Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label Barak. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barak. Show all posts

Saturday, June 27, 2015

Speak No Evil, Hear No Evil...The New Obama Mantra In Regard To Muslims


A Matter of Courage and Wisdom


Author(s):  Prof. Paul Eidelberg
Source:  Special to UCI.     Article date: June 24th, 2015


There are many people in Israel, even in the Knesset, that regard Bibi as intelligent but timid. Caroline Click of the Jerusalem Post called him a “hack politician” when he released Arab terrorists in subservience to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry. Kerry, in lock-step with President Barack Obama, is hardly an admirable personality. Any fool or coward can urge Israel to retreat to her 1967 Auschwitz lines. But there is some confusion here between moral and intellectual virtues.
As may be gleaned from Plato’s dialogue, the Apology, where Socrates is condemned to death for undermining the attachment of youth to the gods of democratic Athens, where the moral relativism of the Sophists reigned unchallenged, courage is a precondition of wisdom. People lacking courage tend to be “politically correct.”  They will not be inclined to think of some way of avoiding intellectually complex and life-threatening situations.
Israel’s situation is certainly complex and life-threatening. Not only is Israel threatened from afar by genocidal Iran; she is also assaulted close at hand by Palestinian Jew-killers – and both enemies are supported by a multicultural or cockamamie Muslim in the White House. Barak Obama is not likely to go down in history as a man of wisdom and courage.
Wisdom and courage represent, respectively, intellectual and moral virtues. What is not common knowledge is that courage is a precondition of wisdom, but by no means a sufficient precondition. Israel’s most highly decorated general, former PM Ehud Barak, a smiling clod, not only deserted Israel’s Christian friends in Lebanon, but also offered Yasser Arafat Judea and Samaria, Israel's heartland. Sadly, Bibi’s Osolovian predecessors are examples of buffoons if not poltroons. Calling any of them “hacks” is flattery.
What makes Bibi particularly unpalatable as Israel’s prime spokesman is that he knows, better than most, the utterly malicious and mendacious character of the Palestinian, the Arabs whom he appeases, and with whom he yearns to negotiate on the basis of “reciprocity.”
He also knows that that the idea of “reciprocity,” foreign to Islam, appears eminently reasonable and fair-minded to benighted Americans. Habituated to compromise at home, Americans still genuflect to “détente” abroad. Recall Kissinger’s morally neutral policy of “détente” with the Soviet Union, which Ronald Reagan, to the consternation of many academics, called the “Evil Empire.”
As for Barack Obama, he chokes on the term “Muslim terrorists” to describe members of another Evil Empire, Islam.
To be fair, however, Truth is out of fashion in post-modern America and in post-modern Israel, where political scientists have replaced the word “evil” with the “Three blind Mice” concept of “conflict resolution,” in consequence of which concept decision makers “See no Evil,” “Hear no Evil,” and “Speak no Evil” about the disciples of Mohammad.
Bearing this optical situaton in mind, let us now take cognizance of the recent eruption of racial violence in some American cities. How easy it is to trace the causes of that violence to unemployment. Who would hasten to say the upsurge of that evil is tacitly encouraged by the occupant of the White House: a post-American multicultural moral relativist, who often attended a church whose pastor preached “god damn America” without a murmur from the man so many “educated” Americans twice elected their President? To see and say this does not require much wisdom and courage.

Wednesday, March 18, 2015

Will Netanyahu's Re-Election Spell The End To Middle East Elections? We Suspect So. Palestinians Should Pay For Their Rejection Of Earlier Proposals.

Those around the world who are upset with Prime Minister's Benjamin Netanyahu electoral victory over the Zionist Camp party should put much of the responsibility for Israel's rightward turn squarely where it belongs: on the Palestinian Authority (PA).
At least twice over the last 15 years, Israel has offered the Palestinians extraordinarily generous two-state solutions. The first time was in 2000-2001 when Ehud Barak and Bill Clinton offered the Palestinians more than 90% of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip, with a capital in Jerusalem. Yassir Arafat turned down the offer and started an intifada, in which 4000 people were killed. This self-inflicted wound by the leader of the PA contributed greatly to the weakening of Israel's peace camp, most particularly of Ehud Barak's Labor party. The current Zionist Camp party, which is an offshoot of Labor, has continued to suffer from that weakening.
Then again, in 2007, Ehud Olmert offered the Palestinians an even more generous resolution, to which Mahmoud Abbas failed to respond positively. This failure also contributed to the weakening of the Israeli center-left and the strengthening of the right.
Israel is a vibrant democracy, in which people vote their experience, their fear and their hope. In 2000-2001 and 2007, most Israelis had high hopes for a peaceful resolution of the Palestinian conflict. These hopes were dashed by Arafat's rejection and Abbas' refusal to accept generous peace offers. It is not surprising therefore, that so many Israelis now vote their fear instead of their hope.


