Doc's Talk: Exploring themes of Political Relativity

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Exploring themes of Political Relativity

The GOP Speaks Out in Support of Israel, Democrats Are Strangely Silent

During the past few days, the Obama administration has been overreacting to Israel's approval of new housing in a northern Jerusalem Jewish neighborhood. The only thing wrong with Israel's announcement was the timing, which even the most ardent Israel supporter would call plain dumb. Though it was not done to embarrass the SCHMOTUS Joe Biden, a task he masters on his own, the timing was embarrassing not only for the SCHMOTUS Joe Biden, but for Bibi Netanyahu Israel's Prime minister who was not aware of the announcement before it was made (yes Israeli politics are very weird). The administration claimed that the proposal for additional housing units in Ramat Shlomo undermines hopes for "profitable" negotiations. Yet the 1,600 units do not violate U.S.-Israel agreements. The U.S. had accepted and praised Israel's concession for a 10-month freeze on building in the West Bank. Jerusalem, including eastern Jerusalem, was specifically excluded from the freeze.

This is not a new community, Ramat Shlomo is already a thriving community of almost 20,000 Jews. It is located between two much larger Jewish communities, Ramot and French Hill. Its growth would not interfere with the contiguity of Arab neighborhoods in eastern Jerusalem.

It is clear by the reaction of the White House that they are using it as an excuse to do what was intended all along, move the US away from its strong friendship with Israel. This was the position of Barack Obama before he was courting the Jewish vote as a presidential candidate, it was also the position of Hillary Clinton before she decided to move to NY and run for Senator. Lets not forget that the Clinton's nice house in Chappaqua was partially funded by the Ten Million Dollar a year salary Bubba got from Yucaipa a firm based in Dubai. Dubai is one of the most anti-Israel of the Muslim nations. Bill and Hilary are major friends of Dubai, to the point where the Clinton Foundation have established Dubai Study departments in universities in the US and London.

All this unprecedented anger is coming from an administration that received 78% of the Jewish vote. Israel's ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, has told the country's diplomats that U.S.-Israeli relations face their worst crisis in 35 years, despite attempts by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office to project a sense of "business as usual.

With all the venom coming out of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., maybe Israel would find some support coming from the other side of the National Mall after all, the Democratic Party usally gets the lions share of the Jewish vote. The strange part was there was no voice coming out of the Democrats in Congress disagreeing with the President's unfair treatment of Israel. But there was plenty of voices coming out of the GOP:

* Congressman Mike Pence, R-Indiana,"Since taking the oath of office, President Obama has repeatedly extended a hand of cooperation to our enemies while pushing aside the concerns and interests of our allies. This disturbing pattern has been displayed time and again in our dealings with Israel over the past year. The recent rhetoric by the Obama Administration threatens the stability of Israel at a time when it faces terrorist threats on its borders and the possibility of a nuclear Iran just over its border.

"The United States of America knows no greater friend in the Middle East than Israel. House Republicans will continue to stand by our most cherished ally, and we will hold the administration accountable for the words and actions it takes toward the people of Israel and their democratically elected government."

* Congressman Eric Cantor R-Virginia “To say that I am deeply concerned with the irresponsible comments that the White House, Vice President, and the Secretary of State have made against Israel is an understatement. In an effort to ingratiate our country with the Arab world, this Administration has shown a troubling eagerness to undercut our allies and friends. Israel has always been committed to the peace process, including advocating for direct talks between Israelis and Palestinians, in effort to bring this conflict to an end. Unfortunately, the Palestinian Government continues to insist on indirect talks and slowing down the process.

“While it condemns Israel, the Administration continues to ignore a host of Palestinian provocations that undermine prospects for peace in the region. Where is the outrage when top Fatah officials call for riots on the Temple Mount? Why does the Palestinian Authority get a pass when it holds a ceremony glorifying the woman responsible for one of the deadliest terror attack in Israel’s history? Surely, the Administration’s double standard has set back the peace process.

“Israel continues to be a world leader in the fight against terrorism and speak out against the prospects of a nuclear Iran. For this Administration to treat our special relationship with Israel, one of our closest and most strategic Democratic allies, in this fashion is beyond irresponsible and jeopardizes America’s national security"

* Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen,(R-Florida) the leading Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, charged that the Obama government’s condemnations of "an indispensable ally and friend of the United States…undermine both our allies and the peace process, while encouraging the enemies of America and Israel alike. She noted that President Obama has taken "softer approaches" towards the Palestinian Authority, Syria and Iran.

* Senator Sam Brownback’s (R-Kansas)office stated, “It' is hard to see how spending a weekend condemning Israel for a zoning decision in its capital city amounts to a positive step towards peace."

That couldn't be right, there had to be one Democrat standing up to Obama's unfair attacks on one of America's closest allies. I search Google News for some recognizable Democratic names.

* I checked on Jerrold Nadler Democratic Congressman from NY. Nadler shows up to speak at every pro-Israel rally at the UN, he claims to be a big friend of Israel's (and big is the operative word). There was no reports of support coming from Nadler. But to be fair, it is Monday, and the all-you-can eat buffets today are appealing to the larger-than-life Congressman.

* How about Anthony Wiener another NY Democratic Congressman who shows up at every pro-Israel rally? Apparently like Nadler, Wiener is being a weenie and not standing up to a Democratic party President who seeks to delegitmize Israel.

* Senator Chuck Schumer would speak out. After all he is not only a supporter of Israel, but Schumer would knock over his own grandma to get his face in front of a camera. Even Chuck said nothing.

* I didn't bother to check on my Congressman Steve Israel (D-NY). He already told everyone where he stands when he allowed the anti-Israel organization J-street to use his name for a dinner invitation at the request of the President. I knew that Israel had his lips too closely affixed to the President's agenda to make a comment in support of the Jewish state that bears his name.

* Gary Ackerman Democratic Congressman from Bayside NY, who is also the Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East was also silent.

Isn't it strange, that supposedly Pro-Israel members of congress, from some of the most pro-Israel districts in the country, members of the party that usually receives the bulk of the Jewish vote, have abandoned Israel, refusing to voice their support in a time of great need. At the same time members of the opposition party who usually gets a smaller percentage of the Jewish vote, who come from places like Indiana, Kansas and Virginia are standing up to a President who is using a poorly timed but legitimate announcement by Israel to drive a wedge between our country and one of her strongest Allies.

This is not an anomaly. The Democratic/Progressive alliance is not necessarily pro-Israel, even the ones that usually are, do not have the guts to stand up and be counted. Maybe its time for supporters of the Jewish State, to look at candidates from other parties when considering who to vote for in the upcoming mid-term elections. The future of Israel may depend on it.

http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2010/03/gop-speaks-out-in-support-of-israel.html

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk