Tag: Andrew Klaven

Anti-Semitism and the American Liberal: Obama Administration Calls Netanyahu a “chicken****”

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics1 Comment

Have you heard about the latest garbage perpetrated by the Obama Administration in their long-lasting animus toward the nation of Israel?

Senator Ted Cruz explains the consequences of the Obama Policy of Animus toward Israel for our nation in an Op Ed for time.com .

This week, the world was treated to yet another embarrassing display of the Obama administration’s incompetent foreign policy.

According to The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg, various anonymous officials referred to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as both “a chicken****” and “a coward.” While these indefensible comments have received the lion’s share of media attention, the substantive remarks about Iran were even more troubling. Goldberg wrote that another senior official claimed that due to their pressure on Netanyahu, it is now “too late” for Israel to stop Iran from amassing an “atomic arsenal.”

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told the White House press corps on Tuesday that the President likely does not know who did this, and there is no effort underway to find out. Other officials have signaled that these persons may be disciplined in ways that are have not been disclosed. But, regardless, they will continue to serve at the pleasure of the President because, as Earnest said, such things happen almost every day in this administration.

In other words, this is no big deal.

With all due respect, this is a very big deal. This is an unprecedented attack on a critical ally of the United States at a moment of international crisis. It is a de facto admission to the mullahs in Tehran that the Obama administration thinks it is too late to prevent them from acquiring nuclear weapons. It is an inexcusable betrayal of the national security of the American people.

Do the Democrats agree with what Obama administration officials are saying about Israel and its leaders? Do they also concede that a nuclear Iran is inevitable? If not, will they call on the President to identify and fire the persons making these assertions? These questions should be asked—and answered—before Americans head to the polls next Tuesday.

It is my hope that Congress can unite to reverse this administration’s approach by defending our allies and standing up to hostile actors in the world. When the White House acts recklessly, Congress should swiftly act to defend our nation. We will not be able to do so if the Senate is led by Harry Reid acting as a rubber stamp for President Obama. Either the Democrats should denounce the Obama Administration’s dangerous policies or the voters should send them home in November.

As disgraceful as these comments were, at least they bring crystal clarity to the choice we face as a nation on November 4th. Choose wisely.

Indeed.

While we are on the subject of Israel…

Why do Liberals hate Israel?  And, why are the majority of American Jews Liberal?

This is a paradox that has perplexed Christian Conservative Americans, such as myself, for a long time.  What is it about the existence of the state of Israel that vexes the minds of Liberals and Progressives so?

David Mamet, a former Liberal turned Conservative author wrote a book titled, The Secret Knowledge: On the Dismantling of American Culture, which studied in depth the themes he announced in his 2008 op-ed for the Village Voice, “Why I Am No Longer a ‘Brain-Dead Liberal.’

June 11th, 2011, americanthinker.com’s Rick Richman posted an article, reviewing Mamet’s new book. In this article, the author touches upon the subject of Liberal Anti-Semitism:

In a chapter entitled “The Intelligent Person’s Guide to Socialism and Anti-Semitism,” he first argues that “social justice” is a sort of Sunday religion that does not carry over to the pressures of the workweek, and he illustrates his thought as follows:

One may bemoan the plight of the Palestinians, who have elected a government of terrorists and daily bomb their neighbor to the West, but we realize that any support past the sentimental is elective: we do not want to live there, nor to go there, and we blink at the knowledge that monies spent in their support may be diverted to the support of terror, and of organizations pledged not only to kill all the Jews, but to kill Americans and Westerners of all faiths.

Where does sympathy stop, and where may it not become sanctimony and hypocrisy?

And then he answers his own question with a mini-drama:

Our American plane has been forced to land at some foreign airport, by the outbreak of World War III. It will not be allowed to depart. Two planes are leaving the airport; we must choose which we want to board. One plane is flying to Israel and one to Syria, and we must choose.

That’s where the sympathy stops.

No one reading this book would get on the plane to Syria. Why? It is a despotism, opposed to the West, to women, to gays, to Jews, to free speech. … And yet one may gain status or a feeling of solidarity by embracing the “Arab cause.”

Mamet’s mini-drama works even if you believe Israel is not a “laudable precious democracy” but “guilty of all the horrors” alleged against it:

I assert that you would still fight with every force and argument at your command to get on the Israeli plane, you and every hard Leftist and every head-shaking misinformed One Worlder and anti-Semite up to and including Jimmy Carter and Noam Chomsky, would, if the issue were his life, suspend his most cherished convictions of Israeli perfidy, and plead for the protection of that state you would then not only acknowledge but assert to be your ally …

There is nothing any reader of this book would not say or do to get himself and his family on the Israeli plane.

Per the americanthinker.com article, one of Mamet’s own previous books: The Wicked Son: Anti-Semitism, Self-Hatred, and the Jews, which is basically an extended letter to his fellow Jews, has a Foreword to the book which ends with this striking paragraph:

To the Jews who, in the sixties, envied the Black Power Movement; who, in the nineties, envied the Palestinians; who weep at Exodus but jeer at the Israel Defense Forces; who nod when Tevye praises tradition but fidget through the seder; … whose favorite Jew is Anne Frank and whose second-favorite does not exist; who are humble in their desire to learn about Kwanzaa and proud of their ignorance of Tu Bi’Shvat; … who bow the head reverently at a baptism and have never attended a bris – to you, who find your religion and race repulsive, your ignorance of your history a satisfaction, here is a book from your brother.

Also, per the article, in his new book, The Secret Knowledge, Mamet asks the following pertinent and poignant question:

Why would any American Jew wish to become a “citizen of the world”? This fantasy is akin to one who believes in the benevolence of Nature. Anyone ever lost in the wild knows that Nature wants you dead. Enjoy the benefits of liberty and defend them as an American, rather than posing as a “citizen of the world.”

In an earlier article, posted on June 2, 2011, on americanthinker.com, Why Does the Left Hate Israel,  Richard Baehr attempts to answer David Mamet’s question:

…I have been to several of the left wing Israel hate fests. They are scary. There is real passion in the air. There is something about Israel that gets the juices going. Anti—Semitism is a part of it. There are a lot of people who are envious of Jews, on the left as well as the right. Patrick Buchanan thinks Jews have hijacked the conservative movement. But on the left, particularly in the academy, and in journalism, I am certain there is professional envy of the many Jewish faces and what better way to get even, and get back for sometimes losing the competitive battle, than by picking on the Jewish state as a surrogate. Leftist Jews sometimes lead the assault against Israel in these venues, thereby giving the attacks, whatever their reason, greater moral authority. Few Jews will stand up for Israel in these environments, because of the great pressure on the left to conform to the group think in the institutions they control.

…The evidence I believe is clear today that Israel faces far greater threats from the left than the right. The left is reflexively anti—Israel and has established important beachheads in significant American institutions— academia, the media, and the old line Protestant ‘high’ churches, as well as in the very seats of government power in many Western European countries, and their intelligentsia. It is not surprising that Israel seems unable to get a fair shake from college professors, the BBC, Reuters, NPR, or liberal churches. Being anti—Israel has become part of their religion.

As a Christian American, I know whom I support in the Middle East:  God’s Chosen People. 

You see, I’ve read The Book.  I know the ending.  Hallelujah!

In the meantime, pajamasmedia.com’s Andrew Klaven presents the following solution to the problem of Israel, with tongue firmly planted in cheek.

As he himself says:

Now, why didn’t somebody think of this before?

 

 

 

Israel Prepares for Their New Rowdy Neighbors

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics5 Comments

Even if United States President Barack Hussein Obama sees nothing wrong with the current events in Egypt, our greatest ally, Israel, doesn’t particularly care for the goings-on at the neighbor’s house…especially, when they come over uninvited:

Militants crossed from Egypt’s turbulent Sinai Peninsula into southern Israel on Monday and opened fire on civilians building a border security fence, defense officials said. One of the Israeli workers was killed, and two assailants died in a gunbattle with Israeli troops responding to the attack.

No group claimed responsibility for the attack, which underscored the growing lawlessness in the Sinai desert since longtime Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak was toppled by a popular uprising last year.

Military spokeswoman Lt. Col Avital Leibovich said the assailants have not been identified but acknowledged that defense officials suspected Palestinian militants in the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, which also borders the Sinai desert in that same area, might have been involved.

Several hours after the attack, an Israeli airstrike killed two men riding a motorcycle in the northern Gaza Strip near the Israeli border. The Islamic Jihad militant group said the men were members on a “reconnaissance” mission and vowed revenge. Military officials said the incident was not connected to the earlier infiltration from Egypt.

Israeli security officials have grown increasingly anxious about the security situation in the Sinai since Mubarak’s ouster. Continued political turmoil in Egypt, weak policing in the Sinai and tough terrain have all encouraged Islamic militant activity in the area. The mountainous desert now harbors an array of militant groups, including Palestinian extremists and al-Qaida-inspired jihadists, Egyptian and Israeli security officials say. The tumultuous situation surrounding Egyptian elections, in which Islamic groups made a strong showing, has added to Israeli unease.

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak told Army Radio that there has been “a worrisome deterioration of Egyptian control” over the Sinai. Barak said he expected the winner of this week’s presidential elections in Egypt to honor the country’s international obligations – an apparent reference to Egypt’s 1979 peace treaty with Israel. The Muslim Brotherhood has said it would respect the historic peace accord but that it would also seek modifications.

Vice Premier Shaul Mofaz, a former defense minister and military chief, said he hoped Israel could conduct a security dialogue with the Egyptians and demand more forceful policing in the Sinai.

“No doubt Sinai has become a security problem,” Mofaz told Army Radio. “Today’s incident ratchets it up a notch.”

There was no immediate comment from Egypt on the attack.

They’ve been a little busy:

The Muslim Brotherhood has vowed to face down Egypt’s ruling generals in a “life or death” struggle over the country’s political future, after declaring that its candidate had won the presidential election and would refuse to accept the junta’s last-ditch attempts to engineer a constitutional coup.

As final ballot results trickled in and unofficial tallies suggested that Mohamed Morsi had secured approximately 52% of the popular vote, the Brotherhood deployed its harshest language yet against the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (Scaf), promising to bring millions of Egyptians back on to the streets if attempts to rebuild the old regime continued.

“Over the past 18 months we were very keen to avoid any clashes or confrontations with other components of Egypt’s political system because we felt that it would have negative consequences for the democratic system and for society as a whole,” said Fatema AbouZeid, a senior policy researcher for the Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice party and a media co-ordinator for the Morsi campaign. “But now it’s very clear that Scaf and other institutions of the state are determined to stand in the way of what we’re trying to achieve, and we won’t accept this any more. Egypt will not go back to the old regime through any means, legal or illegal.

“If we find that Scaf stands firm against us as we try to fulfil the demands of the revolution, we will go back to the streets and escalate things peacefully to the highest possible stage,” she said. “Now we have a new factor in Egyptian politics, the Egyptian people themselves, who will not accept a return to the old regime in any form, not after so much Egyptian blood was shed to remove it.

“The revolution is facing a life or death moment and the Egyptian people have put their faith in Dr Morsi to represent them at this time.”

On Monday the parliamentary speaker, Saad el-Katatni, a Brotherhood veteran, said he did not recognise last week’s decision by Mubarak-era judges in Egypt’s supreme constitutional court to dissolve the legislature, a move widely viewed as highly politicised and designed to bolster the generals. Katatni said MPs planned to attend parliament – which was surrounded by armed soldiers – as usual on Tuesday or convene in nearby Tahrir Square, setting the stage for a showdown between the generals who have held sway for six decades and the long-outlawed Islamist movement now on the brink of political control.

An 11th-hour constitutional declaration issued unilaterally by Scaf awarded the generals sweeping powers including the right to put forward legislation and an effective veto over clauses in the new constitution, and formalised the army’s ability to detain civilians and sweep out of barracks at moments of “internal unrest”.

Political analysts described the move as a constitutional obscenity and said it left the three major institutions of the post-Mubarak Egyptian state – the presidency (now curtailed), the parliament (now dissolved) and the constitutional assembly (now floundering in legal uncertainty) – all under the full or partial influence of the armed forces.

With the oldest of all (and the father of all) Islamic Extremist Organizations taking over Egypt, you can hardly blame Israel for being ready to go to war.

Speaking of war, remember when ol’ Scooter declared that Israel should go back to its old borders, as they stood before the 1967 war?  PJTV’s Andrew Klavan had a better idea.

And I will bless them that bless you, and curse him that curses you.

Genesis 12: 3

Obama Barters with Israel: A Bomb for Peace

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics7 Comments

Things are one again at the point of ignition in the face-off between America’s staunchest ally, and the barbarians in Iran.

