web analytics
September 2, 2015 / 18 Elul, 5775
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘Netanyahu’

Israel to Beef Up Security in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria

Monday, August 31st, 2015

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu told cabinet ministers at the weekly government meeting Monday he plans to increase security in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria due to the rising Arab violence in those areas.

It is not clear how this may or may not affect security arrangements on the Temple Mount.

Netanyahu said that among the security measures to be addressed with be an increase in the number of forces on the ground, and additional armor protection for patrol vehicles in order to raise the level of safety for Israeli citizens.

There has been an increase in the number of terror attacks aimed at Israeli civilians and security forces over the past several months – not only in Judea and Samaria, but in Jerusalem as well.

Data released in a report this month by the Construction Ministry showed there were 580 Arab attacks against civilians and security personnel just in three sections of the Old City of Jerusalem during the months of July and August.

Not included in those data are the number of attacks in other parts of the capital, and the number of attacks in Judea and Samaria for the same period.

Just yesterday, (Sunday, August 30) a 46-year-old Israeli Jewish resident of Judea and Samaria barely escaped alive after at least five shots were fired at his vehicle in a drive-by terror attack near the Jit Junction in Samaria.

Palestinian Arab terrorists fired at his car from a passing vehicle near the Jewish community of Kedumim early Sunday afternoon, according to the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit.

The driver miraculously escaped with a light gunshot wound to his hand. The terrorists, meanwhile, were seen to be driving on into territory controlled solely by the Palestinian Authority, according to a report broadcast on Israel Radio. The IDF is investigating.

Hillary Clinton Adviser Recommended Making Bibi’s Life ‘Uneasy’

Sunday, August 2nd, 2015

(JNi.media) Does Hillary Clinton intend to make reaching a two-state solution for Israel and the Palestinians a key target of her administration? And if she does, will she adhere to advisers who urge her to lean on the Israeli PM to force results out of him?

Former national security adviser to President Bill Clinton Sandy Berger in 2009 advised the newly appointed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to make Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s political life “uneasy.”

The release of the email was part of a new batch of messages released Friday by the State Department.

His email to Hillary Clinton advised her on how to deal with Bibi if he insisted on being “the obstacle” in negotiations with the Palestinians.

Here is the full text of the email:

“From: Berger, Samuel R.

“Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 7:22 PM

“To: H

“Subject: Bibi/Abu Mazen

“Seems the best for a bad situation.

“Moves the public discussion from settlement freeze to final status. Keeps some pressure on the parties. And seems like you will play a more public role, which is good. (You have more credibility on both sides than anyone).

“Going forward, if Bibi continues to be the obstacle, you will need to find the ground from which you can make his politics uneasy. I think you can do that even with current concerns in Israel about US posture. But it will be easier as we rebuild trust so that our future admonitions are accepted. (An HRC trip there to reframe perceptions?).

“Finally, need to be mindful of Abu Mazen’s politics. Taking a lot of criticism for meeting with Bibi without settlement freeze.

“Sandy “This is written from my Blackberry.”

In another email just released, dated September 19, 2009, Berger repeats the advice on putting the squeeze on Netanyahu:

“The objective is to try shift the fulcrum of our current relations with Bibi from settlements — where he thinks he has the upper hand — to ground where there is greater understanding in israel of the American position and where we can make him uneasy about incurring our displeasure..”

On September 23, 2009, President Barack Obama told the UN Assembly it was time to establish a Palestinian State alongside Israel:

“The time has come — the time has come to re-launch negotiations without preconditions that address the permanent status issues: security for Israelis and Palestinians, borders, refugees, and Jerusalem. And the goal is clear: Two states living side by side in peace and security — a Jewish state of Israel, with true security for all Israelis; and a viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967, and realizes the potential of the Palestinian people. (Applause.)”

In the next few days, some reporter is likely to ask presidential candidate Hillary Clinton if she stands behind Sandy Berger’s advice on making Bibi’s life uncomfortable until he cries Uncle on the two-state solution. Voters should know in advance.

Netanyahu: ’24-Day Window for Inspections Really is 3 Months’

Thursday, July 30th, 2015

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu turned up the heat on Thursday to fry the nuclear deal with Iran.

He brought up new arguments against ‘ObamaDeal” and pointed out that the much-talked-about notice of 24 days before Iran must allow inspections of its nuclear facilities is actually three months.

Prime Minister Netanyahu explained during a briefing  that if Iran does not agree to allow inspections after notice of 34 days, it can delay them by appealing to a committee, which would have 30 days to discuss the issue.

If the committee does not accept the appeal, Iran could delay inspections for another 30 days by involving the U.N. Security Council.

The delays would give Iran almost 90 days to cover up activity that violates the agreement.

He appealed to Congress to bring out a veto-proof majority against the deal, saying that such action would “avert the greatest danger of Iran becoming a legitimate nuclear threshold power in 10 years.

He added:

The more a person learns about the agreement, the more he opposes it.

Prime Minister Netanyahu also stressed that the Sunni Muslim countries, headed by Saudi Arabia, are “outraged by the agreement.”

