by Gerald A. Honigman
Originally Posted On IsraelNationalNews
I [have] learned that, as he prepares to leave office, President George Bush is determined to continue to expose his apparently truest hand regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict,
-support Israel, but force it to become so dependent upon America that
it has to ignore reality, its own fragility and vital interests for the
sake of Washington, whether it's also really good for America or not.
Lie after lie after lie, cover up after cover up, excuse after excuse - like in the old days.
In the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, Dubya and his Lady at State, Condoleezza Rice (the Secretary, not the oil tanker already named for her), continue to pretend that Israel has something other than a peace-of-the-grave partner in Mahmoud Abbas's latter-dayArafatian Fatah boys. Lie after lie after lie, cover up after cover up, excuse after excuse -like in the old days and the games Bill Clinton and his crew (includingState's Jewish stooges) played to make Yasser Arafat and Fatah the good guys as well.
With the clock ticking before his departure, it seems that Dubya is still determined to force Israel to cave in to alleged Arab good cops, whose well-known real destruction-in-stages plan(stated by themselves over and over again) regarding the Jewish State are no better than those of the Hamas bad cops.
And now there's additional news that America alone aims to determine Israel's defense and security needs regarding other murderous Arab enemies.
Dubya has evidently promised Baby Assad that if he cuts Iranian ties, then he'll force Israel to give up the entire Golan Heights.
That's right, reward the butcher and enslaver of independent Lebanon, subjugator and murderer of Syrian Kurds, Jews and so forth for a temporary respite in Syria's age-old, deadly machinations, regardless of the highly predictable consequences.
Looks to me like Dubya is setting himself up for a really nice retirement. Not that it wouldn't be nice anyway, but Arabs can be quite generous tothose who shaft Jews.
Just ask Mr. Shakedown Artist and his friends Jimmy "Apartheid Israel" Carter and Bill "Arafat to the White House Over a Dozen Times" Clinton.
The results of the latter's squeeze of Ehud Barak over disputed, non-apportioned (not "occupied") territories of the original 1920 Palestine Mandate at Camp David and Taba, getting him to forsake the secure and defensible real borders (not artificially imposed armistice lines) promised by UNSC Resolution 242, have now become the starting point demanded by Arabs for current "negotiations." That's Clinton and James Baker's former "Jew Boys" legacy vis-a-vis Israel.
Among other things, Dan Kurtzer played front man in the fight with Israel over the route of its defense barrier to protect Ben-Gurion Airport from the same Arab attacks Sderot is now receiving from Gaza courtesy of earlier Foggy fulminations and fantasies.
That's how too many Jews get ahead in a State Department which rejected Israel's right to existf rom the get-go and fought President Harry Truman over Israel's resurrection on less than 15% of the 1920 Palestine Mandate. (Arab Jordan now sits on almost 80% of that Mandate's territory.)
Since we're on the topic, Dubya's virtual uncle and his dad's (George the First) Secretary of State, James Baker, continues to make a fortune via gratitude from the Arab petro-spigot.
For that matter, so does George the First. Moving on.
Whether Syria plays ball with Dubya's deal to cut ties with Iran is not the point, turning Israel into America's puppet is.
And what happens after the forced full Israeli withdrawal when Assad later restores ties with the mullahs?
Israelis stuck with a far worse version of its evacuation from Gaza. It's all downhill into Israel proper for thousands of Syrian tanks, forstarters.
Nations who repeatedly attack neighbors over decades from a certain territory often end up losing such territory.
They used to speak Spanish in what Dubya now calls his ranch.
That's how Syria lost the Golan. Long ago, Israel offered to return to
Damascus far more than it deserves on the Golan Heights; indeed, almost all of it.
Both Assads rejected this.
Syria must never again be able to shell Israeli farms and such from the Heights, nor control Israel's keywater sources.
What would America do with such a rejectionist enemy?
Well, for starters, they used to speak Spanish in what Dubya now calls his ranch.
And it was he himself who earlier said that some Texas driveways are longer than Israel's width. The decisions made by voters in both America and Israel over the next few months will be extremely important ones.
Voters from both nations must elect leaders who will not be manipulated by anyone when it comes down to the vital interests of their countries - regardless of the consequences.
And an Israel which can fit about thirty-four times just into Dubya's home state of Texas has a lot more to worry about.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Help Jewish Children Learn Their Culture
Taglit-Birthright Israel is the most ambitious Jewish outreach program ever undertaken, offering Jewish young adults from around the world a free trip to Israel to build connection with their homeland ﾗ their birthright. All young Jews age 18 to 26 who have never had the opportunity to visit Israel on an educational trip before are eligible.
This summer, we received more than 39,000 applications for 24,000 places. Without your support, weﾒll leave thousands of young people behind again this winter.
Can you make a gift today to help bridge the gap?
Almost 60% of Taglit-Birthright Israel participants do not have a strong Jewish identify or affiliation before their trip. The trip is transformational. Alumni come home with a passion for Israel and Jewish identity that, from all research and indications, will resonate with them for their entire lives.
Taglit-Brithright Israel trips are making a unique difference in the Jewish world. Can you make a gift of $54, $180, $300 or even $3,000 ﾗ enough to get one person onto a plane.
Our experience over Taglit Birthright Israelﾒs ten years of experience confirms that many of the 15,000 eligible trip applicants who were left behind this summer due to a lack of resources will not re-apply and may never experience this or any other chance to build a connection to Israel.
The young people who do not re-apply to the program will have a different Jewish future than those who participate. They will be less likely to enroll in Jewish studies courses, participate in Jewish organizational life, develop a commitment to form a Jewish family or follow the news about Israel.
World Jewry can and will be transformed by the Taglit-Birthright Israel venture. For young American Jews, the Birthright-Israel trip is becoming a rite of passage: for most, the only formal Jewish experience between Bar/Bat Mitzvah and marriage.
I hope you will join us in giving this gift of a once in a lifetime trip to Israel to young Jews desperate for the chance to build their Jewish identify. Please visit the website today ﾗ www.birthrightisrael.org to learn more and to make a contribution.
This year, your gift will be matched by a generous grant from the Adelson Family Foundation ﾗ your $300 contribution will cover the cost of two full days of the ten day trip for one young Jew. Please contribute now and double the impact of your gift.
Help us make sure that all of our trip applicants get on a plane this winter!
This year in Jerusalem!
This summer, we received more than 39,000 applications for 24,000 places. Without your support, weﾒll leave thousands of young people behind again this winter.
Can you make a gift today to help bridge the gap?
Almost 60% of Taglit-Birthright Israel participants do not have a strong Jewish identify or affiliation before their trip. The trip is transformational. Alumni come home with a passion for Israel and Jewish identity that, from all research and indications, will resonate with them for their entire lives.
Taglit-Brithright Israel trips are making a unique difference in the Jewish world. Can you make a gift of $54, $180, $300 or even $3,000 ﾗ enough to get one person onto a plane.
Our experience over Taglit Birthright Israelﾒs ten years of experience confirms that many of the 15,000 eligible trip applicants who were left behind this summer due to a lack of resources will not re-apply and may never experience this or any other chance to build a connection to Israel.
The young people who do not re-apply to the program will have a different Jewish future than those who participate. They will be less likely to enroll in Jewish studies courses, participate in Jewish organizational life, develop a commitment to form a Jewish family or follow the news about Israel.
World Jewry can and will be transformed by the Taglit-Birthright Israel venture. For young American Jews, the Birthright-Israel trip is becoming a rite of passage: for most, the only formal Jewish experience between Bar/Bat Mitzvah and marriage.
I hope you will join us in giving this gift of a once in a lifetime trip to Israel to young Jews desperate for the chance to build their Jewish identify. Please visit the website today ﾗ www.birthrightisrael.org to learn more and to make a contribution.
This year, your gift will be matched by a generous grant from the Adelson Family Foundation ﾗ your $300 contribution will cover the cost of two full days of the ten day trip for one young Jew. Please contribute now and double the impact of your gift.
Help us make sure that all of our trip applicants get on a plane this winter!
This year in Jerusalem!
Sunday, October 26, 2008
The fact that a candidate
has known or crossed paths
with a bad person is not
the sum total of that
person.
I have heard a lot of bad
things about McCain, I'm
sure you have as well.
He's been called arrogant.Argumenative.Vindictive.Emotionally unstable.Disloyal.By people who have known him for many years.
If you believe that Obama
is a communist or
terrorist, then you also
believe McCain is a liar,
since he has said,
"Senator Obama is a good
man, a decent family man,
a good American." And "You
have nothing to fear from
an Obama Presidency."
Now have you noticed, as I have, that not a single person has come forward and said a single thing negative about Obama as a person?
I mean people who know him.People who work with him in the Senate.People who worked with him in helping the poor.Jews that worked with him in his first private sector Law Firm.No one from the Harvard review.No one from the Illinois State Senate, no one from the the U.S. Senate.
The reason that you don't hear negative comments about his character from people who've known him and worked with him is because, as they all say, almost to a man,And this is what McCain says as well, "This is a fine man, a decent man, a good American."
For a long time now, starting with Ronald Reagan, people in dire straits in America have been told by the Republican Party, "Tough luck".
When it became obvious that our country had a unique problem, i.e., women and children living in the streets, Reagan said, "They choose that lifestyle."
Although I am familiar with Republican Statistics, and I am aware that America is still the wealthiest country on the planet earth, millions of Americans are suffering and struggling to survive, and have a decent life.
Many Americans, and many of them inheritors, live like Arabian Princes and Princesses while children suffer in abandoned automoblies and vacant buildings.
This a country where Myley Cyrus "earns" a half billion dollars in 3 years, and thousands of children brave the elements and don't get enough to eat.
This is the country where Tina Fey is advanced 5 million dollars to write a book, which she will pay someone else a hundred grand to write for her. while babies and old people wait in line for hours in the heat and cold to eat donated food.
The Republicans, who've been in power for eight years, say that government can't help poor people here, but we can create a jobs program in Iraq, and rebuild their country after spending billions to destroy it.
For years now, the greed of the inherited class has slowly been strangling working people and poor people.
Now comes a decent man, a man who has actually worked for a living, who actually cares about his fellow man.And it scares the hell out of the hard right.And so, they try, to some extent successfully, to scare the sheople.
But, at least so the polls indicate, this time, the scare machine isn't working.People want a government that works for them, not just the fat cats.
And the right will trot out all the commie scare garbage and anti-American swill that has worked in the past.
I see homeless people everyday.They do not choose to be homeless.The vast majority of them work, hard, full time.Scare tactics don't work with them any more.They are already scared, of losing their job, of not being able to pay for gas or feed their kids.
America really does need change, and Obama seems to be the agent for it.Guilt by association and name calling is not going to win this election.
Decency, intelligence and compassion may.
has known or crossed paths
with a bad person is not
the sum total of that
person.
I have heard a lot of bad
things about McCain, I'm
sure you have as well.
He's been called arrogant.Argumenative.Vindictive.Emotionally unstable.Disloyal.By people who have known him for many years.
If you believe that Obama
is a communist or
terrorist, then you also
believe McCain is a liar,
since he has said,
"Senator Obama is a good
man, a decent family man,
a good American." And "You
have nothing to fear from
an Obama Presidency."
Now have you noticed, as I have, that not a single person has come forward and said a single thing negative about Obama as a person?
I mean people who know him.People who work with him in the Senate.People who worked with him in helping the poor.Jews that worked with him in his first private sector Law Firm.No one from the Harvard review.No one from the Illinois State Senate, no one from the the U.S. Senate.
The reason that you don't hear negative comments about his character from people who've known him and worked with him is because, as they all say, almost to a man,And this is what McCain says as well, "This is a fine man, a decent man, a good American."
For a long time now, starting with Ronald Reagan, people in dire straits in America have been told by the Republican Party, "Tough luck".
When it became obvious that our country had a unique problem, i.e., women and children living in the streets, Reagan said, "They choose that lifestyle."
Although I am familiar with Republican Statistics, and I am aware that America is still the wealthiest country on the planet earth, millions of Americans are suffering and struggling to survive, and have a decent life.
Many Americans, and many of them inheritors, live like Arabian Princes and Princesses while children suffer in abandoned automoblies and vacant buildings.
This a country where Myley Cyrus "earns" a half billion dollars in 3 years, and thousands of children brave the elements and don't get enough to eat.
This is the country where Tina Fey is advanced 5 million dollars to write a book, which she will pay someone else a hundred grand to write for her. while babies and old people wait in line for hours in the heat and cold to eat donated food.
The Republicans, who've been in power for eight years, say that government can't help poor people here, but we can create a jobs program in Iraq, and rebuild their country after spending billions to destroy it.
For years now, the greed of the inherited class has slowly been strangling working people and poor people.
Now comes a decent man, a man who has actually worked for a living, who actually cares about his fellow man.And it scares the hell out of the hard right.And so, they try, to some extent successfully, to scare the sheople.
But, at least so the polls indicate, this time, the scare machine isn't working.People want a government that works for them, not just the fat cats.
And the right will trot out all the commie scare garbage and anti-American swill that has worked in the past.
I see homeless people everyday.They do not choose to be homeless.The vast majority of them work, hard, full time.Scare tactics don't work with them any more.They are already scared, of losing their job, of not being able to pay for gas or feed their kids.
America really does need change, and Obama seems to be the agent for it.Guilt by association and name calling is not going to win this election.
Decency, intelligence and compassion may.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Giving Until It Hurts
Barry Rubin
October 8, 2008
In response to a casual question, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates dropped a historical bombshell, an offhand remark telling more about how the Middle East works than 100 books. And a former Marine commander adds an equally big revelation about long-ago events quite relevant for today.
Almost thirty years ago, President Jimmy Carter tried to show what a nice guy he was by pressing the Shah not to crush the revolutionaries. After the monarch fell, National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski met top officials of the new Islamist regime to pledge U.S. friendship to the government controlled by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. At the time, I wrote that by approaching some of the milder radicals, the administration frightened the more militant ones. U.S.-Iran relations must be smashed, they concluded, lest Washington back their rivals. In fact, as we'll see in a moment, the Carter administration offered to back Khomeini himself.
Three days after the Brzezinski meeting, in November 1979, the Islamist regime's cadre seized the U.S. embassy and its staff as hostages, holding them until January 1981. This was our introduction to the new Middle East of radical Islamism. Carter continued his weak stance, persuading the Tehran regime that it could get away with anything.
So we've long known that undermining U.S. allies, passivity toward anti-American radicals, and inaction after a massive terrorist act against Americans didn't work. The hostages were only released because Iran was suffering desperately from an Iraqi invasion and feared Carter's successor, Ronald Reagan, as someone likely to be tougher.
The lesson of being strong in defending interests and combating enemies has not quite been learned. Today, the opposite is the mainstream prescription for success and the United States may be about to elect a president whose world view parallels the way Carter worked.
Here's where Gates comes in. On September 29, while giving a lecture at the National Defense University in Washington DC, someone asked him how the next president might improve relations with Iran. Gates responded:
"I have been involved in the search for the elusive Iranian moderate for 30 years." Then Gates revealed what was actually said at Brzezinski's meeting, in which he participated, summarizing Brzezinski's position as follows:
"We will accept your revolution....We will recognize your government. We will sell you all the weapons that we had contracted to sell the Shah....We can work together in the future."
The Iranians demanded the United States turn over to them the fugitive Shah, who they would have executed. Brzezinski refused. Three days later Iran seized the embassy and forever changed the Middle East. The road thus paved led to the Iran-Iraq and Iraq-Kuwait wars, the power of Hamas and Hizballah, September 11, 2001, and a great deal more. Many thousands would die due to American timidity and Iranian aggressiveness.
Had the United States been a mean bully in its treatment of the new Islamist Iran? The On the contrary, Washington did everything possible to negotiate, conciliate, and build confidence. We'll do almost anything you want, Carter and Brzezinski offered, just be our friend. Far from being appeased Iran demanded such a total humiliation--turning over the fatally ill, deposed Shah for execution--even that administration couldn't accept it.
Far from persuading Khomeini that the United States was a real threat, the U.S. government made itself appear a pitiful, helpless giant, convincing Tehran--as Khomeini put it--America couldn't do a damn thing. His revolution and ideology was too strong for it.
So why should we expect such a tactic could work today? How long does it take to get the message: this is an ideological revolution with huge ambitions to which America is inevitably a barrier. Appeasement, talks, apologies, confidence-building measures won't convince Tehran that America is its friend, only that it's an enemy so weak as to make aggression seem inevitably successful.
The only U.S. precondition has been that to get a high-level dialogue, Iran must first stop its drive for nuclear weapons, at least temporarily.
Gates understands what happened: "Every administration since then has reached out to the Iranians in one way or another and all have failed....The reality is the Iranian leadership has been consistently unyielding over a very long period of time in response to repeated overtures from the United States about having a different and better kind of relationship."
This situation is quite parallel to efforts to have reasonable preconditions with the Palestinians--stop terrorism, incitement, clearly accept a two-state solution--or with Syria--stop sponsoring terrorism, cease trying to take over Lebanon, and accept normal relations with Israel as the outcome of peace. Similar bargains have been offered Hamas and Hizballah. Yet even this is too much for the other side and too much for those who continue trying to undermine any Western leverage on radical forces.
If the other side won't give anything, they insist, merely offer more. And if the other side takes those concessions, pockets them, gives nothing in return, and continues their behavior, this merely proves you have to give still more.
Here's more evidence why that's wrong. Former U.S. Marine Colonel Timothy Geraghty was Marine commander in October 1983 when suicide bombers attacked the barracks of U.S. peacekeeping forces in Beirut, killing 242 Americans. He now reveals that a September 26, 1983 U.S. intelligence intercept showed Iran's government ordering the attack through its embassy in Lebanon. The timid response to that operation set a pattern leading directly to the September 11 attack.
Three decades after the miserable failure of the make-friends-with-Islamist-Iran policy--including offering Khomeini continued U.S. arms' supplies for goodness sake!--isn't it time to learn this simple lesson?
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley).
The Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, P.O. Box 167, Herzliya, 46150, Israel Email: info AT gloriacenter.org - Phone: +972-9-960-2736 - Fax: +972-9-960-2736 © 2007 All rights reserved
October 8, 2008
In response to a casual question, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates dropped a historical bombshell, an offhand remark telling more about how the Middle East works than 100 books. And a former Marine commander adds an equally big revelation about long-ago events quite relevant for today.
Almost thirty years ago, President Jimmy Carter tried to show what a nice guy he was by pressing the Shah not to crush the revolutionaries. After the monarch fell, National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski met top officials of the new Islamist regime to pledge U.S. friendship to the government controlled by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. At the time, I wrote that by approaching some of the milder radicals, the administration frightened the more militant ones. U.S.-Iran relations must be smashed, they concluded, lest Washington back their rivals. In fact, as we'll see in a moment, the Carter administration offered to back Khomeini himself.
Three days after the Brzezinski meeting, in November 1979, the Islamist regime's cadre seized the U.S. embassy and its staff as hostages, holding them until January 1981. This was our introduction to the new Middle East of radical Islamism. Carter continued his weak stance, persuading the Tehran regime that it could get away with anything.
