Doc's Talk: Obama to Israel: 'Drop Dead'

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Obama to Israel: 'Drop Dead'

Richard Baehr
It took awhile, 14 months to be exact, but both the ADL and AIPAC have issued very solid statements condemning the President's new verbal war on Israel, and asking for the Administration to curtail the public berating of its supposed ally, and work with Israel in a more diplomatic fashion on both the peace process and Iran.

What is disgraceful is that so far, exactly one elected Democrat in Congress has done the same: Congresswoman Shelley Berkley of Nevada. Sadly, Democrats seem to care far more about passing health care legislation this week, than protecting the US-Israel relationship from Obama's assault. It's apparent that indifference i f not hostility to Israel's survival is at work. The infamous New York Daily News headline about Gerald Ford's response to New York's fiscal crisis was less fair to him (he never said these words) than the title of this article is to President Obama. It is interesting that David Axelrod, who blasted Israel on network news programs on Sunday, and is a proud standard bearer of the Millard Fillmore label when it comes to the history and politics of the Middle East conflict (for the record, Fillmore headed the Know Nothing Party back in the 1850s), will be honored by the NJDC (National Jewish Democratic Council) at a coming event. Axelrod has pretty much a perfect record of having avoided any connection with any pro-Israel or Jewish communal activity in his long political career, with the notable exception of raising money from Jews for Democratic candidates.

This Obama does well too. In Obama's case, the handwriting as to his sympathies in the Middle East conflict (not to be confused with his lies delivered to AIPAC conferences), were pretty well documented well before he was elected -- the 20 years he listened in rapture to the sermons of Reverend Wright; all those dinners , and babysitting, and chit chats with Rashid Khalidi and Ali Abunimah; the close friendship with Samantha Power (who sought an international force to invade the West Bank and liberate it from Israel); the years spent in the most anti-Israel hothouses in America -- the neighborhoods where elite colleges are located.

Martin Peretz has it right that America elected its first third world President, and he is behaving accordingly. His sympathies lie with the Palestinians. He is, after all, a redistributionist on all issues, and will always favor the group or state he perceives as weaker. The flak attacks by Hillary Clinton, other State Department officials, and Axelrod will do nothing to advance the peace process, ostensibly the goal of the Administration. Since Oslo, the Palestinians for over 15 years spoke directly to Israelis, without intermediation, even during the intifada.

When Obama launched his Presidency with a call for a 100% settlement freeze on all land beyond the green line, including natural growth of settlements, he enabled the Palestinians to avoid coming back for talks without those conditions being met. Why would the Palestinians be more pro-Israel than the White House, and accept less than the White House was demanding of Israel? Now the PA can hang back some more and honor some more mass murderers of Israelis while they wait for Obama to deliver more Israeli concessions before talks begin (prisoner releases, extending the settlement freeze to Jerusalem, eliminating more roadblocks ,easing the blockade of Gaza. ).

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is right to let the Americans know that Israel will continue to build within its capital. To please the Americans and not establish facts on the ground, only new housing for Palestinians would be allowed. Of course, when the ten month freeze on new settlements in the West Bank was agreed to, Bibi came in for high praise. Bibi specifically excluded Jerusalem from that freeze.

The announcement of the 1,600 units in a neighborhood where 16,000 Jews already live was step 4 in a 7 step approval process, with no construction for 3 more years. So yes, maybe it was an ill-timed announcement with Joe Biden in town, given how everyone needs to walk on hot coals to avoid giving the PA another excuse to not negotiate even indirectly with Israel.

For the Obama Administration to blow up over this as some grave insult is ridiculous, but telling. This is a real and deliberate provocation, by Obama, not Israel. This was an opportunity for the Administration, to let Israel know which side Obama backs.

Sad to say, even J-Street has been better than Obama this week. The White House had nothing to say (no condemnation to be sure) about the Palestinian Authority honoring a terrorist mass murderer of Israeli Jews last week. Even J-Street said this was a provocation and condemned it.

Murdered Jews and Jewish apartments: Obama evidently finds the latter more repellent than the former. Then again, Obama was silent on the mass murder of hundreds of Christians in Nigeria by Muslim marauders. Never will an unkind word be said about Muslim murderers or Palestinian killers that might detract from his charm offensive to the Muslim world, the one that so far has accomplished only a projection of weakness, and cowardice, and a loss of any ability to weigh competing claims fairly.

Richard Baehr is chief political correspondent of American Thinker.

Readings:

Jennifer Rubin on who stands with Israel (add Joe Lieberman no longer a Democrat, to the list);

John Podhoretz on Obama's new approach, which put very simply, is not very smart. But then again, the ranks of those deluded or dazzled by Obama's supposed brilliance drops every day;

David Horovitz exposing the fragility of US support for Israel in this Administration;

At least the American people still stand with Israel;

Gallup: Greenberg, Quinlan, Rosner;

Abe Foxman and the ADL;

AIPAC;

Another lie: that Israel's settlement policy is causing American deaths in Pakistan , Afghanisan and Iraq. But of course, if only there were no building east of the green line, then Al Qaeda and Iran would lay down their arms.

On Iran, the Administration is doing nothing fast. But the Administration is preparing the ground for explicit linkage; Jerusalem housing will be used to explain the Administration's failure to win UN sanctions, and for Iran getting the bomb.

Wall Street Journal;

Two from Barry Rubin: first- some facts on Jerusalem construction; Why the PA is smiling;

Melanie Phillips, one of the last remaining voices of sanity in Britain.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/obama_to_israel_drop_dead.html at March 16, 2010 - 05:21:42 AM CDT

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