web analytics
December 5, 2016 / 5 Kislev, 5777

Posts Tagged ‘national security advisor’

Former Deputy Chief of Staff: Every Day Sgt. Azaria Is on Trial Damages the IDF

Monday, September 19th, 2016

Former Deputy Chief of Staff Gen (Res.) Uzi Dayan, who at one point was head of the IDF Central Command and is a nephew of the late Moshe Dayan, told a military court in Jaffa on Monday it should not have been involved in the case of shooting medic Sgt. Elor Azaria in the first place.

“I don’t know if the soldier sinned or not,” Gen. Dayan, a witness for the defense, stressed. “I’m concerned about the soldiers on the ground. Every such [court trial] day is causing more damage to the IDF.” He then turned to the judges and said, “It’s still not too late to reach a plea bargain, the damage to the Army is enormous.”

Gen. Dayan testified that, in his opinion, “every terrorist has a death sentence on his head, regardless of whether or not they pose a risk at the moment.”

The man who commanded the Hebron region at one point and served as National Security Advisor to the Prime Minister, said there should not have been a military police investigation of the case, nor a consequent involvement of the military prosecution, and certainly no trial. He also told the court that in his entire career he never permitted the military police to investigate an operational event.

“The military police does not have the tools needed to investigate operational events,” Gen. Dayan told the panel of three military judges. “It’s a shame that instead of using the tool of an investigating committee, they rolled it straight to the criminal arena. If a warrior makes a mistake, we don’t roll it over to the criminal realm, unless an insidious motive is involved.”

When the prosecutor asked if the rules of engagement don’t forbid killing a terrorist simply because he is a terrorist, Gen. Dayan responded, “This is patently wrong. What’s relevant are the mission instructions. I ordered to kill terrorists simply because they were terrorists, regardless of whether they endangered or didn’t endanger. … Terrorists must be killed. Is it under any condition? No, that’s true. But as to the question of whether terrorists should be killed, the answer is yes.”

At the end of his testimony, Gen. Dayan told the judges, “Many eyes are trained on you. The issue is under an unprecedented public debate, which means that your decision bears an enormous significance.”

Gen. (Res.) Dan Biton, who also testified for the defense, warned the court in a written affidavit that “there was a command failure on the part of the brigade commander, battalion commander and company commander.” He added, “In my opinion the company commander was in a trauma as a result of the shooting. This case represents a fault line. A wrong decision would lead to a situation whereby every soldier would be afraid to open fire to save a life.”

JNi.Media

Netanyahu Representative in DC to Negotiate $38 Billion Aid Deal

Tuesday, September 13th, 2016

Brigadier General Yaakov Nagel, Israel’s acting National Security Council, arrived in Washington DC on Tuesday to meet with President Obama’s National Security Advisor Susan Rice, in preparations for signing a new US military aid package. The new US aid deal, which the two governments have been negotiating since November 2015, awards Israel $38 billion over 10 years.

Nagel met with US Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro to work out the final details before leaving for Washington — including the text of the official announcements. The new aid package is expected to average $3.8 billion a year, a considerable cut from Netanyahu’s initial request for $4.5 billion. The deal is also contingent on Israel agreeing not to approach Congress for additional funds, as in the case of the Iron Dome missile defense system, which Congress has been paying for outside the annual aid package. Now an estimated $5 billion out of the package will be spent over 10 years on missile defense development.

In other words, the new aid package is only adding $300 million to the previous amount. To remind you, the sum of $3 billion annually was set during the Camp David peace negotiations with Egypt, as compensation to Israel for giving up the Sinai peninsula as a military asset. That amount has never been raised in close to 40 years, even though the current value of that annual package would have been $10.48 billion.

The critical disagreement between the two sides over the current deal has been whether or not Israel could continue to invest a percentage of the aid package in Israeli made military products. The Obama Administration wanted the entire amount to stay in US corporations, which would have been devastating to Israeli manufacturers and to the IDF. A short episode during the 2014 Gaza War, in which the Obama Administration stopped shipping to Israel all defense items, including Hellfire missiles, served as a memorable lesson to the Israeli security apparatus about the need to increase its self-reliance.

The new deal ended up adding six years in which Israel can continue to spend as much as 26% of the US aid money on Israeli made products, as well as another 13% for fuel purchases. By the seventh year, or halfway into Clinton’s or Trump’s second term, the Israeli military industrial complex would have to quit US aid cold turkey — Unless Netanyahu or his successor is able to renegotiate that part — depending on who is in the White House and who controls Congress at the time.

David Israel

Left-Wing Idol Samantha Power to Replace Rice as UN Ambassador

Wednesday, June 5th, 2013

Human rights champion Samantha Power is slated to replace U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, whom President Barack Obama appointed as National Security adviser after Tom Donilon quit on Wednesday. Power’s nomination, unlike Rice’s appointment, requires Senate confirmation.

Rice is a long-time supporter of Obama and was in line to be Secretary of State until Republicans bashed her for incorrect reports on the terrorist attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, where the American ambassador was brutally killed.

Donilon has been rumored for several weeks as wanting to throw in the towel after five years and charges of throwing around his weight.

Both Donilon and Power are part of the “clubhouse” atmosphere in the Obama administration. Donilon’s wife Cathy Russell was a former chief of staff to Jill Biden and is the State Department’s ambassador at large for global women’s issues.

Power, a Catholic, is married to Cass Sunstein, born into a Jewish family and a controversial liberal, whose views include abolishing marriage. He was appointed as President Obama’s information czar, and both he and his wife Samantha scare the dickens out of conservatives with their views that principles of democracy should not interfere with defending human rights, especially of those who are safely far away and do not challenge American influence.

Rice, during her term as Ambassador, said she spends an overwhelming amount of her time defending Israel, which basically meant voting against the Palestinian Authority’s insult to the United States’ efforts to force Israeli concessions towards what was supposed by a PA compromise for establishing itself as an independent country.

With Rice as National Security Adviser and Power as Ambassador, if confirmed, human rights will likely be a top issue.

Both women also are incredibly aggressive in their views of using force, Power much more so. Rice supported a NATO invasion of Libya, and Power has supported military intervention in both Libya and the Balkans.

And Israel.

Power has served as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Multilateral Affairs and Human Rights.

Her views, and those of husband Cass Sunstein, are wildly supportive of human rights, so much so that she said in a televised interview in 2002 that it might be necessary to bring in the U.S. Army to police Israel.

She has since regretted her remarks, denying that she really meant what she said. Ditto concerning her foul-language attack, which cannot be published here, in which she called Hillary Clinton a “monster” during the Obama campaign for the nomination as Democratic presidential candidate in 2008.

Her statement about Israel, which can be seen in the video below, was made after her interviewer fed her a soft-glove question that if she were a presidential adviser, how would she respond to events in Israel if “at least if one party or another [starts] looking like they might be moving toward genocide?”

The “one party or another” obviously is Israel, since Palestinian Authority terror is politically correct as a “human right,” so long as it does not spill into the streets of America.

Power welcomed the opportunity to express her views that the United States needs to make the Middle East safe for the United States, even if it means “alienating a domestic constituency of tremendous political and financial import [Read: Israel]…or investing…billions of dollars, not in servicing Israel’s military, but actually investing in the new state of Palestine.”

She then dropped her bombshell that “external intervention” is needed.

“Unfortunately, imposition of a solution on unwilling parties is dreadful. It’s a terrible thing to do; it’s deference to [leaders] who are fundamentally politically destined to destroy the lives of their own people.”

She is not partial to Palestinian Authority Arabs.

Power is best known for her efforts to increase public awareness of genocide and human rights abuses, particularly in the Darfur conflict.

Although a darling of the left-wing, she is not shy to advocate all of the methods associated with tyrants.

Power has an itchy trigger finger.

She has said, “My prescription would be that the level of American and international engagement would ratchet up commensurate with the abuse on the ground.”

She also predicted before Obama became president that after taking office, he would change his mind on his promise to pull American combat troops out of Iraq. So far, her prediction was wrong, but considering the wave of terror that is engulfing Iraq, “It’s not over until it’s over.”

Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu

Unanswered Questions About Susan Rice

Wednesday, March 13th, 2013

President Obama reportedly has decided to appoint U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice as his next national security adviser. Since the national security adviser is a member of the president’s executive staff, Ambassador Rice would not need to be confirmed by the Senate, as would a nominee for a cabinet-level office such as secretary of state. (It will be recalled that worries over her prospects at being confirmed by the Senate derailed her widely expected nomination as secretary of state).

Given that the national security adviser has the ear of the president and in most administrations is an enormously significant member of the foreign policy team, salient parts of Ambassador Rice’s record warrant scrutiny.

There still are serious, unanswered questions concerning Ms. Rice’s role in the aftermath of last year’s terrorist attack on the American consulate in Benghazi that resulted in the deaths of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans. Since that time it has been learned that the administration knew almost at the outset that the attack was a well-planned operation of Islamist terrorists. Yet officials initially claimed the attack was a spontaneous reaction to an anti-Muslim video. Indeed, Ambassador Rice touted the notion of a spontaneous mob action for several days after the event despite the evidence to the contrary.

On what basis did Ms. Rice promote the false storyline? Did she knowingly mislead the public or was she duped? These are important questions about someone who would advise the leader of the free world on a daily basis.

In terms of Israel, we continue to be dismayed by her performance at the U.N. Security Council in February 2011, when she cast the U.S. veto of an Arab-initiated resolution condemning Israeli settlement expansion. President Obama had said early on that the U.S. would not go along with it and if necessary, block the measure by voting against it. (Because the U.S. is a permanent member of the Security Council, this meant the measure could not pass no matter how many affirmative votes were cast by others.)

A video of that Security Council session shows a visibly upset Ambassador Rice as she cast the negative vote. Her body language and facial expressions strongly suggest she was doing something she really didn’t want to. And most of her speech was characterized by a lambasting of Israel for its settlement activity.

One excerpt:

[W]e reject in the strongest terms the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity. For more than four decades, Israeli settlement activity in territories occupied in 1967 has undermined Israel’s security and corroded hopes for peace and stability in the region. Continued settlement activity violates Israel’s international commitments, devastates trust between the parties, and threatens the prospects for peace….

While we agree with our fellow Council members – and indeed, with the wider world – about the folly and illegitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity, we think it unwise for this Council to attempt to resolve the core issues that divide Israelis and Palestinians. We therefore regrettably have opposed this draft resolution.

And then there were the instances when she snubbed Israel. She skipped Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech to the U.N. in September 2012. She was not present during the UN debate over the Goldstone Report and left it to her deputy to read a statement from the Obama administration opposing it. She was also absent from the UN Security Council in 2011 when the U.S. opposed Palestinian efforts to declare statehood at the United Nations, again relying on a deputy to read an administration statement.

To be sure, Ambassador Rice has her defenders in the pro-Israel community who cite her many efforts defending Israel against the institutionalized demonization that is part of everyday life at the U.N. But that doesn’t quite alleviate our concern over her apparent embrace of the Palestinian narrative on the core issues of the Arab-Israel conflict – even when the president seems to be leaning the other way.

Editorial Board

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/editorial/unanswered-questions-about-susan-rice/2013/03/13/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: