Doc's Talk: PENCE & BAUER: Defending Israel takes more than hugs

Monday, July 12, 2010

PENCE & BAUER: Defending Israel takes more than hugs

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jul/8/defending-israel-takes-more-than-hugs/

17 months of damage can't be erased with one friendly meeting
By Mike Pence and Gary Bauer

The alliance between our nation and Israel has deep and enduring roots, yet since taking office, President Obama has torn apart the ties that bind. Despite a meeting this week with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that by many accounts was cordial, much still remains to be done to restore the friendship between our two countries.
The modern nation of Israel was established as the clock struck midnight in Jerusalem on May 14, 1948. Eleven minutes later, President Harry Truman, rejecting the advice of Secretary of State George Marshall and most of the foreign-policy establishment, recognized the newly restored Israeli nation. The next day, Arab states declared war on Israel in an effort to kill the new nation in its crib.

Since then, under Israeli prime ministers and American presidents of both parties, the friendship has endured. Both countries believe in the dignity of every human being. Both nations believe in fundamental human rights - freedom of speech, assembly and dissent. We share values rooted in the rich soil of Judeo-Christian civilization; we face hatred from similar enemies.

The Israeli people are overwhelmingly pro-American, and Americans express affection for Israel at levels that are rivaled only by our feelings toward Great Britain. In the wake of the Sept. 11 attack, Americans were shocked to see street celebrations break out in parts of the Middle East, with dancing crowds celebrating the pain inflicted on us. But we were comforted to see Israelis cry along with us, lower their flag and declare a day of mourning as we buried our dead. Israelis understood very well what had happened to America. Proportionately, more Israelis were killed by Palestinian jihadists during the intifada than we lost on Sept. 11.

It is against the backdrop of this cherished alliance that the realization is slowly taking shape in both Israel and the U.S. that Mr. Obama is the most anti-Israel president ever to occupy the Oval Office.

In the 17 months since taking the oath of office, the president methodically has moved the United States away from our friend Israel while reaching out to the most thuggish regimes in the Middle East. He sends letters offering friendship to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a man who says Israel will be "wiped off the map," while at the same time disrespecting Mr. Netanyahu.

Mr. Obama protests that nothing has changed and that he is committed to the U.S.-Israel relationship. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton went to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) convention to reassure the audience that we are committed to Israel's security. Other administration functionaries use the same talking points, but public policy tells a different story. The administration shows a disturbing pattern of currying favor with enemies like Iran while pushing aside the concerns and interests of allies like Israel.

Iran's government is responsible for the deaths of U.S. troops in Iraq. Yet the White House offers the Iranian regime friendship, diplomacy and dialogue. The president has displayed infinite patience with Mr. Ahmadinejad. Iran's deception has been overlooked. Mr. Obama has eagerly sought talks while promising no preconditions even as Iran insists that its nuclear program will not be negotiated. A year ago, when Iranian reformers were beaten and murdered in the streets of Tehran, the Obama administration was slow and tepid in its condemnation for fear it would damage the administration's outreach to the oppressive Iranian government.

Compare this indulgent treatment of Iran to the bullying Israel has received from the Obama administration. There was unprecedented outrage when the administration heard that the Jerusalem municipal authority had allowed building permits to go forward in a well-established, undisputed Jewish neighborhood. White House officials made sure to "leak" to the media that Mr. Obama was livid with Israel. The White House publicly demanded that all building stop in East Jerusalem, a demand to which no Israeli prime minister could ever agree.

The American people have been left to wonder how an American administration could denounce the Jewish state of Israel for rebuilding Jerusalem. What should a reasonable observer conclude when Israelis building homes in their own capital elicit more White House anger than does Mr. Ahmadinejad, who promises a second genocide and urges the Iranian people to imagine a world without Israel and the U.S.?

When the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference met in May, it was widely assumed that the Obama administration would use the opportunity to rally support against the Iranian nuclear program. Instead, the conference, with the support of the Obama administration, issued a statement demanding that Israel, which is not a signatory to the treaty, open its nuclear program to outside supervision. It's unprecedented for a U.S. president to sign on to a resolution that singles out Israel and ignores Iran, Syria and North Korea.

The most recent browbeating of Israel came when the president criticized Israel's blockade of Gaza as "unsustainable." This administration does not understand the critical importance of the Gaza blockade. The terrorist organization Hamas has used Gaza as a launching pad for thousands of rockets that killed innocent civilians in Israel. The blockade helps keep weapons away from Hamas, saving lives in Gaza and Israel. Yet the American president sees fit to join the anti-Israel international chorus, which seeks little more than to tear down Israel's right and ability of self-defense.

Time and time again, the pattern is the same. The world is being sent a clear and unmistakable signal: This administration will not stand with Israel against the circling vultures. The Obama administration's policies are undermining our ally, emboldening Israel's enemies and making a Middle East war more, not less, likely. By endangering Israeli security, Mr. Obama is also making America less safe. Our alliance with Israel is not a liability; it is an asset. Together with other free nations, we are defending our shared values.

A group of respected world leaders and academic figures, including former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar and former Peruvian President Alejandro Toledo, met in Paris recently. They boldly asserted, "There is no West without Israel." They are right. Israel is the "tip of the spear" of Western democratic values in a dangerous neighborhood of thugs, jihadists and dictators. The weakening of the Israeli nation does not help America. It puts us more at risk. Undermining a 62-year alliance with Israel doesn't win friends for the U.S. - it makes every nation question the value of aligning with America. After all, if America will break with its most cherished ally, what other nation could rely on our promises?

We are entering dangerous waters. Iran is marching forward with its nuclear program. NATO member Turkey appears to have realigned against U.S. interests and toward a new alliance with Iran and Syria. The president's policies toward Israel are damaging an alliance that now more than ever needs to be strong. Meeting with Mr. Netanyahu and treating him with respect this week was a good start. But much work still remains to be done.

Rep. Mike Pence is chairman of the House Republican Caucus, and Gary Bauer is the president of American Values and chairman of Campaign for Working Families.

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