 

Kerry Skips over Israel in Middle East Trip

Tuesday, July 28th, 2015

When President Barack Obama says Israel his back, does he mean he is turning his back?

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is conveniently skipping over America’s closest ally this week during a trip that will take him to neighboring Egypt as well as Egypt, Qatar, Singapore, Malaysia and Vietnam.

The reason or skipping over Israel is obvious: The Obama administration’s single-minded objective right now is to make sure Congress does not reject “ObamaDeal” with a veto-proof majority.

President Obama’s declaration that he wants an “honest discussion” on the controversial agreement with Iran has its limits. After Kerry was told by Republican senators last week that he was “fleeced” and “bamboozled” by Iran, he does not want to walk into lion’s den.

But the State Dept., of course, has a different version of why Kerry is not stopping over Israel.

Spokesman John Kirby explained to nosy reporters at Monday’s daily press briefing:

It’s just not part of the parameters for this trip. It’s not – it wasn’t a deliberate decision not to go. There’s an awful lot to cover in eight days, as you can see. It’s literally – it’s an around-the-world trip.

He has been in touch with Prime Minister Netanyahu many, many times over the last several weeks in terms of discussing the deal and the parameters of it. So it’s not as if we aren’t in constant communication with Israeli counterparts about this.

The last call that I see to the Prime Minister took place on Thursday the 16th of July.

A journalist pointed out that was more than week ago, bur Kirby maintained, “Yeah, but that’s not that long ago.”

“Constant communication” is subjective.

The truth is that Kerry and Prime Minister Netanyahu do not have much to talk about. They can argue until they are blue in the face, but it is not going to get anyone anywhere, even though it would be a boon for the media.

Kerry may not find Egypt much friendlier, but at least he can count on Cairo not enabling the freedom of expression and speech that he doesn’t like in Israel, unless it is in his favor.

He will be in Cairo on Sunday for a session of the U.S.-Egypt Strategic Dialogue, a forum that “reaffirms the United States’ longstanding and enduring partnership with Egypt,” in the words of the State Dept.

That is the same phrase the United States uses for all of its wonderful friends, such as Israel.

On Monday, Kerry will meet with Gulf States officials in Doha, where Saudi Arabia will take the lead to lecture him in private what Netanyahu says in public: The deal with Iran is suicidal, and the war on the Islamic State (ISIS) needs to be more aggressive.

Former Saudi Ambassador to US: Gulf States Willing to Attack Iran

Tuesday, July 21st, 2015

A Saudi prince’s reaction to the nuclear agreement with Iran makes last week’s White House’s rosy spin of official reaction by Saudi Arabia to “ObamaDeal” look like an act that should never have gone on stage.

Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan, former Ambassador to the United States, warned that the nuclear agreement with Iran “will wreak havoc in the Middle East” and that Gulf Powers are willing to attack Iranian nuclear sites, even if the United States is not interested.

One of King Salman’s first actions after taking the throne earlier this year was to yank Prince Bandar off the National Security Council, but he still is an advisor and an important voice, one that totally contradicts what President Barack Obama would like people to believe about Riyadh’s reaction the nuclear agreement.

White House Press Secretary, after a meeting between Saudi foreign minister Adel al-Jubeir and President Obama, glossed over Saudi skepticism of ObamaDeal and blah-blahed “about the important bilateral relationship that exists between the United States and Saudi Arabia.”

Believe that and then believe that President Obama has “an unbreakable bond with Israel.”

Prince Bandar’s comments to Beirut Daily Star and also reported by the Times of London were the first public criticism from Saudi Arabia, and he was straight to the point.

He warned that ObamaDeal will “wreak havoc” and then bluntly asserted:

Saudi Arabia and the Gulf powers are prepared to take military action without American support after the Iran nuclear deal

Prince Bandar is not a small voice. He was ambassador to Washington for 20 years, and MRC TV noted that it is unlikely that he would have conducted a major newspaper interview without King Salman’s blessing.
The prince’s view of the Obama administration sounds like Israel’s when it comes to relying on the United States.

“People in my region now are relying on God’s will, and consolidating their local capabilities and analysis with everybody else except our oldest and most powerful ally,” Prince Bandar told the Beirut newspaper.

He was even more candid in an article he wrote for the London-based Arabic news Web site Elaph, where he compared ObamaDeal with Bill Clinton’s agreement with North Korea, which supposedly would keep its word and not develop a nuclear bomb.

But Prince Bandar can forgive Clinton because “it turned out that the strategic foreign policy analysis was wrong and there was a major intelligence failure,” according to translation of interview provided by The Washington Post.

He said that he is “absolutely confident he would not have made that decision” if he had all the facts.
Prince Bandar said the case of Iran is different because:

The strategic foreign policy analysis, the national intelligence information, and America’s allies in the region’s intelligence all predict not only the same outcome of the North Korean nuclear deal but worse – with the billions of dollars that Iran will have access to.

He quoted a phrase first made by Henry Kissinger: America’s enemies should fear America, but America’s friends should fear America more.”

It sounds like Saudi Arabia and Israel are on the same page.

Zarif Rejoicing: Iran Deal ‘Ruined’ Israeli Plans Against Iran’

Tuesday, July 21st, 2015

(JNi.media) Since they reached an agreement with the West, which has just been approved by the UN Security Council, the official Iranian media (is there any other) have been celebrating the regime’s victory.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said in parliament on Tuesday that his country’s nuclear agreement with the 5+1 powers has “ruined the Zionist regime security plan against the Islamic republic.”

He also said that “Iran has further declared to everyone that its nuclear enrichment, facilities, research and development would not be stopped.”

Zarif went to the parliament with the head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization Ali Akbar Salehi to present the text of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

“The prolonged and breathtaking nuclear agreement between Iran and the six powers indicated that the Islamic republic would negotiate but cannot be blackmailed,” Zarif said, pointing to the Israelis’ anger at the deal as an indication that “Iran is a powerful country in the region and across the globe.”

Zarif declared that Iran’s successful nuclear negotiations mean that “nobody would dare to threaten the Iranians.”

In a similar vain, last week, the leader of Iran’s Jewish community Haroun Yashayaei, published an article titled “Your Time Is Over Mr. Netanyahu,” focusing on the central concern of the Iranian regime, namely, will the Israelis attack.

“The Israeli prime minister was daydreaming and when the Americans had announced that the military option against Iran was no longer on the table as negotiations were the best solution for Iran’s nuclear issue, Netanyahu made a fuss by claiming that, even without the support of the United States, his army will carry out a military attack on Iran,” Yashayaei wrote, noting that “even when his own military commanders told Netanyahu that realization of his dream was neither possible, nor proportionate to the capabilities of the Israeli regime and army of Israel, he still didn’t understand that his time is over.”

Yashayaei further called Netanyahu “so narcissistic that none of these developments can deter him from following his delusional goals.”

So they’re still a little worried.

Obama: ‘Don’t Judge Me on Whether Deal Ends Iran’s Aggression’

Wednesday, July 15th, 2015

President Barack Obama told Thomas Freidman in an interview that he is confident Bibi will not be able to convince Congress to torpedo the agreement with Iran but also admitted that the deal has nothing to do with Iran’s aggression towards Israel.

Friedman, The New York Times columnist who is President Obama’s favorite spokesman, talked with the President for 45 minutes after the agreement was announced Tuesday.

The interview reveals inherent contradictions between President Obama’s understanding of foreign relations and his solutions for them. It shows that the President, like his predecessors, sees Israel’s security through its own eyes even though he believes he can put himself momentarily in the shoes of Iran.

He also likes to think he can pull strings that will determine how other countries will act, just like he encouraged the Arab Spring rebellion in Egypt to bring about democracy and respect for human rights, which still is waiting in the wings along with 72 virgins.

President Obama told Friedman that by helping Iran strengthen economically, perhaps – in his wishful thinking – the Iranian people will be able to influence the regime that “it’s not necessary for them to be great to denigrate Israel or threaten Israel or engage in Holocaust denial or anti-Semitic activity.”

Obama also thinks that once one of Iran’s neighboring countries is strong economically and militarily, it makes it more unlikely that Iran will attack it.

He was referring t Muslim countries. The Jewish State of Israel is a different matter.

President Obama said:

[Iran] has an authoritarian theocracy in charge that is anti-American, anti-Israeli, anti-Semitic [and] sponsors terrorism.

Hezbollah has tens of thousands of missiles that are pointed toward Israel. They are becoming more sophisticated. The interdiction of those weapon flows has not been as successful as it needs to be…

Iran is acting in an unconstructive way, in a dangerous way in these circumstances. What I’ve simply said is that we have to keep our eye on the ball here, which is that Iran with a nuclear weapon will do more damage, and we will be in a much worse position to prevent it.

That is going to be one of Obama’s loudest arguments when defending the agreement in Congress, but if he lived in Israel, he would not be so blasé about the ability of the Iranian-backed Hezbollah army to bring Israel to its knees with a massive missile attack.

The agreement may or may not stop Iran from getting its hands on a nuclear weapon, but by all accounts, it will pump $150 billion into Iran’s coffers. Not much of that money is going to be used to implement equality for women or for opening up an embassy in Israel.

By fueling terrorism, Obama is allowing himself, or his successor, to force Israel to beg for American help to prevent a threat it created, so Prime Minister Netanyahu better think twice when he tried to fight against the bill in Congress.

Obama stated:

Perhaps he thinks he can further influence the congressional debate, and I’m confident we’re going to be able to uphold this deal and implement it without Congress preventing that.

But after that’s done…we then ask some very practical questions: How do we prevent Hezbollah from acquiring more sophisticated weapons? How do we build on the success of Iron Dome, which the United States worked with Israel to develop and has saved Israeli lives?

First, he creates a greater threat to Israel be fueling Iranian-backed terror and then he wants to ask Israel how “we” can solve it.

Do you want money for an Iron Dome? Be nice. Maybe freeze settlements.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/dont-judge-me-on-whether-deal-ends-irans-aggression/2015/07/15/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: