As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Tag Archives: Israel

Obama Denies He is Anti-Semitic

President Obama was forced to address the question of whether he is anti-Semitic.

In an interview – out today – with the editor of Forward, a publication that covers Jewish American issues, Obama was asked about the charge:

Then, I asked, does it hurt you personally when people say that you’re anti-Semitic?

“Oh, of course,” he answered quietly, leaning back in his chair, a cup of tea on an adjacent table still untouched. “And there’s not a smidgen of evidence for it, other than the fact that there have been times when I’ve disagreed with a particular Israeli government’s position on a particular issue.”

A president whose relations are so bad that the issue of his possible personal anti-Semiticsim arises. Never heard of that one before.

DWS Won’t Commit to the Iran Deal

You go girl!

Spastically vitriolic DNC Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz is suddenly a paragon of probity and careful consideration, refusing to say whether she will vote in favor of President Obama’s Iran nuclear deal.

I’m gonna go home and speak to my constituents who have been weighing in, and I’ll reach a conclusion on what I’m going to do with my vote once I really feel like I’ve been able to thoroughly review the whole deal . . . There’s lot of merit to the deal, but there’s also a legitimate cause for concern.

DWS is thinkin’ on it because any dummy can see that all this deal does is make Iran wait 10-15 years before it acquires a nuclear weapon it can Fedex straight to Tel Aviv. And she knows her constituents get it too.

I’m glad her compassion for Israel has knocked some sense into her.

Don’t Free Pollard

I am Jewish American and a very strong supporter of Israel.

But I am not an Israeli.  And I have no sympathy for Jonathan Pollard nor any wish that he be set free.

Jonathan Pollard is a spy. Espionage is a capital offense. He is lucky to be serving a life sentence. Why his sentence allows him mandatory parole after 30 years is unclear to me. Then it’s not really a life sentence, is it?

That he spied for an ally makes little difference. Israel is a foreign country, with entirely different interests than ours. What happens to our secrets when they are given to Israel is beyond our control and could be harmful to the United States.

What if Israel shares the information with another country seen, at least for the moment, as friend to them but which is hostile toward us?

I don’t make distinctions when it comes to spies.

Pollard says he was motivated by his love for Israel, but, um, he was also paid about $50,000 for his enthusiasm and was on tap to get much more. He is a treasonous rat.

Pollard is being viewed as a White House offering to the Israelis to placate them amid their anger over the Iran deal. The administration denies this, saying the parole is mandatory.

I’m willing to bet the Iran deal plays a part in this. The administration can oppose Pollard’s release by arguing that he violated prison rules or is likely to commit additional crimes. The Justice Department should be doing everything it can think of to keep him in jail. Instead, it has signaled that it will do nothing.

And that is a great shame.

Obama’s Iran Deal Nonsense

I actually think President Obama convinces himself that most of the things he is saying are true, and even, wise.

That they are neither doesn’t make him a liar, nor even a fool. It makes him an egoist completely convinced that things are right merely because he does or says them. And, being an egoist, he wants to have the presidency he has always dreamed of, which includes things like spreading the wealth around from those who have earned it to those who haven’t. And not fighting wars, which he was always told were things greedy capitalists and Republicans like to do, not crusaders for social justice like himself.

And so, never having been serious about attacking Iran, he started negotiations with the Iranians in a very bad position, since attacking Iran was his ace in the hole. Having conveyed to the Iranians that he had taken his best card and thrown it in the garbage, he let them take him to the cleaners, even though they weren’t even playing with a full deck.

At a White House press conference today, Obama repeatedly defended his Iran deal by challenging skeptics to say what else they would have done. As if there were no other options than the surrender he had arranged. The answer to this is of course very simple, and was expressed by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu during his address to Congress: Get a better deal.

Obama press conference

Obama specifically addressed this with his usual straw man approach, saying that a better deal could only mean eliminating Iran’s nuclear program, which he asserts no one in their right mind believes Iran would ever do. Which begs the question: Why, then, was that the original intent of the Iran negotiations?

How about a deal that severely limits their program, unlike this one. How about one that allows the anytime/anywhere inspections were were promised?

