cause’ in a management course and it sounds good here.  ‘important learnings’ is cute too; I’ve been managing IT for 30 years and I still have yet to learn one single lesson from my impressive catalogue of mistakes.

Andrew will be 100% focused on this effort, with members of the CIO LT stepping in to support other areas for which Andrew is responsible.

Andrew will try to attribute blame on his colleagues. If he is successful, I shall fire them, if not I’ll fire him. With a glowing recommendation.

We undertake this initiative with confidence we can stabilize DS&O and make any warranted enhancements to our approach or technology.

‘warranted’ means that we never made any bad choices initially. ‘enhancements to our approach or technology’ means that we might well need to choose a completely new technology, that will triple the budget and push the project back by three years. Until the next fuck-up.

We will work to ensure that the difficulties experienced here are not repeated.

Those of you who have already been through an SAP implementation will see the humour in this statement.

We will share these learnings with our businesses currently preparing for (or in) deployment.

Our bookmaker is currently taking bets on SAP projects at 15 to 1 of failure.

We also will continue to stress the importance of readiness … businesses and functions must undertake needed changes to prepare for the adoption of new processes, a new organizational structure, and more – all of which are required to execute enterprise process strategies.

Given the magnitude and cost of this unholy blunder, it would seem only fair that you accept some of the responsibility. After all, we did talk to you a couple of times before implementation.

What’s critical to understand is the  Leadership Team (CLT) remains as committed as ever to our ERP modernization journey and SAP as our solution.

We take the meaning of ‘dogmatic’ to levels that even a religious zealot couldn’t imagine. Every morning, we recite ‘Our SAP which art in heaven, hallowed be thy name”.

We are not stopping, we are not slowing down … we are moving ahead with our roadmap and the commitments we’ve made.

Yes, we are going to continue, hell-bent, on forcing SAP down your throats, no matter at what cost or damage to the business, because they had the sexiest PowerPoint presentation.

Leaders have confidence in our function and demonstrating our commitment to their businesses (as we are with DS&O) means we will continue to deserve that confidence. 

Truth be told, the business is sick and tired of IT delivering shitty service by some ignoramus in Bangalore.

Should you have questions about our work on DS&O, please reach out to your manager, SAP leadership or your CIO LT member.

For the British, ‘reach out’ has a distasteful innuendo, possibly acceptable in such a gush of platitudes. Notwithstanding, if you have any self-respect, find a job elsewhere.

Thank you,

If I was honest, I’d say I’m sorry, but I’m above that

Brian

Feb 032020
 

Messieurs,

Il est important de protéger l’environnement, donc j’ai commandé des panneaux solaires et une pompe à chaleur, qui me libéreront de ma dépendance aux énergies fossiles et m’éviteront dorénavant de brûler 6 tonnes de mazout chaque année. Il est édifiant de découvrir que cette démarche n’a strictement aucun intérêt financier. 

Le subside que je recevrai de la Confédération n’est en réalité qu’un prêt qui sera remboursé en moins de sept ans avec les impôts que je paierai sur le courant que je vous revendrai.

Le récent fiasco des contrats dénoncés unilatéralement par SwissGrid pose une lumière crue sur les rétributions accordées aux particuliers qui revendent leur électricité. La journée, vous me facturez 26 ct/kWh et vous allez me le racheter 12 ct/kWh, soit un bénéfice de 116%. Cela alors que vous n’apportez quasiment aucune valeur ajoutée à la transaction, car les électrons que je générerai seront utilisés par le consommateur le plus proche : mon voisin.

On serait tenté de croire que votre politique de rétribution est mue par des considérations purement mercantiles, mais celles-ci ne résistent pas à l’analyse : la production privée, presque homéopathique, se mesure en MWh alors que vous traitez en TWh.

La raison réelle est plus sournoise. L’idée qu’un consommateur aie ne serait-ce qu’un peu d’indépendance énergétique vous est totalement rédhibitoire et les restrictions des volumes de fluides caloriporteurs le confirment : vous ne tolérez même pas que je puisse emmagasiner de la chaleur le jour afin de l’utiliser la nuit suivante.

Dès lors, on constate que la sollicitude des instances publiques pour l’énergie renouvelable n’est qu’une fumisterie hypocrite ; celui qui produira de l’électricité verte le paiera intégralement de sa poche et sera taxé pour son impudence.

Le seul espoir reste dans la prochaine ouverture du marché de l’électricité, qui sonnera le glas de votre monopole et peut-être l’arrivée de concurrents plus enclins à acheter une énergie propre à un prix équitable. Cela serait un vrai encouragement à l’abandon des énergies fossiles si nuisibles à notre environnement.

Recevez, Messieurs, l’assurance de mes sentiments distingués.

Maurice Calvert

Jan 082020
 

Today’s Guardian has this piece https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jan/07/eu-parks-post-brexit-demands-avoid-early-clash-boris-johnson-ursula-von-der-leyen

To save you clicking:

The European parliament will express its “grave concern” about the attitude of Boris Johnson’s government to the 3.3 million EU citizens living in the UK following threats of deportation made by a British minister.

In a leaked resolution drafted by the main political groups and due to be backed by MEPs next Wednesday, Johnson’s administration is accused of creating “anxiety” in recent months.

Dear Ursula von der Leyen: Britain will shortly be leaving the EU and you appear to be unsettled that EU citizens will no longer enjoy freedom of abode in the UK. One of the primary purposes of Brexit was to allow the UK to decide who may and may not settle in the UK, without external interference. You apparently haven’t grasped that we will be able, if we so choose, to treat Belgians and Spaniards no differently to those from Botswana and Taiwan. We are of course more than willing to negotiate preferential terms for Europeans, but negotiation carries no obligations; both you and we can walk away from an unsatisfactory agreement.

To be perfectly clear: We owe you nothing and you owe us nothing. Both our mutual privileges are gone. The sooner you understand this, the better.

Aug 312016
 

According to Wikipedia, as of 2010, some 1’200’000 people died in traffic-related accidents. Here’s how that looks geographically:

TrafficDeathsStatistics

The take-away is fairly simple: you’re better-off driving in (interesting how these same countries come back every time): Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland and, unexpectedly, Israel. The rest of Europe, if you don’t stray too far east, is relatively harmless, along with Canada and Australia, which are only twice as dangerous as the ‘model’ countries. In the USA, your chances of dying are quadrupled. From there, the multiplier is on a bender: Mexico 5, Bolivia 6, Kenya 7, Iran 8, Ecuador 9, Oman 10, Nigeria 11, Thailand 12 and the winner if Erithrea, where you are 16 times more likely to die on the road.

Why did I go to all this trouble for victims of car accidents, you may well ask? Because it represents about 1’200’000 who die every year for no good reason, yet we find it perfectly acceptable. In contrast we wallow in grief for one death:

A while back, Pakistan hung Shafqat Hussain, found guilty of having killed a 7-year-old child, and the whole twitosphere is in uproar because he was too young to be executed. This suits journalists, who can use said tweets to justify their perception of ‘public opinion’. A false premise that even a tapeworm could understand, because tweets are not votes, carefully counted in a ballot-box; they are tweets, and as their name implies, they are mindless drivel, most likely generated by a computer.

What’s interesting is that nobody questions that Shafqat did actually kill a 7-year-old, but nobody, especially journalists, gives a shit because the life of an innocent young boy is much less news-grabbing than the sob-story of a supposedly-persecuted adolescent. I’m not sure whose testicles I’d prefer to crush in a vice, Shafqat’s or the journalists. From a Darwinian perspective, all those testicles seems the most sensible approach.

You’re not reading/listening anymore because I questioned the reality of the twittosphere? Your single-digit IQ brings forth my greatest compassion.