Reuters.com has the story:

Israel has asked the United States for advanced “bunker-buster” bombs and refueling planes that could improve its ability to attack Iran’s underground nuclear sites, an Israeli official said on Thursday.

“Such a request was made” around the time of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Washington this week, the official said, confirming media reports.

But the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity given the sensitivity of the issue, played down as “unrealistic” Israeli reports that the United States would condition supplying the hardware on Israel promising not to attack Iran this year.

White House spokesman Jay Carney, asked whether the Israelis had made such a request to U.S. officials during the visit, said “there was no such agreement proposed or reached” in President Barack Obama’s meetings with Netanyahu or his aides.

But when asked if the matter was raised with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta or other U.S. officials, Carney told reporters he had no information on that. “I would refer you to other officials,” he said.

A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed that military capabilities came up in discussions between Netanyahu and Panetta but did not elaborate. No deals were struck during those talks, the official added.

Netanyahu made clear to Obama at a White House meeting on Monday that Israel had not yet decided on military action against Iran, the White House has said.

Netanyahu has hinted that Israel could resort to force should Tehran – which denies suspicions that it is covertly trying to develop atomic bombs – continue to defy big powers’ diplomatic pressure to curb its nuclear program.

The risk of an Israeli-Iranian war troubles Obama, who is up for re-election in November and has cautioned against sparking greater Mideast turmoil, though he has also asserted that military action remains an option if sanctions fail. A Gulf conflict could send oil prices soaring.

A front-page article in the Israeli newspaper Ma’ariv on Thursday said Obama had told Netanyahu Washington would supply Israel with upgraded military equipment in return for assurances there would be no attack on Iran in 2012.

Of course, the United Nations is urging Israel not to attack, Associated Press reports:

Three days of protracted negotiations held under the specter of war highlighted the diplomatic difficulties ahead for nations intent on ensuring that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons.

In a statement Thursday that was less than dramatic, six world powers avoided any bitter criticism of Iran and said diplomacy – not war – is the best way forward.

The cautious wording that emerged from a weeklong meeting of the U.N. nuclear agency reflected more than a decision to tamp down the rhetoric after a steady drumbeat of warnings from Israel that the time was approaching for possible attacks on Iran to disrupt its nuclear program.

Indeed, the language was substantially milder than the tough approach sought by Washington and allies Britain, France and Germany at the International Atomic Energy Agency’s 35-nation board meeting. Agreement came only after tough negotiations with Russia and China.

That could spell trouble on any diplomatic path ahead.

Gee.  Ya think, DiNozzo?

According to the Washington Post, the majority of Israeli citizens do not want to attack Iran without our support:

Amid an escalating din among Israeli leaders about the threat of a potentially nuclear Iran, the Israeli public has displayed little enthusiasm for a solo preemptive military strike. A handful of recent polls have shown that ordinary Israelis are firmly against the idea of going it alone.

“Israelis are much more careful, much more cautious than their government,” said Ephraim Yaar, a Tel Aviv University professor who co-directs a monthly public opinion survey. This week, more than 60 percent of Israelis polled said they opposed an attack on Iran without U.S. cooperation.

In the will-they-or-won’t-they guessing game that discussion about a military strike has become here, few view public opinion as a predictor of outcome. Netanyahu is sharply attuned to public sentiment, analysts say, but he has repeatedly emphasized — most recently in Washington — that he is driven by an obligation to protect Israel even without U.S. blessing, though he clearly wants it.

So, too, do Israelis, though that is not out of deference to the United States, said Yaar, whose survey was conducted just before Netanyahu’s trip. Commentators and retired security officials have questioned whether the Israeli military has the capacity to carry off a solo assault. The Israeli public shares that doubt, the survey found — and believes that Iranian retaliation could kill more than 500 civilians, the figure estimated by Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak in November.

That may be a long time coming.

On June 4, 2009, President Barack Hussein Obama gave a speech at the University of Cairo to the Muslim world.  Here is an excerpt from whitehouse.gov:

As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. It was Islam — at places like Al-Azhar — that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities — (applause) — it was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.

Uh huh.

Last year, pajamasmedia.com’s Andrew Klaven presented the following solution to the problem of Israel, with tongue firmly planted in cheek.

As he himself says:

Now, why didn’t somebody think of this before?

Shalom!