web analytics
November 30, 2015 / 18 Kislev, 5776
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘United States’

Cruz: Kerry Should Disavow Offensive Falsehoods Against Israel or Resign

Friday, October 16th, 2015

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), a presidential candidate and a long-time critic of the current administration’s mishandling of Israel and the entire Middle East policy, called on U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry to either retract his false claims that Israel has been guilty of “acts of terror” or resign, in a statement released on Thursday evening, Oct. 16.

On Wednesday, Secretary Kerry claimed that Israel’s settlements were a source of the most recent wave of Palestinian terrorism. Then, State Department Spokesperson John Kirby said that both sides, the “Palestinians and Israel [are] equally guilty of terrorism” in a State Department press briefing, according to the release.

Cruz then went on, ““The Obama Administration is the most hostile we have seen towards the nation of Israel in our nation’s history. In the last few days, this obsessive antagonism has been on full display.

“It is utterly unacceptable that a senior official in the U.S. government would make such an unfounded slur against Israel, which has been our invaluable ally in the fight against terrorism. We must immediately and unconditionally reject the delusion that the coordinated Palestinian frenzy of bloodlust is in any way legitimate. There is no moral equivalence here between the savagery of the Palestinian terrorists and the innocent Israelis they are trying to murder.” Cruz said that Kerry and his staff have proven themselves unfit for the positions they hold, and called on Kirby to retract his “offensive assertion that Israel is ‘guilty of acts of terror’ or resign, and Sec. Kerry should immediately disavow these remarks or resign.”

Cruz’s statement also noted that the Texas Republican first called for the Secretary of State’s resignation back on April 28, 2014, when Kerry publicly “warned” that Israel could become an “apartheid state” if it did not give in to Kerry’s demands for concessions to the Palestinians.

Cruz was one of only three U.S. senators who voted against Kerry’s confirmation as Secretary of State in January, 2013.

Cabinet Minister Calls U.S. Government ‘Hostile’

Thursday, October 15th, 2015

Gilad says the State Dept. believes lies to draw false conclusions, but he does not expect an apology because the Obama administration is “hostile” to Israel.

The off-and-on irritable relationship between the United States and Israel is back into the “testy” category with frowns from Washington that Israel uses excessive violence to quell rioters and terrorists and a Cabinet minister’s labeling Washington as “hostile.”

Public Security Minister and Likud hawk Gilad Erdan, speaking on Army Radio Thursday morning, accused the State Dept. of being “misled by lies.”

He said he expects the Obama administration to “clarify” its statements,” but then added:

I don’t expect anything from the spokesmen at the State Department. The State Department has traditionally been hostile to the State of Israel.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has talked himself into trouble again. The JewishPress.com reported here earlier this week that he told Harvard University students that there has been a rapid growth of settlements and followed by noting “frustration” among Arabs.

As reported here this morning, Kerry’s spokesman John Kirby tried to roll back the remark but only make things worse by referring to “excessive violence.”

Errand’s response is bound to be raised at today’s daily press briefing at the State Dept., whose spokesmen have found it very difficult lately to answer questions by journalists who have finally realized that something is rotten in the Washington as well as in the Palestinian Authority

But Erdan’s use of the word “hostile” may have been out of order.

“Ignorant” would Netanyahu more appropriative.

As for excessive force, does anyone remember Ferguson?

Terror, Shmerror, State Dept Only Cares About Two State Holy Grail

Thursday, October 15th, 2015

Several things became clear during Wednesday’s U.S. State Dept. press briefing, the first half of which focused exclusively on the wave of terrorism in Israel.

First, the overriding goal for the United States of America is the creation of a Two State Solution and anything that gets in the way of that is a problem. The Two State Solution is the Holy Grail (as it were) regardless of whether that fixed goal will dramatically increase violence and further destabilize the region or not.

Second, the U.S. State Department despises the fact that increasing numbers of Jews are living beyond the “Green Line,” in Judea and Samaria. The U.S. hates this so much that official policy is to condemn Jews living and breathing in that area at least as much, if not more, than brutal murders of innocent Jewish civilians by Arab terrorists.

Third, the U.S. has so embraced the idea that the Temple Mount “belongs” to the Palestinian Arabs that it casts unarmed, non-hostile Jewish tourists or Israelis who peacefully ascend the Mount as the legitimate cause of savage murders of any Jews, anywhere. The U.S. has jettisoned the fact that Israel re-acquired control of the Temple Mount in a defensive war and simply handed over control of that area to the Arabs, in the hope and belief that members of all religions would have equal access to that site.

