Doc's Talk: A Challenge to Henry Waxman

Thursday, April 15, 2010

A Challenge to Henry Waxman

Ari David
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/a-challenge-to-henry-waxman/?singlepage=true

President Obama has no affection for the state of Israel and no apparent understanding of its importance to the national security of the United States and to the free world. He has concocted a phony crisis over permitting housing units for Jews to be built in the capital of the Jewish state. By the time this crisis is resolved — if indeed Obama sees an end in sight, and whether he does or not is lamentably debatable — Israel will have been weakened by the necessity of placating Obama, and the interests of her enemies will have been advanced.

Israel’s enemies are also the enemies of the United States. They hate not only Jews but Christians, who are under siege in every Muslim country in which they live as a minority. But Israel is expected to cede land and uproot its citizens in favor of a jihadist aggressor whose aim is world domination.

Obama’s deplorable rudeness and contempt, displayed toward Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his White House visit, is only one signal of the radical sea-change in Israel-U.S. relations. Obama is now seriously considering a request by Qatar’s foreign minister that the U.S. not veto an upcoming UN Security Council vote condemning Israel for building in its own capital.

Until now, only the U.S. stood between Israel and hostile UN resolutions. With Obama at the helm, Israel will no longer be able to count on American friendship as a buffer to international sentiment that is increasingly threatening to Israel and the Jewish people.

One of the most powerful Democratic members of Congress is Rep. Henry Waxman of Los Angeles. Waxman frequently cites his Jewish background as the source of his cultural pride and his liberal values, and he has voiced public support for Israel, even if his actions don’t live up to his rhetoric. Waxman’s district is 14% Jewish, and this politically active segment is one of the reasons he has been in office for 35 years.

Considering the work Waxman performed to help pass ObamaCare, it stands to reason that he would have Obama’s ear regarding Israel. And per Waxman’s previous defense of Israel, it stands to reason that he would be concerned about Obama’s treatment of the country. It should be distressing to Waxman’s district that he has remained silent about Obama’s clear antipathy towards our democratic ally.

Waxman’s blind loyalty to President Obama’s agenda — which is contrary to his previously stated positions — is disturbing.

Throughout history, Jews who stood up for their people against the forces of tyranny were heroes and advanced the cause of freedom for all people — just as the state of Israel must do now.

By not standing up to Obama, by not spending even a penny of political capital, Waxman is now next to useless as a protector of the Jewish people, as an ally of the state of Israel, and for the cause of freedom.

Waxman’s inaction speaks volumes. He has placed political expedience ahead of the security of Israel and the United States, and the safety of Jews and Christians worldwide.

Waxman must publicly demand that Obama continue to exercise the U.S. veto in the UN Security Council when it votes to condemn Israel. Moreover, he should strenuously criticize Obama for daring to bar Jews from living where they choose in their own eternal and undivided capital, as affirmed by the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 (confirming the status of Jerusalem as Israel’s undivided capital). Obama, in condemning Israel for building in Jerusalem, is disregarding U.S. law.

Waxman should demand that the U.S. move its embassy to Jerusalem, as the Jerusalem Embassy Act requires.

Waxman should not treat this as quid pro quo, for it is not a favor from Obama to enforce existing law, nor is it presidential prerogative to ignore it. Waxman owes it to his faithful constituency to remind Obama of his responsibility to faithfully execute and carry out the laws of the United States.

We know Obama is angling for the redivision of Jerusalem. He propounds the lie that there is an East and a West Jerusalem and that so-called East Jerusalem is traditionally Arab. This insidious lie was concocted by Israel’s enemies in order to deny the Jewish connection to Israel’s capital and the land of Israel itself.

Arab East Jerusalem was Jewish until 1948, when Jordan either expelled or massacred the Jews living there. Jordan blew up over 100 synagogues, Jewish schools, and other institutions, and desecrated whatever remained.

Israel liberated Jordanian-occupied Jerusalem in 1967 during the Six Day War, after being attacked by five Arab nations intending to destroy her and drive all the Jews into the sea. People of all faiths and nationalities live in freedom there now — which was not the case during the 19 years of Jordanian occupation.

Obama is now endeavoring to advance false narratives at Israel’s expense.

Passover is the Jewish holiday that celebrates our Exodus from bondage and our journey to the Promised Land. The story of the Exodus is our deed to the land of Israel — a hundred years ago, every Christian nation in Europe recognized that it was so.

Today, Muslims zealously defend their claim to Jewish land, though Jerusalem is not mentioned even once in the Koran, yet is the centerpiece of the Hebrew Bible and the heart and soul of Judaism. Why should Obama support the Arabs in their zeal and deny the Jews in theirs? If Waxman continues to go follow Obama, he will be complicit in leading the Jewish people right back into bondage. Or worse.

Moreover, the destruction of Israel or a weakened Israel unable to defend itself would not herald the world peace and harmony that our short-sighted president envisions. Certainly, the absence of Jewish housing units in Jerusalem would not contribute to peace and stability.

Obama does not recognize that Israel’s enemies and the enemies of the United States are identical. They share precisely the same goals for world domination and the destruction of the free world. Obama harbors a persistent blind spot for Muslim intransigence, aggression, terrorism, and hatred for all things Jewish and Christian.

Henry Waxman must discover his integrity and speak out against the injustices towards Israel already perpetrated by Obama, and against those he plans to carry out in the near and long-term.

Ari is a Los Angeles area native whose background is in the entertainment business. He has been a writer, actor and stand up comedian. Ari is now a Congressional candidate running for the seat representing West LA and Hollywood. Entertainment business issues, the economy, personal liberty and national security are Ari's greatest concerns.

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