Israeli President Reuven Rivlin casts his vote in yesterday's elections. (Image source: Israel Government Press Office)

The Obama administration also contributed to the election results in Israel by refusing to listen to Israeli concerns -- concerns shared by Israelis of every political stripe -- about the impending deal with Iran. Many Israelis have given up any hope of influencing the Obama administration to demand more from the Iranians. The current deal contains a sunset provision which all but guarantees that Iran will have nuclear weapons within a decade. Zionist Camp leader Isaac Herzog made a serious mistake when he said he trusted President Obama to make a good deal with the Iranians. Few Israelis share that trust, as do few members of Congress, and few Sunni Arab governments. That lack of trust was reflected in voting for a Prime Minister who has been more confrontational and less trusting.
If Israelis voted their fears, these were not entirely irrational fears; they were based on the history of the region.
The international community, academics and the media tend to have short memories. They will blame Netanyahu, and especially his campaign rhetoric, for a result of which they disapprove. But Netanyahu's rhetoric found a receptive audience because many Israeli voters have long memories. They remember what the leaders of the Palestinian Authority, the Obama administration, the Iranian mullahs and the United Nations have done and said with regard to Israel. They remember the lethal responses to earlier peace offers.
So let's not look at a snapshot of these election results. Instead, let's look at a videotape of the last 15 years in order to understand how Israel's democracy produced the current election results.
Only time will tell whether these results will engender a better resolution of the Iranian threat, the Palestinian stalemate and other issues of concern to the world. But history has shown that positive results can never be achieved by directing pressure unilaterally at the Israeli government, and not at the Palestinian Authority, the Iranian mullahs, the Obama administration and the international community.
Already, the spokespersons for the PA have predicted that the reelection of Netanyahu marks the end of any realistic peace process, without reminding their listeners of how Palestinian intransigence marked the end of earlier peace processes and impacted this election. They are once again threatening to bring their grievances to the International Criminal Court and other international institutions, which would surely be a setback to any realistic prospects for a resolution.
So instead of casting the blame on Netanyahu and the Israeli right for all the problems of the Middle East, let all sides look at themselves in the mirror of reality and decide how they can contribute to making the world a safer place, by preventing Iran from ever obtaining a nuclear arsenal and by encouraging a compromise resolution of the Palestinian issue that protects Israel's security while providing the Palestinians with a viable, demilitarized state.

Monday, April 28, 2014

Kerry Tells Trilateral Commission That Israel On The Way To Becoming An Apartheid State. We KNOW That Obama/Kerry Will Make It So! Israel Will Be Left To Fend For Itself.

In Secret Recording, Kerry says Israel will become “Apartheid State”




“Truthful lips endure forever, but a lying tongue is but for a moment.” (Proverbs 12:19)
Peace Talks
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Photo: Miriam Alster/Flash90)
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said Israel is on course to become an “apartheid state” if it does not make peace soon with the Palestinians.
The explosive comments were revealed early Monday morning by The Daily Beast which obtained a secret recording of Kerry’s comments. The secretary of state reportedly made the comments during a closed-door meeting on Friday of the Trilateral Commission, a non-governmental organization that seeks to strengthen ties between North America, Europe, and Japan.
“A two-state solution will be clearly underscored as the only real alternative,” Kerry stated at the meeting. “Because a unitary state winds up either being an apartheid state with second class citizens – or it ends up being a state that destroys the capacity of Israel to be a Jewish state.”
“Once you put that frame in your mind, that reality, which is the bottom line, you understand how imperative it is to get to the two-state solution, which both leaders, even yesterday, said they remain deeply committed to.”
According to The Daily Beast, Kerry blamed both Israeli and Palestinian leaders for stalled peace talks and questioned whether a change in leadership would help bolster peace negotiations and reach a settlement. If “there is a change of government or a change of heart,” Kerry said, “something will happen.”
He also criticized Israeli construction in Judea and Samaria, which Kerry says is unhelpful to the peace process. “There is a fundamental confrontation and its over settlements. Fourteen thousand new settlement units announced since we began negotiations. It’s very difficult for any leader to deal under that cloud,” Kerry said.

Kerry also said that with frustrations mounting, he may push forth his own peace deal and tell both sides to “take it or leave it.”
State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki told The Daily Beast that Kerry was only repeating his views which others share with him. The secretary of state has always maintained that a two-state solution is the only viable solution for peace.
“Secretary Kerry, like Justice Minister Livni, and previous Israeli Prime Ministers Olmert and Barak, were reiterating why there’s no such thing as a one-state solution if you believe, as he does, in the principle of a Jewish State. He was talking about the kind of future Israel wants and the kind of future both Israelis and Palestinians would want to envision,” she said.
“The only way to have two nations and two peoples living side by side in peace and security is through a two-state solution. And without a two-state solution, the level of prosperity and security the Israeli and Palestinian people deserve isn’t possible.”
The Obama administration has steered clear of using the term ‘apartheid’ to refer to Israel. In 2008, Obama said using the label in association with Israel is “emotionally loaded, historically inaccurate, and it’s not what I believe.”
Kerry remains hopeful that peace negotiations will eventually resume between both sides. He said he would not “declare it [peace talks] dead.”
“You would say this thing is going to hell in a hand basket, and who knows, it might at some point, but I don’t think it is right now, yet,” Kerry stated.