Mar 232016
 

Another few dozen dead in Brussels, apparently the work of islamic suicide bombers. Almost customary news-of-the-day, followed by the customary heart-rending of politicians, eager to gain media-time for their own self-glorification. After ‘nous sommes Charlie’, we have ‘nous sommes Paris’ and now, predictably, ‘nous sommes Bruxelles’. Trite, self-serving and an utter waste of media bandwidth.

The drivel served up to us, ad nauseum, wallows between indignation and glib sound-bites about tolerance and the necessity of doing something for the down-trodden poor. These poor souls apparently are (almost) justified in resorting to violence because they can’t find employment, whilst clamouring for equal treatment despite the djellabas, thick beards and a thick misogynistic streak that doesn’t quite jig with our society.

Whether it was Voltaire or Rousseau who said “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” makes no difference; you have the absolute right to worship who/whatsoever you choose. However, your rights end where my rights start, and vice-versa. Having respected your right to worship, you have the logical obligation to respect my right to do something else.

The moderate, respectable muslim will object that the suicide bombers don’t represent his views. The problem is that the suicide bomber claims to represent islam. If the moderate muslim doesn’t take steps to stop the suicide bombers, he shouldn’t be surprised to find himself bundled with them.

A muslim, you have decided to come and live in Europe. You’re more than welcome, many of us came from elsewhere and we thrive on diversity. However, it’s not a one-way street; when we visit a mosque, I take off my shoes and my wife wears a veil; quaint to our culture, but I respect yours. When you come to Europe, your daughter at school has the obligation to learn how to swim. We don’t do this to look at her breasts, we do it because in Europe there are many lakes and rivers and we don’t want our children to drown.

Is all this really so hard to understand? Or, as I suspect, are you doing it deliberately?

Jun 242015
 

So Tsarnaev apologises for his crime. Predictable, as in the USA, showing remorse seems to infer some kind of leniency, on the American model “You’ll always be forgiven your fuckups and given a second chance”.

In business, you create a venture, it goes tits-up, you go bankrupt, you get a second chance. This is eminently fair, after all, your backers were venture capitalists who were fully aware that they might lose their shirt.

Tsarnaev’s case is very different, he maimed and killed. Purportedly in the name of a religion. Said religion does not, in its majority, condone maiming and killing, although it’s a fine line, given the lack of condemnation by the muslim community.

Let us be perfectly clear, the death penalty has little dissuasive effect (on psychotics, who by definition aren’t in ‘our’ world). The death penalty serves a simple purpose: the culprit cannot do it again and he cannot propagate his genes. There is no credible argument which would allow the remote possibility that Tsarnaev could reproduce; his crime is so ignominious that he must be eliminated.

Feb 222015
 

Recent events have weighed heavily on the notion of tolerance, which Voltaire described nicely in his prayer to God in 1763, some 250 years ago. Despite being a dyed-in-the-wool atheist, I have to admit his text was premonitory:

No longer then do I address myself to men, but to you, God of all beings, of all worlds, and of all ages; if it may be permitted weak creatures lost in immensity and imperceptible to the rest of the universe, to dare to ask something of you, you who have given everything, and whose decrees are immutable as they are eternal. Deign to look with pity on the errors attached to our nature; let not these errors prove ruinous to us. You have not given us hearts to hate ourselves with, and hands to kill one another. Grant then that we may mutually aid each other to support the burden of a painful and transitory life; that the trifling differences in the garments that cover our frail bodies, in our insufficient languages, in our ridiculous customs, in our imperfect laws, in our idle opinions, in all our conditions so disproportionate in our eyes, and so equal in yours, that all the little variations that differentiate the atoms called men not be signs of hatred and persecution; that those who light candles in broad daylight to worship you bear with those who content themselves with the light of your sun; that those who dress themselves in a white robe to say that we must love you do not detest those who say the same thing in cloaks of black wool; that it may be all the same to adore you in a dialect formed from an ancient or a modern language; that those whose coat is colored red or violet, who rule over a little parcel of a little heap of mud of this world, and who possess a few round fragments of a certain metal, enjoy without pride what they call grandeur and riches, and may others look on them without envy: for you know that there is nothing in all these vanities to inspire envy or pride.

May all men remember that they are brothers! May they hold in horror tyranny exerted over souls, just as they do the violence which forcibly seizes the products of peaceful industry! And if the scourge of war is inevitable, let us not hate one another, let us not destroy one another in the midst of peace, and let us use the moment of our existence to bless, in a thousand different languages, from Siam to California, your goodness which has given us this moment.

Dec 022014
 

Mr. President,

I stand before the world as a proud representative of the State of Israel and the Jewish people. I stand tall before you knowing that truth and morality are on my side. And yet, I stand here knowing that today in this Assembly, truth will be turned on its head and morality cast aside.

The fact of the matter is that when members of the international community speak about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a fog descends to cloud all logic and moral clarity. The result isn’t realpolitik, its surrealpolitik.

The world’s unrelenting focus on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is an injustice to tens of millions of victims of tyranny and terrorism in the Middle East. As we speak, Yazidis, Bahai, Kurds, Christians and Muslims are being executed and expelled by radical extremists at a rate of 1,000 people per month.

How many resolutions did you pass last week to address this crisis? And how many special sessions did you call for? The answer is zero. What does this say about international concern for human life? Not much, but it speaks volumes about the hypocrisy of the international community.

I stand before you to speak the truth. Of the 300 million Arabs in the Middle East and North Africa, less than half a percent are truly free – and they are all citizens of Israel.

Israeli Arabs are some of the most educated Arabs in the world. They are our leading physicians and surgeons, they are elected to our parliament, and they serve as judges on our Supreme Court. Millions of men and women in the Middle East would welcome these opportunities and freedoms.

Nonetheless, nation after nation, will stand at this podium today and criticize Israel – the small island of democracy in a region plagued by tyranny and oppression.

Mr. President,

Our conflict has never been about the establishment of a Palestinian state. It has always been about the existence of the Jewish state.

Sixty seven years ago this week, on November 29, 1947, the United Nations voted to partition the land into a Jewish state and an Arab state. Simple. The Jews said yes. The Arabs said no. But they didn’t just say no. Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon launched a war of annihilation against our newborn state.

This is the historical truth that the Arabs are trying to distort. The Arabs’ historic mistake continues to be felt – in lives lost in war, lives lost to terrorism, and lives scarred by the Arab’s narrow political interests.

According to the United Nations, about 700,000 Palestinians were displaced in the war initiated by the Arabs themselves. At the same time, some 850,000 Jews were forced to flee from Arab countries.

Why is it, that 67 years later, the displacement of the Jews has been completely forgotten by this institution while the displacement of the Palestinians is the subject of an annual debate?

The difference is that Israel did its utmost to integrate the Jewish refugees into society. The Arabs did just the opposite.

The worst oppression of the Palestinian people takes place in Arab nations. In most of the Arab world, Palestinians are denied citizenship and are aggressively discriminated against. They are barred from owning land and prevented from entering certain professions.

And yet none – not one – of these crimes are mentioned in the resolutions before you.

If you were truly concerned about the plight of the Palestinian people there would be one, just one, resolution to address the thousands of Palestinians killed in Syria. And if you were so truly concerned about the Palestinians there would be at least one resolution to denounce the treatment of Palestinians in Lebanese refugee camps.

But there isn’t. The reason is that today’s debate is not about speaking for peace or speaking for the Palestinian people – it is about speaking against Israel. It is nothing but a hate and bashing festival against Israel.

Mr. President,

The European nations claim to stand for Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité – freedom, equality, and brotherhood – but nothing could be farther from the truth.

I often hear European leaders proclaim that Israel has the right to exist in secure borders. That’s very nice. But I have to say – it makes about as much sense as me standing here and proclaiming Sweden’s right to exist in secure borders.

When it comes to matters of security, Israel learned the hard way that we cannot rely on others – certainly not Europe.

In 1973, on Yom Kippur – the holiest day on the Jewish calendar – the surrounding Arab nations launched an attack against Israel. In the hours before the war began, Golda Meir, our Prime Minister then, made the difficult decision not to launch a preemptive strike. The Israeli Government understood that if we launched a preemptive strike, we would lose the support of the international community.

As the Arab armies advanced on every front, the situation in Israel grew dire. Our casualty count was growing and we were running dangerously low on weapons and ammunition. In this, our hour of need, President Nixon and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, agreed to send Galaxy planes loaded with tanks and ammunition to resupply our troops. The only problem was that the Galaxy planes needed to refuel on route to Israel.

The Arab States were closing in and our very existence was threatened – and yet, Europe was not even willing to let the planes refuel. The U.S. stepped in once again and negotiated that the planes be allowed to refuel in the Azores.

The government and people of Israel will never forget that when our very existence was at stake, only one country came to our aid – the United States of America.

Israel is tired of hollow promises from European leaders. The Jewish people have a long memory. We will never ever forget that you failed us in the 1940s. You failed us in 1973. And you are failing us again today.

Every European parliament that voted to prematurely and unilaterally recognize a Palestinian state is giving the Palestinians exactly what they want – statehood without peace. By handing them a state on a silver platter, you are rewarding unilateral actions and taking away any incentive for the Palestinians to negotiate or compromise or renounce violence. You are sending the message that the Palestinian Authority can sit in a government with terrorists and incite violence against Israel without paying any price.

The first E.U. member to officially recognize a Palestinian state was Sweden. One has to wonder why the Swedish Government was so anxious to take this step. When it comes to other conflicts in our region, the Swedish Government calls for direct negotiations between the parties – but for the Palestinians, surprise, surprise, they roll out the red carpet.

State Secretary Söder may think she is here to celebrate her government’s so-called historic recognition, when in reality it’s nothing more than an historic mistake.

The Swedish Government may host the Nobel Prize ceremony, but there is nothing noble about their cynical political campaign to appease the Arabs in order to get a seat on the Security Council. Nations on the Security Council should have sense, sensitivity, and sensibility. Well, the Swedish Government has shown no sense, no sensitivity and no sensibility. Just nonsense.

Israel learned the hard way that listening to the international community can bring about devastating consequences. In 2005, we unilaterally dismantled every settlement and removed every citizen from the Gaza Strip. Did this bring us any closer to peace? Not at all. It paved the way for Iran to send its terrorist proxies to establish a terror stronghold on our doorstep.

I can assure you that we won’t make the same mistake again. When it comes to our security, we cannot and will not rely on others – Israel must be able to defend itself by itself.

Mr. President,

The State of Israel is the land of our forefathers – Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It is the land where Moses led the Jewish people, where David built his palace, where Solomon built the Jewish Temple, and where Isaiah saw a vision of eternal peace.

For thousands of years, Jews have lived continuously in the land of Israel. We endured through the rise and fall of the Assyrian, Babylonian, Greek and Roman Empires. And we endured through thousands of years of persecution, expulsions and crusades. The bond between the Jewish people and the Jewish land is unbreakable.

Nothing can change one simple truth – Israel is our home and Jerusalem is our eternal capital.

At the same time, we recognize that Jerusalem has special meaning for other faiths. Under Israeli sovereignty, all people – and I will repeat that, all people – regardless of religion and nationality can visit the city’s holy sites. And we intend to keep it this way. The only ones trying to change the status quo on the Temple Mount are Palestinian leaders.

President Abbas is telling his people that Jews are contaminating the Temple Mount. He has called for days of rage and urged Palestinians to prevent Jews from visiting the Temple Mount using (quote) “all means” necessary. These words are as irresponsible as they are unacceptable.

You don’t have to be Catholic to visit the Vatican, you don’t have to be Jewish to visit the Western Wall, but some Palestinians would like to see the day when only Muslims can visit the Temple Mount.

You, the international community, are lending a hand to extremists and fanatics. You, who preach tolerance and religious freedom, should be ashamed. Israel will never let this happen. We will make sure that the holy places remain open to all people of all faiths for all time.

Mr. President,

No one wants peace more than Israel. No one needs to explain the importance of peace to parents who have sent their child to defend our homeland. No one knows the stakes of success or failure better than we Israelis do. The people of Israel have shed too many tears and buried too many sons and daughters.

We are ready for peace, but we are not naïve. Israel’s security is paramount. Only a strong and secure Israel can achieve a comprehensive peace.

The past month should make it clear to anyone that Israel has immediate and pressing security needs. In recent weeks, Palestinian terrorists have shot and stabbed our citizens and twice driven their cars into crowds of pedestrians. Just a few days ago, terrorists armed with axes and a gun savagely attacked Jewish worshipers during morning prayers. We have reached the point when Israelis can’t even find sanctuary from terrorism in the sanctuary of a synagogue.

These attacks didn’t emerge out of a vacuum. They are the results of years of indoctrination and incitement. A Jewish proverb teaches: “The instruments of both death and life are in the power of the tongue.”

As a Jew and as an Israeli, I know with utter certainly that when our enemies say they want to attack us, they mean it.

Hamas’s genocidal charter calls for the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews worldwide. For years, Hamas and other terrorist groups have sent suicide bombers into our cities, launched rockets into our towns, and sent terrorists to kidnap and murder our citizens.

And what about the Palestinian Authority? It is leading a systemic campaign of incitement. In schools, children are being taught that ‘Palestine’ will stretch from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. In mosques, religious leaders are spreading vicious libels accusing Jews of destroying Muslim holy sites. In sports stadiums, teams are named after terrorists. And in newspapers, cartoons urge Palestinians to commit terror attacks against Israelis.

Children in most of the world grow up watching cartoons of Mickey Mouse singing and dancing. Palestinian children also grow up watching Mickey Mouse, but on Palestinians national television, a twisted figure dressed as Mickey Mouse dances in an explosive belt and chants “Death to America and death to the Jews.”

I challenge you to stand up here today and do something constructive for a change. Publically denounce the violence, denounce the incitement, and denounce the culture of hate.

Most people believe that at its core, the conflict is a battle between Jews and Arabs or Israelis and Palestinians. They are wrong. The battle that we are witnessing is a battle between those who sanctify life and those who celebrate death.

Following the savage attack in a Jerusalem synagogue, celebrations erupted in Palestinian towns and villages. People were dancing in the street and distributing candy. Young men posed with axes, loudspeakers at mosques called out congratulations, and the terrorists were hailed as “martyrs” and “heroes.”

This isn’t the first time that we saw the Palestinians celebrate the murder of innocent civilians. We saw them rejoice after every terrorist attack on Israeli civilians and they even took to the streets to celebrate the September 11 attack on the World Trade Center right here in New York City.

Imagine the type of state this society would produce. Does the Middle East really need another terror-ocracy? Some members of the international community are aiding and abetting its creation.

Mr. President,

As we came into the United Nations, we passed the flags of all 193 member States. If you take the time to count, you will discover that there are 15 flags with a crescent and 25 flags with a cross. And then there is one flag with a Jewish Star of David. Amidst all the nations of the world there is one state – just one small nation state for the Jewish people.

And for some people, that is one too many.

As I stand before you today I am reminded of all the years when Jewish people paid for the world’s ignorance and indifference in blood. Those days are no more.

We will never apologize for being a free and independent people in our sovereign state. And we will never apologize for defending ourselves.

To the nations that continue to allow prejudice to prevail over truth, I say “J’accuse.”

I accuse you of hypocrisy. I accuse you of duplicity.

I accuse you of lending legitimacy to those who seek to destroy our State.

I accuse you of speaking about Israel’s right of self-defense in theory, but denying it in practice.

And I accuse you of demanding concessions from Israel, but asking nothing of the Palestinians.

In the face of these offenses, the verdict is clear. You are not for peace and you are not for the Palestinian people. You are simply against Israel.

Members of the international community have a choice to make.

You can recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, or permit the Palestinian leadership to deny our history without consequence.

You can publically proclaim that the so-called “claim of return” is a non-starter, or you can allow this claim to remain the major obstacle to any peace agreement.

You can work to end Palestinian incitement, or stand by as hatred and extremism take root for generations to come.

You can prematurely recognize a Palestinian state, or you can encourage the Palestinian Authority to break its pact with Hamas and return to direct negotiations.

The choice is yours. You can continue to steer the Palestinians off course or pave the way to real and lasting peace.

Thank you, Mr. President.

May 012014
 

Let me pretend for a moment that I am Vladimir Putin.

Our sole sea access towards the Mediterranean is from the strip of coastline on the Black Sea between Ukraine and Georgia. We have recently invested massively in a naval base at Novorossiysk, the only readily-accessible city, as the coastline southwards to Sochi is obstructed by mountains:

Ukraine / Russia / Georgia

Ukraine has had strong ties with Russia ever since we annexed the Crimean Khanate in 1783. Barely 25 years ago it became independent. The first 10 years were a mess, with a 60% loss in GDP. In 1996 Kuchma was elected president and as corrupt as they get. Since 2004 Yanukovych and Yushchenko have been taking turns at rigging elections and mis-managing the country, which is now in a shambles.

Earlier this year it is brought to my attention that the EU is negotiating closer ties with Ukraine. The logical conclusion is that Ukraine will sooner or later join NATO. When that happens, my naval base at Novorossiysk would be barely 125Km from Kerch, from whence it would be easy to deny us naval access to the Black Sea. This is strategically unacceptable, as sailing to the Mediterranean / Africa / the Middle East from the Baltic or the Pacific is unthinkable.

To keep unfettered access to the Black Sea, the area from Donetsk to Sevastopol cannot be allowed to present a threat to Russia, the question is: how do I achieve this?

Simply invading the area would probably succeed. The Europeans would procrastinate, Obama would chastise, but nothing would be formally done to stop me, and reasonably so: the Europeans need our natural gas and Obama has repeatedly shown that he won’t go to war just because some foreigner’s rights have been trampled.

That would be a crude solution, let me envisage a wiser plan:

  • Get the KGB to identify self-seeking troublemakers in Ukraine and encourage them to sue for ‘democracy’. Provide appropriate financing to sustain them for a few months.
  • Once the demonstrations are in full swing, send in half a dozen elite snipers to pick off the noisiest, thereby turning them into martyrs. Actively propagate the rumour that the snipers were Ukrainians, the Internet will do the rest. Pay said snipers handsomely to keep their mouths shut.
  • The troubles created will be enough to dissuade foreign aid and investment, the economy will tank, what remains of the government will be incapable of restoring law and order.
  • Announce that I am providing assistance to Russian nationals in Eastern Ukraine. To prove my good faith, get the KGB to suggest holding a referendum to some red-neck local, who takes the bait and goes on TV calling himself the new president of Crimea.
  • The outcome of the referendum is a foregone conclusion: Crimea wants to be part of Russia. For the stupid foreigners’ benefit, encourage the notion that Crimea and Eastern Ukraine are the same thing.
  • Stupid foreigners beguiled, instead of sending my troops to Eastern Ukraine, I send them to the Crimea to establish my strangle-hold on Sevastopol.
  • Wait a few months, to let the world accept that Crimea is once again part of Russia.
  • Based on the success of the Crimean referendum, find a clown in Donetsk to suggest a similar referendum in what really is Eastern Ukraine, roughly from Kharkiv to Melitopol.
  • Rig said referendum if necessary, funds are no object. The line east of Kharkiv – Sevastopol is now part of Russia and I’ve achieved my goal.