Throughout the first half of the Oct. 15 State Dept. press briefing, reporters sought to pin down State Department Spokesperson John Kirby on who and what the U.S. believes is responsible for the recent tsunami of terror in which Jews were shot, stabbed with kitchen knives, hunting knives, butcher knives and rammed with cars by Arab Palestinians.

The violence is condemned by the U.S., although this government refuses to assign primary blame to either party. Young Arab men and women are brutally stabbing Israeli Jews standing at bus stops, boarding buses, walking on Israeli streets? That’s bad, but, as Kirby quoted Secretary of State John Kerry, “there’s disenfranchisement, there’s disgruntlement, there is – there’s frustration on both sides that have led to this [increase in violence].”

Why this reluctance to assign blame? It is because, apparently, anything that diplomats aching for a Two State Solution see as an impediment to their goal is equally bad. This becomes apparent from watching and reading the transcripts of the endless State Dept. briefings in which the issue of terrorism or violence in Israel is raised.

More than a dozen Israeli Jews going about their lives in Israel were stabbed, shot or run over by Arab terrorists in the past few weeks alone. One 17-year old Israeli Jew stabbed four Beduoins in Dimona, Israel. That act was condemned across the spectrum in the Israeli government, including by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“Israel is a country of law and order. Those who use violence and break the law – from whatever side – will be dealt with to the fullest extent of the law,” said Netanyahu. He added that he “strongly condemns the attack against innocent Arabs.”

When Matt Lee of the Associated Press asked Kirby why it was so important that Secretary Kerry refused to assign blame, the response was:

I think he’s been very clear that he wants both sides to take affirmative actions, both in rhetoric and in action, to de-escalate the tension, to restore calm, and to try to move forward towards a two-state solution. He also recognizes, as a public servant with a long career associated with foreign affairs and the diplomatic relations of this country, that many of these issues are ages old. And when there’s a specific attack such as we’ve seen, we are not shy about calling it out. And as I said last week on – if we believe it’s terrorism, to say it’s terrorism. We’re not shy about that in terms of affixing responsibility for it. But in terms of the general scope of the violence that we’re seeing and the unrest, he’s been very clear that rather than to affix blame specifically on all of that, to try to focus on moving forward and restoring calm.

In other words, specific acts don’t matter, the only thing that matters is the Holy Grail in the distance and the desire to continue moving towards it.

In Feisty Democratic Debate Middle East Issues Not Heatedly Contested

Wednesday, October 14th, 2015

(JNi.media) It’s been noted that candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton, in her attempt to push back her major challenger, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, attacked the Senator’s positions and voting record in Tuesday night’s first Democratic presidential debate. But, overall, there were few major disagreements among all four debaters about US foreign policy in the Middle East, about which Clinton’s expertise prevailed.

CNN moderator Anderson Cooper asked former Senator and former Governor of Rhode Island Lincoln Chafee to say in 30 seconds “who or what is the greatest national security threat to the United States?”

As is typical in such debates, Chafee responded that “I just have to answer one thing that Senator Webb said about the Iran deal, because I’m a strong proponent of what President Obama — and [Webb] said that [the] Iran deal [enabled] Russia to [become more involved in the region]. No, that’s not true, Senator Webb. I respect your foreign policy chops. But Russia is aligned with Iran and with Assad and the Alawite Shias in Syria. So that Iran deal did not allow Russia to come in.

To which the former senator from Virginia Jim Webb responded “I believe that the signal that we sent to the region when the Iran nuclear deal was concluded was that we are accepting Iran’s greater position on this very important balance of power, [over] our greatest ally Israel, and the Sunnis represented by the Saudi regime … It was a position of weakness and I think it encouraged the [Russian military engagement] that we’ve seen in the past several weeks.

Cooper repeated his question to Chafee, “what is the greatest national security threat to the United States?”

The governor’s answer was not the stuff of which eloquent quotes are made. He said, “It’s certainly the chaos in the Middle East. There’s no doubt about it.” Then, at Cooper’s coaxing, he added: “And it all started with the Iraq invasion,” for which he blamed Clinton, who, as the junior Senator from New York, in 2002 voted to allow President Bush to invade Iraq over false evidence.

Former Governor Martin O’Malley, in his turn, said, “I believe that [a] nuclear Iran remains the biggest threat, along with the threat of ISIL; climate change, of course, makes cascading threats even more (inaudible).

Former Secretary Clinton, asked what’s the greatest national security threat the US is facing, said, “I think it has to be continued threat from the spread of nuclear weapons, nuclear material that can fall into the wrong hands. I know the terrorists are constantly seeking it, and that’s why we have to stay vigilant, but also united around the world to prevent that.”

In Senator Sanders’ view, the Middle East does not pose the biggest threat to America, arguing instead that “the scientific community is telling us that if we do not address the global crisis of climate change, transform our energy system away from fossil fuel to sustainable energy, the planet that we’re going to be leaving our kids and our grandchildren may well not be habitable. That is a major crisis.”

Former Senator Webb said that “our greatest long-term strategic challenge is our relation with China. Our greatest day-to-day threat is cyber warfare against this country. Our greatest military-operational threat is resolving the situations in the Middle East.”

The Middle East came up once more in a significant way during the debate when Cooper asked the candidates to name one way their administration would not be merely a third Obama term.

Chafee answered, “Certainly, ending the wars. We’ve got to stop these wars. You have to have a new dynamic, a new paradigm. We just spent a half-billion dollars arming and training soldiers, the rebel soldiers in Syria. They quickly join the other side…”

Cooper interrupted: “President Obama’s generals right now are suggesting keeping troops in Afghanistan after the time he wanted them pulled out. Would you keep them there?”

Chafee insisted he wanted to his answer first, reminding the audience that the US has “just bombed a hospital. We’ve had drone strikes that hit civilian weddings. So I would change … our approach to the Middle East. We need a new paradigm in the Middle East.”

Former Governor O’Malley said, on the difference between his and Obama’s administrations: “I would follow through on the promise that the American people thought we made as [a] Democratic Party, to protect the Main Street economy from recklessness on Wall Street. I would push to separate out these too-big-to-jail, too-big-to-fail banks, and put in place Glass-Steagall, a modern Glass-Steagall that creates a firewall so that this wreckage of our economy can never happen again.”

Former Secretary Clinton said, “Well, I think that’s pretty obvious. I think being the first woman president would be quite a change from the presidents we’ve had up until this point, including President Obama.” As to policy differences, she added: “Well, there’s a lot that I would like to do to build on the successes of President Obama, but also, as I’m laying out, to go beyond. And that’s in my economic plans, how I would deal with the prescription drug companies, how I would deal with college [student loans], how I would deal with a full range of issues that I’ve been talking about throughout this campaign to go further.”

Senator Sanders answered, “I have a lot of respect for president Obama. I have worked with him time and time again on many, many issues. But here’s where I do disagree. I believe that the power of corporate America, the power of Wall Street, the power of the drug companies, the power of the corporate media is so great that the only way we really transform America and do the things that the middle class and working class desperately need is through a political revolution when millions of people begin to come together and stand up and say: Our government is going to work for all of us, not just a handful of billionaires.”

After much applause in response to Sanders’ message, Cooper turned to former Senator Webb, asking “how would you not be a third term for Obama?”

Webb said, “I got a great deal of admiration and affection for Senator Sanders, but I — Bernie, I don’t think the revolution’s going to come. And I don’t think the Congress is going to pay for a lot of this stuff. And if there would be a major difference between my administration and the Obama administration, it would be in the use of executive authority. I came up as a committee counsel in the Congress, used to put dozens of bills through the House floor every year as a committee counsel on the Veterans Committee. I have a very strong feeling about how our federal system works and how we need to lead and energize the congressional process instead of allowing these divisions to continue to paralyze what we’re doing. So I would lead — working with both parties in the Congress and working through them in the traditional way that our Constitution sets.”

Adelson Warming Up to Rubio as GOP Presidential Candidate

Wednesday, October 14th, 2015

Casino mogul Sheldon Adelson is about to throw his weight, financial and otherwise, behind Florida Senator Marco Rubio as this favorite for the Republican party’s presidential nominee, Politico reported.

Rubio campaigned in Las Vegas last week and stopped off at Adelson’s casino office for a brief meeting, where Adelson lavishly praised the young senator.

Rubio’s campaign manager and two of Adelson’s advisers also attended the meeting.

Politico reported that sources close to the casino billionaire said that a formal endorsement for Rubio may come as soon as the end of this month,

Almost every GOP presidential hopeful wants Adelson’s financial support, although his backing does not guarantee success. He threw away approximately $70 million in 2012 when he backed Georgia politician Newt Gingrich for president.

But Rubio is not deepening only on Adelson. Investor Charles Schwab, whose estimated net worth of $6.4 is far less than Adelson’s but still more than that of Donald Trump, privately has said he is interested in backing Rubio.