So we've long known that undermining U.S. allies, passivity toward anti-American radicals, and inaction after a massive terrorist act against Americans didn't work. The hostages were only released because Iran was suffering desperately from an Iraqi invasion and feared Carter's successor, Ronald Reagan, as someone likely to be tougher.
The lesson of being strong in defending interests and combating enemies has not quite been learned. Today, the opposite is the mainstream prescription for success and the United States may be about to elect a president whose world view parallels the way Carter worked.
Here's where Gates comes in. On September 29, while giving a lecture at the National Defense University in Washington DC, someone asked him how the next president might improve relations with Iran. Gates responded:
"I have been involved in the search for the elusive Iranian moderate for 30 years." Then Gates revealed what was actually said at Brzezinski's meeting, in which he participated, summarizing Brzezinski's position as follows:
"We will accept your revolution....We will recognize your government. We will sell you all the weapons that we had contracted to sell the Shah....We can work together in the future."
The Iranians demanded the United States turn over to them the fugitive Shah, who they would have executed. Brzezinski refused. Three days later Iran seized the embassy and forever changed the Middle East. The road thus paved led to the Iran-Iraq and Iraq-Kuwait wars, the power of Hamas and Hizballah, September 11, 2001, and a great deal more. Many thousands would die due to American timidity and Iranian aggressiveness.
Had the United States been a mean bully in its treatment of the new Islamist Iran? The On the contrary, Washington did everything possible to negotiate, conciliate, and build confidence. We'll do almost anything you want, Carter and Brzezinski offered, just be our friend. Far from being appeased Iran demanded such a total humiliation--turning over the fatally ill, deposed Shah for execution--even that administration couldn't accept it.
Far from persuading Khomeini that the United States was a real threat, the U.S. government made itself appear a pitiful, helpless giant, convincing Tehran--as Khomeini put it--America couldn't do a damn thing. His revolution and ideology was too strong for it.
So why should we expect such a tactic could work today? How long does it take to get the message: this is an ideological revolution with huge ambitions to which America is inevitably a barrier. Appeasement, talks, apologies, confidence-building measures won't convince Tehran that America is its friend, only that it's an enemy so weak as to make aggression seem inevitably successful.
The only U.S. precondition has been that to get a high-level dialogue, Iran must first stop its drive for nuclear weapons, at least temporarily.
Gates understands what happened: "Every administration since then has reached out to the Iranians in one way or another and all have failed....The reality is the Iranian leadership has been consistently unyielding over a very long period of time in response to repeated overtures from the United States about having a different and better kind of relationship."
This situation is quite parallel to efforts to have reasonable preconditions with the Palestinians--stop terrorism, incitement, clearly accept a two-state solution--or with Syria--stop sponsoring terrorism, cease trying to take over Lebanon, and accept normal relations with Israel as the outcome of peace. Similar bargains have been offered Hamas and Hizballah. Yet even this is too much for the other side and too much for those who continue trying to undermine any Western leverage on radical forces.
If the other side won't give anything, they insist, merely offer more. And if the other side takes those concessions, pockets them, gives nothing in return, and continues their behavior, this merely proves you have to give still more.
Here's more evidence why that's wrong. Former U.S. Marine Colonel Timothy Geraghty was Marine commander in October 1983 when suicide bombers attacked the barracks of U.S. peacekeeping forces in Beirut, killing 242 Americans. He now reveals that a September 26, 1983 U.S. intelligence intercept showed Iran's government ordering the attack through its embassy in Lebanon. The timid response to that operation set a pattern leading directly to the September 11 attack.
Three decades after the miserable failure of the make-friends-with-Islamist-Iran policy--including offering Khomeini continued U.S. arms' supplies for goodness sake!--isn't it time to learn this simple lesson?
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley).
The Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, P.O. Box 167, Herzliya, 46150, Israel Email: info AT gloriacenter.org - Phone: +972-9-960-2736 - Fax: +972-9-960-2736 © 2007 All rights reserved
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
The Chomsky Hoax
Exposing the Dishonesty of Noam Chomsky