Obama’s latest snub to Israel is just one more example of his complete naivety and inexperience in the realm of foreign relations. Remember folks, this is the man that said he would meet with Ahmadinejad “without preconditions.” But he openly snubs one of our chief allies and the people who Ahmadinejad has promised to “wipe off the map” with a “cleansing fire.”
Mr Obama was less inclined to be so conciliatory. He immediately presented Mr Netanyahu with a list of 13 demands designed both to the end the feud with his administration and to build Palestinian confidence ahead of the resumption of peace talks. Key among those demands was a previously-made call to halt all new settlement construction in east Jerusalem.
When the Israeli prime minister stalled, Mr Obama rose from his seat declaring: “I’m going to the residential wing to have dinner with Michelle and the girls.”
As he left, Mr Netanyahu was told to consider the error of his ways. “I’m still around,” Mr Obama is quoted by Israel’s Yediot Ahronot newspaper as having said. “Let me know if there is anything new.”
“Consider the error of his ways?!?!?” Is this guy for real? Has Obama lived even a tenth of the life that a man like Netanyahu has lived? Has Obama had Islamist terror raining missiles down on his home and his friends? Has Obama had people telling him he is not allowed to live in his own homeland? Good grief!
One hopes that Mr. Netanyahu realizes that Obama was a momentary lapse of reason on the part of the American voter. Unfortunately we’re stuck with this mistake for another few years. But after the next election, we’ll move beyond this ‘Alice in Wonderland,’ surreal experience that we’re enduring.
Amazing the leaps in logic that so-called academics will go to “prove” their politically-correct biases. A recent study, published in the peer-reviewed medical journal, “The Lancet”, attempts to forge a statistical link from the high rate of spousal and familial abuse in Palestine to the “Israeli occupation.”
Study authors play the victim card with a vengeance, claiming that Palestinian men have been so completely emasculated by the Israeli presence that they are forced to abuse their wives and children as a means of bolstering their frail male egos. No mention by the study authors of the numerous other well-known examples of abuse, violence, honor killings, etc. in Muslim countries and communities that are not “occupied” by Israel though. I wonder why?
This is what passes as dispassionate, scientific inquiry at the Lancet today. Amazing and sad.
Victor Davis Hanson has a short and to-the-point rebuttal for those who are publicly denouncing the recent Israeli strikes in Gaza.
In the same vein, Hamas blankets Israel for days with rockets and the Europeans are silent until Israel responds with force—only to be blamed for inordinate aggression—the subtext being both that the militarily capable party is to be condemned for being,well, too militarily capable, and that those who can field and deploy terrorists, or aid those who will, against Western targets are deserving of some sort of exemption.
I have never understood the willful and chronic refusal to denounce Palestinian and islamist terror on the part of our press, our academics, and our elected and appointed officials. These people happily overlook islamist bigotry, violence, and hatred, but immediately fly into a spittle-spewing rage when Israel defends its civilians against the thousands of rocket attacks that Hamas rains on Israeli cities.
It has been reasonably queried, numerous time before, and appears to be forgotten almost immediately after the question is posed, “how would France, Germany, Great Britain, Canada, or the US respond if our immediate neighbors sent daily salvos of missiles and homicide bombers into our towns and cities?” Would we use force (for example in Afghanistan) to restrain the groups and governments that supported terror attacks on our home soil? Or would we allow the attacks to continue unabated and unreported by a blinkered and uncaring media?
When we did respond, would our actions be stymied by hysterical cries of “inordinate aggression,” or would we defend our actions, claiming that the daily maiming and murder or our citizens by religious fanatics, bent on returning the world to a 4th century mentality that celebrates rape, abuse, murder, bigotry, and intolerance must be stopped?
Burke rightly stated that “the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” What Burke did not address in this quote is those who actively abet “evil” by attacking the “good men” who refuse to “do nothing.”
The hatred being directed toward Israel for simply defending its civilians from these brutal and continuous assaults by people committed to the violent overthrow of Israel is both irrational and nonsensical. Israel should be applauded for being one of the few countries left on the planet who is both willing and able to stand up to the sort of regressive and hate-filled mindsets that has so often plunged this world into darkness in the past.
From Brietbart.com we see that Ahmandinejad is once again threatening to destroy Israel.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad predicted on Monday that Muslims would uproot “satanic powers” and repeated his controversial belief that Israel will soon disappear, the Mehr news agency reported.
“I must announce that the Zionist regime (Israel), with a 60-year record of genocide, plunder, invasion and betrayal is about to die and will soon be erased from the geographical scene,” he said.
“Today, the time for the fall of the satanic power of the United States has come and the countdown to the annihilation of the emperor of power and wealth has started.”
Since taking the presidency in August 2005, Ahmadinejad has repeatedly provoked international outrage by predicting Israel is doomed to disappear.
“I tell you that with the unity and awareness of all the Islamic countries all the satanic powers will soon be destroyed,” he said to a group of foreign visitors ahead of the 19th anniversary of the death of revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
Ahmadinejad also again expressed his apocalyptic vision that tyranny in the world be abolished by the return to earth of the Mahdi, the 12th imam of Shiite Islam, alongside great religious figures including Jesus Christ.
“With the appearance of the promised saviour… and his companions such as Jesus Christ, tyranny will be soon be eradicated in the world.”
This madman is predicting that Muslims will bring about the “fall of the satanic power of the United States” and is threatening to “wipe Israel off of the map” and saying that Israel is “about to die and will soon be erased from the geographical scene.” However, Barack Obama blithely stumbles along, promising that he will meet with him in the first year of his presidency, with no preconditions. In Obama’s world, those threats don’t really mean anything, the Iranians only make those threats against us and our allies because the U.S. is “just downright mean” and “guided by fear.” In Obama’s world, those threats are our fault, so why wouldn’t we immediately sit down and break bread with a lunatic and dictator?
It’s abundantly clear that Obama doesn’t even begin to understand the preconditions that others like Reagan and Kennedy had already established before meeting with Khrushchev and Gorbachev. They made it clear that any aggressive actions against the U.S. or its allies would be met with force. Additionally they had the military wherewithal and political support to defend the country if necessary. Obama on the other hand is riding the wave of Democratic anti-war sentiment and is promising to demolish our military by cutting military spending and pushing that money toward welfare programs. With a demoralized and unequipped military, as well as an overtly anti-war Congress, Obama plans to meet with all of the people who are threatening our demise — without preconditions.
The man is a complete neophyte, a baby, untested and untried, and apparently completely unaware. He doesn’t appear to understand (believe or care) that that the radical islamists mean business. He doesn’t seem to mind that the threats we are hearing are part of a religious crusade for Ahmadinejad. It’s not a political situation that he’s discussing. In Ahmadinejad’s mind, it’s his job to usher in the time of the 12th imam and to do that, the world needs massive wars, famine, toil, trial, and unrest. There is no middle ground or “common interests” that can be reached with that mindset. When faced with Ahmadinejad’s demands, he expects that you will give in and convert to his brand of Islam, give in and become a dhimmi, give in and die, or die fighting against it. Ahmadinejad is not seeking a middle ground, he’s seeking a worldwide caliphate with him and the mahdi in charge.
Obama, by his own admission, is willing to help Ahmadinejad right along by raising his stature with an official meeting from the President of the United States. By agreeing to meet with him and others like him — without preconditions and in his first year in office — Obama is engaging in a wholesale program of preemptive capitulation.
It is sad that he, and so many others in this country, don’t seem to understand or care that they are doing so.
A just released report by Israel’s Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center indicates the problem of Arab-Muslim examples of anti-Semetic and anti-Israeli sentiment are not policy-based. The report details how the hatred and violence that is directed toward Jews is based in the extreme Islamist views that are driving much of the terrorist activity around the world.
Arab-Muslim anti-Semitism “is generally directed against Israel as a Jewish-Zionist state as an enemy of the Arab-Muslim world….” In other words, the emphasis is not on Israel’s alleged injustices toward the Palestinians or “occupation,” but on Israel’s very existence (emphasis added). It is widely believed—axiomatically in some quarters—that the “Arab-Israeli conflict” has now been whittled down to the “Israeli-Palestinian conflict” and resolving the latter will put the whole issue to rest. That, of course, cannot be right when the focus of the hatred is on Israel itself and not on its policies, or shape or size.
This article on FrontPagemag.com describes how the inculcation of this hatred toward Jews and the Jewish state throughout Middle Eastern countries — in their education systems and as an apparently normal part of every day life — only serves to entrench this irrational and vitriolic bias against Israel.
The fact that the majority of this anti-Israeli hatred has, as its end goal, the removal of Israel and the Jewish state* should give give American, Canadian, and European politicians who are involved in the so-called peace process pause to reconsider their policy suggestions. If Arab-Muslim violence toward Israel and Israelis will continue regardless of the outcome of the Peace Process, it is time to reconsider what they are trying to achieve vs. what they are actually achieving. Are they helping to stop violence in that region, or are they collectively working toward the eradication of the Jewish state.
*As the Iranian President Ahmadinejad says, he wants to “wipe Israel off the map.”
Jimmy Carter, perhaps better than any person alive today, personifies the term “useful idiot.”
The man has spent the last several weeks forcing himself into a situation where he was essentially unwanted and where his only accomplishment will be to reinforce the bloody and brutal leadership of a group of terrorists who are willing to commit any act of barbarism, no matter how vile and subhuman, to achieve their goal of wiping the state of Israel off of the planet.
What made Carter’s trip all the more pathetic was his (apparently honest) belief that he had managed to convince the leaders of Hamas to “recognize Isreal” as a legitimate state. The group has in its founding documents and charter the commitment to “obliterate” Israel, but Carter believes that he can simply waltz in, sit down with the leaders of Hamas and Syria, and convince them in a few hours of negotiations that they should give up on that goal.
Hamas, apparently, is now ready to live at peace with Israel if a peace agreement is signed and ratified by the Palestinians, which would assure that the Palestinian state would be established in the areas taken by Israel in the 1967 war. Carter made his statement at the Israel Council of Foreign Relations at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on Monday, following his extensive visits with Hamas terror leaders in Gaza, Egypt and Syria.
Not surprisingly, Hamas didn’t get the same read from their negotiations with former president Carter.
It didn’t take long for Hamas to clarify their intentions. Two hours after Carter’s speech was broadcast on Israel radio, Hamas leader Khaled Maschal, who had held extensive meetings with Carter in Damascus, denied that any such assurance had been made. Maschal, who had overseen Carter’s talks with other Hamas leaders in Egypt and in Gaza, once again reaffirmed the Hamas commitment to liquidate the Jewish state. Not for the first time, the ex-president was left looking like a dupe of the terrorists.
It is truly sad to see a former President being this eager a participant in a terrorist group’s attempts to use him as one of their pawns. The man has become a laughingstock and an international embarrassment and his actions — like Nancy Pelosi’s before him — only serve to prop up these terrorists and their activities. By doing that, they make the real work of international diplomacy that much more confusing and difficult.
It is unfortunate, but it may be time for the Carter family to have the former president restrained. If it takes a court order, a changing of legal guardianship, whatever … they cannot allow him to continue on like this. He is damaging a whole lot more than just his reputation and it really … seriously … needs to be stopped.
Hugh Fitzgerald prepared a remarkably well-reasoned and intelligent response to a question that was posed on Jihad Watch. The questioner asked,
“If the Israel/Palestinian conflict were exactly the same as it is, only the roles of the two warring parties were exactly reversed, would you then switch allegiances to the Palestinian side?”
I really wanted to cut and paste the entire reply, but my respect of copyright kept me from doing so.
The post is about a month old, but it’s still well worth your time to head over to Dhimmi Watch to read Fitzgerald’s reply. He cuts through a lot of the emotional baggage that is hanging around the issue and gets to the basics of what is (or should be) driving people’s support of Israel.
Steven Emerson, with IPT News, is providing essential information on the early days of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). In a March 24 article he details how FBI surveillance tapes of a 1993 CAIR meeting in Philadelphia demonstrate that CAIR members were tailoring their message stop the Oslo Peace Accord and soothe the ears of Americans while still promoting the terrorist goals and objectives of Hamas.
That’s where CAIR came in. Participants in that 1993 meeting discussed tailoring their message to an American audience, speaking of outright deception at times and of softening their rhetoric at others, as the following exchange between CAIR founders Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad shows:
Awad: What is important is that the language of the address is there even for the American. But, the issue is how to use it.
Omar Ahmad: There is a difference between you saying “I want to restore the ’48 land” and when you say “I want to destroy Israel”.
Awad: Yes, there are different but parallel types of address. There shouldn’t be contradiction. Address people according to their minds. When I speak with the American, I speak with someone who doesn’t know anything. As for the Palestinian who has a martyr brother or something, I know how to address him, you see?
So when you hear sayings from CAIR, like we want to “restore the pre-1948 land,” you should now understand that they actually mean “destroy Israel.” This is from their own mouths people. The more you read about this group and its original intent, the less you can reasonably believe that they are about civil rights and peaceful intent.
Via Jihad Watch
Read this and see if you see the same thing I do. I’ll comment afterward.
Christian Aid has added its voice to the growing condemnation of Israel’s blockade of Gaza.
The breach of the border between Gaza and Egypt demonstrates the desperation of a people held hostage to both a policy of collective punishment and an inadequate peace process, Christian Aid said yesterday.
Christian Aid said it condemned ‘in the strongest possible terms’ Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip. They point out that it did not begin last week as commonly thought, but has been going on since June 2007.
Israel’s decision to allow in limited shipments of fuel and basic humanitarian supplies will not ease the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza, the agency says.
“Since Hamas took power last June, Gaza has been subjected to severe restrictions on movement that have allowed in only a drip-feed of aid, preventing a full-scale humanitarian emergency but keeping the population in a perpetual state of economic crisis,” said Janet Symes, Christian Aid’s Head of Middle East Programme. …
The European Union has criticised Israel’s ‘collective punishment’ of Gaza’s 1.5 million residents, while the United Nations has warned it could be forced to stop distributing food to hundreds of thousands of people unless Israel opened the crossings to allow in supplies.
In November 2007, Christian Aid and 40 other international, Israeli and Palestinian NGOs called for an end to the isolation of Gaza in the interests of ending the escalating crisis.
In addition to condemning the illegal policy of collective punishment, they said: “Isolating Gaza has not stopped Palestinian rocket attacks into Israel and the entire population of Gaza remains vulnerable to continuing Israeli military attacks. All civilians, Israeli and Palestinian, must be protected under international law.”
Notice that the breach in the border was between Gaza and Egypt?
Now ask yourself why Christian Aid is attacking the Israelis for the border security that Egyptian Arabs are enforcing?
Now ask yourself why the Egyptians are not sending in aid and food to the Palestinians in Gaza?
Now ask why none of the other Arab, or Islamic nations can be bothered to lift a finger to help the Palestinians?
Why is it only the Jews and the Americans that are responsible for the “plight” of the Palestinian people when the Saudis have multiple billions in oil revenue coming in every month that they could share with the “starving” people in Gaza?
Now ask why these other Islamic nations turn their collective backs on fellow Muslims?
Now ask why the U.N., the European Union, and groups like Christian Aid don’t demand that the Muslim countries do something to stop the violence being perpetrated by Hamas and the other Palestinian terror groups. Why don’t they further condemn these Muslim countries for not helping their Muslim brethren in Gaza?
Can’t come up with a realistic answer can you?
Now ask yourself if the people in Christian Aid need to go back and rethink their basic premises? (Hint: the answer a reasonable mind will come to is, “yes, they should.”)