US Condemns Terror Attacks without ‘Balanced Blame’ [video]

Tuesday, October 13th, 2015

The State Dept. Tuesday issued a rare condemnation of terror “against Israelis citizens’ without directly mentioning injuries to Palestinian Authority and Israeli Arab terrorists and rioters, who are called “civilians” by Western leaders and media.

Spokesman John Kirby said:

The United States condemns in the strongest terms today’s terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians, which resulted in the murder of three Israelis and left numerous others wounded.

He added, “We mourn any loss of innocent life, Israeli or Palestinian, but the statement was a clear change from the usual “balanced” statements that express sorrow for victims on “both sides.”

Kirby added the routine comments that the United States is “in regular contact with the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority [and] remain[s] deeply concerned about escalating tensions and urge all sides to take affirmative steps to restore calm and prevent actions that would further escalate tensions.

More important is what Kirby did not say.

He did not call on “both sides” to prevent injuries, which would imply that Israel must tolerate rioters and use limited force against terrorists.

Even more significant was the omission of any reference to the Temple Mount and the Al Aqsa mosque, which is at the heart of the Arab campaign that accuses Israel of trying to prevent Muslims from praying there while supposedly encouraging “settlers” to destroy it.

Israel indeed has prevented Muslims from using the mosque as a launching pad for attacking police and Jews, as well as non-Jews, who visit the site. That is not exactly what the value of “freedom of worship” means.

The change in tone by the United States is a sign that the traditionally successful Arab lie of playing the victim is not going to work this time.

The Palestinian Authority already is churning out the same warped reports that Hamas previously has fabricated to suck the sympathy and anti-Zionist venom of the European Union and United Nations, if not to a lesser degree the State Dept. and the Obama administration.

Arab media are working overtime to tell the world that more than 1,000 Arabs have been wounded by Israelis forces, compared with only a few dozen Jews who have been stabbed or shot by terrorists,. It has headlined that more than 30 Arabs have been killed, compared with less than a dozen Israelis victims.

It wants to convince everyone that it is disproportionate when more terrorists are killed than Jews.

The official Palestinian Authority still calls the terrorists “martyrs”, and the Palestinian Authority’s official WAFA website today was full of reports with headlines such as:

Israeli Police Kills Teenager, Injures another near Jerusalem.

Israeli Police Fatally shoot 3 Palestinians, Critically Injure another in Jerusalem.

It also reported that Israeli officials “claimed” that Arabs had staged the attacks.

Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah has called on the European Union “to exert pressure on Israel to immediately end its military escalation against Palestinians in the occupied territories.”

He also “called for an end to settlers’ extremism and their daily violations in Jerusalem and the West Bank against vulnerable communities and sacred and holy sites.”

Hamdallah then urged “the United Nations Security Council to take immediate action to stop the grave Israeli escalations and provide international protection to the Palestinian people.”

UNRWA, as usual, has cooperated, and said that Israeli forces are using “excessive use of force [that] “may be contrary to international law enforcement standards.”

It made no mention of Palestinian Authority or Israeli Arab murders and attempted murders of Jews.

The United States is not buying it, and it is questionable how much the European Union will swallow it.

EU Federica Mogherini said earlier this week, “Far from preventing the resumption of a political dialogue, the latest tensions should push both parties to work together for the sake of their people.”

Lieberman: Let the Police Shoot like American Cops Shoot

Tuesday, October 13th, 2015

Former Foreign Minister Avigdor “Tough Guy” Lieberman came out Tuesday with a 4-step plan to combat the current wave of terror, including open-fire orders similar to those in the United States.

A large number of the Palestinian Authority and Jerusalem Arab terrorists who have attacked Jews the past two weeks have been shot dead by security forces, but several of them still are alive.

A recent Israeli television poll showed that Lieberman is most favored by the public to handle the security situation. People are unhappy with Netanyahu, which usually is the case no matter what.

They have even less of an appetite for Opposition leader Yitzchak Herzog, whose speeches recently have made him sound like a male version of Tzipi Livni. In other words, pathetic.

Lieberman, who heads the Yisrael Beiteinu party that was severally punished in the elections this past March, also suggested three other steps that the Security Cabinet should take:

— No terrorist should be left alive.

— Cancel citizenship of any Jerusalem Arab involved in terror; and

— Declare army rule in every place necessary to stop terror.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/lieberman-let-the-police-shoot-like-american-cops-shoot/2015/10/13/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: