Doc's Talk: Roll over Beethoven

Sunday, November 14, 2010

Roll over Beethoven

SARAH HONIG

Even Barack Obama’s midterm electoral humiliation won’t redeem US foreign policy. The problem didn’t begin with the history-deficient mind-set of American students who’ll earn their bachelor’s degrees in 2014. But the intellectual rootlessness of the class of 2014 exacerbates the flaws. Today’s students/tomorrow’s leaders fertilize the soil into which bad seeds are sown by the current Washington elite.

On the simplistic level it was a hoot to read that to the class of 2014 Beethoven is a movie pooch, Michelangelo was a computer virus and Czechoslovakia never existed. For the past 13 years Beloit College’s Mind-Set List by Tom McBride and Ron Nief was a guaranteed source of hilarity, because each year the ignorance quotient it registers seems to climb to unprecedented, more grotesque and inconceivable heights.

But rather than amuse, the Mind-Set List should alarm. It’s safe to assume that things are way worse off campus. The ignorant are more amenable to manipulation. Those who don’t know there ever was a Czechoslovakia are unlikely to have delved into what led up to World War II. The word appeasement isn’t likely to give them goose bumps. They won’t know how Czechoslovakia was betrayed, ripped apart and sacrificed by antiwar priests on the altar of world peace. It’s improbable they’ll have internalized the sobering realization that the priests were (at best) fools and that the peace they sought to serve was a false god.

Uninformed, and lacking healthy suspicion, they won’t be able to recognize old dangers in new guises. The know-nothing cultural touchstones of the future movers and shakers of the world’s single remaining superpower doom us all to reliving dreadful scenarios.

Already now they’re putty in the hands of politicians with neo-appeasement agendas.

They’re Obama’s enablers. They facilitate lackadaisical postmodern foreign policy that could wreak as much havoc as did Neville Chamberlain’s negligent naïveté of 1938.

Seventy-two years ago, a “peace partner” called Adolf Hitler convinced the free world that the source of global disquiet was Czechoslovakia. He even did so with adroit resort to human-rights discourse, having employed a vast propaganda machine to disseminate disinformation about calculated cruel Czech abuses against the Sudetenland’s innocent peace-loving ethnic Germans. It may all look eerily familiar to contemporary news consumers if we merely substitute the world Israeli for Czech and Palestinian for Sudeten.

Indeed Israel today is depicted as no less an intransigent hindrance to global harmony than Czechoslovakia once was. “Our dispute” is singled out as the one which must be resolved instantly to rid this oil-rich region and the oil-thirsty planet of the volatility which Israel obdurately inflames.

Just see the alacrity with which any prime politico anywhere harps on our case. With characteristic hubris, Obama sets out to solve within a year what hasn’t been resolved since the 19th century. Nobody who’s anybody on the Quartet’s prestige-coveting Who’s Who has failed to chime in cheerily. Everyone is gung ho on garnering personal glory from the renewed Mideast “negotiations” spectacle.

The self-serving ground rules are clear.

Israel must effuse goodwill gestures and concessions to allow the show to go on. Jewish construction is insufferable. The Palestinians (divided though they are) must be excused anything lest the façade be marred.

Who cares if the region’s real powder keg is unrelated to Israel? Who, moreover, cares that Obama is leaving said keg unguarded?

IF ANY further proof were needed of Obamaesque false perspectives and foolhardiness, one need look no further than Baghdad. In keeping with his moral-relativist precepts, Obama is busy creating a catastrophic vacuum in Iraq – to begin with an artificial ethnic/religious concoction arbitrarily put together by perfidious Albion. This imperialist mélange has nothing to do with Jews, Zionists and Israelis. But Israel can be dragged in, as Czechoslovakia was, to deflect attention from actual flash points.

And so, as world powers ceremoniously sponsor a sham gabfest geared to sell Israel out, Shi’ites infiltrate Iraq from Iran, Sunnis are dispatched by al-Qaida and the Kurds gear up for war. The stage is set for a cataclysmic intra-Muslim conflagration while all eyes are focused on perpetual whipping boy Israel.

No local force can stem the creeping disaster. Seven months after Iraq’s inconclusive elections, its fractious politicians are yet to form a viable government. The so-called Iraqi army is a conglomeration of sectarian militias. Each will eagerly turn against the others. The communal sadism is savage and the mutual slaughter unstoppable. But the world hardly bothers to glance at dismembered Iraqi corpses. Gazans, like the Sudeten Germans of yore, tug at the international community’s heartstrings.

All we’ve already seen in Iraq is but a prelude to the apocalypse Obama unleashes willy-nilly. True, he didn’t start the Iraqi conflict, but how he exits Iraq is no less crucial. Obama’s Iraqi chaos won’t be contained within the borders which London once capriciously drew. The anarchy will destabilize the Saudi realm and the neighboring Arabian Peninsula’s luxurious latifundia.

There’s no point in mincing words. Obama has surrendered Iraq to the worst of America’s enemies and to the enemies of Western civilization, even if he cannot for ideological reasons admit this. In the making right now is a fiasco of gargantuan proportions. It will dwarf Jimmy Carter’s 1979 abandonment of the shah and his extraordinary shortsightedness which gave the world Teheran’s ayatollah theocracy.

If any reason existed for the most intense vigilance possible on Israel’s part – indeed for mistrust of any grand move by Obama – Iraq furnishes it with surfeit. This is the time for our leaders to mouth morning and night in every public utterance a new set of interlinked mantras:

“Concentrate on Iraq. Israel is not the cause of the region’s ills. Palestinian grievances are frauds concocted by aggressive and corrupt Arab regimes. Neither an independent Fatahland nor a sovereign Hamastan (or a combination thereof) will obviate the much more compelling Kurdish demand for a state, nor will it sate Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s appetites, quell Shi’ite- Sunni hatreds, abate the blood lust or in any manner halt the Mesopotamian Armageddon. A Palestinian state is irrelevant to the region’s real misfortune.”

But can our higher-ups be counted upon to tell it like it is? We better not hold our breath. They are prisoners of Obama-babble. It’s not that they don’t know his platitudes are hokum. They just don’t dare say so. It’s politically incorrect and bad PR.

Obama-speak clichés oblige Israel to take existential risks. The Arabs are in essence asked to wait patiently for Israeli suicide rather than rush in for the precipitous kill. Coated with enough sugar, this poison-pill appears the perfect cure. Refusal to swallow it becomes unreasonable Israeli rejectionism, which upsets the delicate international equilibrium in a world devoid of any troublesome memories of Czechoslovakia.

The ignorance inculcated in the young can be blissful not only for the class of 2014. Who needs well-founded pessimism in Obama’s world, where (presumably) there are no deadly dangers and no ill will?

www.sarahhonig.com

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