HOW ABOUT ONE THAT DOESN’T END IN 15 YEARS?

With a nice, large-gauge figurative gun pointed at their heads, the Iranians might just have decided they could accept a very limited nuclear program, or none at all.

And if not, we had to be prepared to go ahead with an attack, which Obama was not. Unless maybe by leading from behind, so far behind that nobody would want to be in front.

I’m currently reading a biography of Julius Caeser. Quite a good one – Caesar: Life of a Colossus, by Adrian Goldsworthy.

The barbaric lengths the Romans went to during that time to preserve and expand their empire were bracing. Thousands of hostages from defeated tribes, captives sold into slavery, killing of men, women, and children, burning of villages – all to the convey the idea that the Romans weren’t to be messed with.

This was standard practice of the time and accepted by everyone as doing what was necessary to maintain and strengthen Roman civilization. It wasn’t even surprising to Rome’s enemies, who frequently did such things to each other.

Of course, I wouldn’t want us to return to anything like that. And I think we should use our military sparingly. But there are times when, if we are going to maintain our civilization, we have to evince a sliver of Roman toughness. We need to look at the world with a steely, unforgiving eye that recognizes that many of our foes are still living in barbaric times, thinking barbaric thoughts. And that they want to attack us, because they simply hate us and want to advance their own rotten civilizations.

white house Iran flag

Iran’s leaders are never going to be reformed, as Obama hopes. And with the victory he has given them, they won’t soon be overthrown either. In 15 years they be off to the atomic races, developing nuclear weapons while their neighbors – no less barbaric, most of them – start developing their own as a countermeasure. And this grave, existential threat to the world will arise because in the moment of truth, our civilization stood down from what had to be done.

Obama is right that military force is no guarantee that Iran won’t develop a nuclear weapon. Unfortunately, the deal he has struck is a guarantee that they will.

Israel is an older civilization, with a longer memory. They understand the type of people they are dealing with, because they’ve been dealing with them for millennia. They get that 15 years is nothing in the long history of a civilization as old as Persia. Unfortunately, they may have to act alone. But, I believe, they will act, because they have to.

And whose side exactly will Obama be on when they do?

Netanyahu: “We Will Always Defend Ourselves”

And now we must turn to the question, what will Israel do now that Iran is guaranteed nuclear weapons under today’s deal?

I’ve read some reports that Israel has already waited too long and that it would be difficult for it to take out the Iranian nuclear weapons program. I’ve also read that if the Israeli air force dropped by Iran for a visit, it could set the program back at least a few years. Perhaps that would render the new agreement moot, since it deals with a program that would no longer exist in the same form. Then a future U.S. president would have the option to act militarily if Iran tries to reconstitute its program in the absence of an agreement.

An American strike would no doubt be devastating, and it’s not clear to me that Iran would pick up the pieces and move ahead. So there may be some value for Israel in kicking the can down the road by striking now.

The fallout from an Israeli attack would be immense. But I don’t know how Israel can possibly tolerate an Iranian nuclear weapon pointed its way, which is what the agreement ensures – albeit perhaps with a delay of ten to fifteen years, assuming Iran doesn’t successfully cheat.

Netanyahu hinted Israel might act. But he has also done a lot of hinting for a long time.

He said today:

The world is a much more dangerous place today than it was yesterday . . .

By not dismantling Iran’s nuclear program, in a decade this deal will give an unreformed, unrepentent, and far richer terrorist regime the capacity to produce many nuclear bombs. Intact, an entire nuclear arsenal, with the means to deliver it. What a stunning, historic mistake.

Israel is not bound by this deal with Iran . . . because Iran continues to seek our destruction, We will always defend ourselves.

Hillary to the Jews: I’ll be Better for Israel

Hillary Clinton is trying to keep the Jewish money flowing by suggesting privately she will be better for Israel than President Obama, according to Politico.

And you know what? It will probably work. The people of my tribe vote Democratic every time – and donate the same way – despite the abundant, irrefutable evidence that Republicans are far more supportive of Israel than Democrats. Not to mention better for the economy, but one can at least have an argument about that.

From the piece:

Hillary Clinton is privately signaling to wealthy Jewish donors that — no matter the result of the Iranian nuclear negotiations — she will be a better friend to Israel than President Barack Obama.

But, even as donors increasingly push Clinton on the subject in private, they have emerged with sometimes widely varying interpretations about whether she would support a prospective deal, according to interviews with more than 10 influential donors and fundraising operatives.

Clinton’s private responses in some ways resemble a foreign policy Rorschach test; donors who see a deal as important to world peace have come away thinking that Clinton shares their perspective, but so, too, do donors who oppose any prospective agreement as compromising Israeli security.

Publicly, she’s expressed support for the negotiating process, which she secretly initiated during her time as secretary of state, but has also said “no deal is better than a bad deal.”

Well, this is easy enough for her, isn’t it? After all, being better than Obama to Israel is not much of a commitment.

Book to Detail Obama Administration’s “Root Hostility” Toward Israel

A new insider book by former Israeli ambassador to the United States Michael Oren will provide “an incredibly detailed account of the root hostility of the Obama administration toward the Jewish state,” according to writer John Podhoretz.

Oren was ambassador from 2009-2013 and is, as Podhoretz notes, no “flame-breathing Israeli right-winger.”

Rather, he was actually suckered by Obama’s promises of “hope and change.” Until, apparently, he found out that part of the “change” applied to George W. Bush’s stalwart support for Israel.

According to Podhoretz, who writes in the New York Post:

On major matters, the administration seemed to hold Israel accountable for problems it had nothing to do with.

Example: The Palestinian Authority made moves toward seeking a declaration of statehood at the United Nations in 2011, which would’ve triggered a law shutting down their US mission and suspending all aid to the PA and to UN agencies that recognized Palestine.

In response, Deputy Secretary of State Tom Nides called Oren into his fancy Foggy Bottom office and screamed at him: “You don’t want the f - - - ing UN to collapse because of your f - - - ing conflict with the Palestinians, and you don’t want the f - - - ing Palestinian Authority to fall apart either.”
To which Oren replied that Israel didn’t want the United Nations to collapse, “but there are plenty of Tea Party types who would, and no shortage of Congress members who are wondering why they have to keep paying Palestinians who spit in the president’s eye.” He reports that Nides “slumped into his Louis XVth chair.”

Oren also writes about bizarrely petty offenses. In 2010, Obama left Israel off a list of countries he mentioned as having helped in the wake of the Haiti earthquake when it was the first nation in the world to dispatch relief teams and get them to the disaster sites — because the president was angry about something having to do with the peace process.

The book, Ally: My Journey Across the American-Israeli Divide, will be released June 23.

Lew Booed at Jerusalem Post Conference

Oh, this is priceless. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew was heckled, jeered, and booed as he spoke Sunday to a conference organized by the Jerusalem Post. Clearly, those in attendance understand the enormous peril posed by the Obama administration’s appeasement of Iran. And so, naturally, they reacted with anger as Lew artlessly read the administration’s propaganda… Continue Reading

Obama to Israel: “I Understand Your Concerns”

Now that’s touching. Then why is President Obama negotiating a deal with Iran which, by his own reckoning, will within 15 years allow the Iranians a nuclear “breakout time” of a nanosecond? Obama spoke to Israeli TV during an interview that is being broadcast there this week, according to The Blaze: I can, I think,… Continue Reading

Obama: No Iranian Nuclear Weapon “on my Watch”

Whoa whoa whoa whoa waydasecond. What’s going on here? The Israelis have picked up on something President Obama said in his interview with Tom Friedman, which appeared Saturday in the New York Times. It appears the goal posts might have been moved a little bit, turning a 50-yard field goal try into an extra point kick.… Continue Reading

The Dangerous, Erroneous Assumption Guiding Obama’s Mideast Policy

President Obama, like most liberals, is under the unfortunate and rather self-indulgent misimpression that the rest of the world is just like us. That’s why Obama and his friends have a hard time being American exceptionalists. That’s why they trust, but aren’t really serious about verify, and to the extent they are, they blithely assume that someone’s going to… Continue Reading