For Jews, "The Trust is Gone"

by Ed Koch

I consider the Obama administration's recent actions against the Israeli government to be outrageous and a breach of trust. I refer to the denunciations by Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other administration officials The world knows what happened; nevertheless, I will try to put it into context.

Vice President Joe Biden was in Jerusalem to convey to the Israelis and the world that the United States government is committed to protecting and assuring the security of Israel from attack. While he was there, an Israeli government minister announced that the Israeli government had authorized the construction of 1,600 apartments in East Jerusalem to be occupied by Jews. Currently, 280,000 Jews live in East Jerusalem, and these apartments were to be added to an existing complex, built on land owned by Jews; about 250,000 Jews live on the West Bank outside of Jerusalem.

The timing of the Israeli government's announcement was unfortunate and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu apologized for it, but it did not mark any change in the Israeli government's policy. That policy is and has long been to allow construction of homes for Jews in East Jerusalem.

Now a little history. In 1947, the United Nations passed a resolution authorizing the creation of a Jewish state 
Jordan conquered East Jerusalem, separating it from its Western half.
within the British Mandate of Palestine. After it declared independence in 1948, Israel was immediately attacked by the combined armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Although Israel repelled the attack, Jordan conquered East Jerusalem, separating it from its Western half. Ultimately, a cease fire was arranged by the U.N. and for the next 19 years until 1967, Jordan occupied East Jerusalem, including the old city, which historically had been the capital of King David's ancient kingdom.

In 1967, the Arab armies of Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria again sought to destroy the State of Israel, but Israel prevailed in six days and conquered the Jordanian-held East Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Sinai Peninsula and the Gaza Strip. During the 19 years that Jordan occupied East Jerusalem, it expelled all of the Jews living in what was historically the Jewish Quarter, and literally destroyed every synagogue and the homes of the Jews. When Israel reunited all of Jerusalem, Jews were, of course, allowed to live in any part of the city, and today, more than a quarter of a million Jews live in East Jerusalem. Numerous Arabs live there as well.

For quite some time and certainly since the Gaza War, the Palestinian Authority has broken off direct negotiations with Israel which had been ongoing since about 1993, in an effort to create two states, one Jewish and one Palestinian, living side-by-side in peace. This so-called two-state solution always seemed out of reach, notwithstanding the efforts of Presidents Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush to jumpstart negotiations.

President Obama has sought to revive the negotiations between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority. He called on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to assist by committing Israel to stop building new apartments in East Jerusalem and new settlements on the West Bank. In a move that Hillary Clinton, according to The New York Times, praised as "unprecedented," Netanyahu agreed to a ten-month settlement moratorium on the West Bank. However, he refused to stop Jews from living in any part of East Jerusalem, which is considered by Israelis to be an inseparable part of their capital. Both the Palestinian Authority and the U.S. government, ultimately accepted Netanyahu's offer, albeit grudgingly, and the Palestinian Authority agreed to engage in indirect talks through the American mediator George Mitchell.

Given this history, it was a shock to the Israeli and American supporters of Israel to have Joe Biden, a great friend of Israel, make the extraordinary harsh statement he made denouncing the future construction of 1,600 apartments in East Jerusalem. The Vice President's condemnation was even more baffling because, as The Times of March 12th reported, "he spent most [of the previous day] expressing his personal devotion to Israel, as well as the Obama administration's ‘iron-clad commitment to Israel's security.'" As someone high in political life once said to me after I mentioned to him the violation of his iron-clad commitment to me on a subject involving the mass transit fares in New York City, "Next time, get it in steel. Iron breaks."

But even more disturbing than the Vice President's reaction were the comments and implicit threats voiced by Hillary Clinton in a telephone conversation she had with Prime Minister Netanyahu, described in The Times of
Humpty Dumpty has been broken and the absolute trust needed between allies is no longer there.
March 12th. "In a tense, 43-minute phone call on Friday morning, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Israel's plan for new housing units for Jews in East Jerusalem sent a ‘deeply negative signal' about Israeli-American relations."

Under President Clinton and George W. Bush, Israeli Prime Ministers have offered the Palestinians a state of their own on virtually the entire West Bank and Gaza, with land swaps to compensate for any portion of the West Bank that would remain in Israel, but those offers were rejected by the Palestinians.

What is most disturbing about the truly harsh and inflammatory rhetoric of both Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton directed at the government of Israel, is that it is speculated President Obama himself may have ordered Biden and Clinton to make the statements they made.

The Times of March 16th reported, "...the President was outraged by the announcement of 1,600 housing units in an ultra-Orthodox neighborhood in East Jerusalem during Mr. Biden's visit, administration officials said. Mr. Obama was deeply involved in the strategy and planning for Mr. Biden's visit and orchestrated the response from Mr. Biden and Mrs. Clinton after it went awry, these officials said." President Obama and his administration's overly harsh public reaction to the construction in East Jerusalem appears to have emboldened Israel's enemies and provided a cover for their extremist views. It has also created a serious crisis of confidence among the Israeli public that it can depend on this administration for its security.

There will be an effort this week when Prime Minister Netanyahu meets with President Obama to mend fences. There will be huggy-kissy pictures with Hillary and handshakes by Bibi Netanyahu with Joe Biden and the President, but the relations will never be the same again. Humpty Dumpty has been broken and the absolute trust needed between allies is no longer there. How sad it is for the supporters of Israel who put their trust in President Obama.

Ed Koch is the former Mayor of new York City and a liberal Democrat.

Liars.

Rep. James Clyburn, Democrat House Whip, suggests that GOP leaders are giving aid and comfort to terrorists and racists (aka Tea Party activists):



Really? In this country you have the right (still) to say anything you want. But as a public official--and a member of the leadership of the governing party at that-- you also have the responsibility to refrain from outrageous and incendiary allegations without a shred of evidence.

Believe me, if there was any evidence that Republicans were behind the threats that Democrat congressmen say they have received, we would have seen it by now.  But then again, with liberals it is the seriousness of the charge that counts, not the quality of the evidence.  So the charges--lies, actually-- get repeated by other Democrats and amplified by the media wing of the Democrat party.

You'd think the Democrats would be so happy their monstrous legislation passed that they'd be on all the cable shows talking it up.  But no.  Instead they are all over the airways accusing Americans scared and angry about the direction they have taken the country of being kooks, racists and terrorists.  Could it be that they are more comfortable attacking ordinary Americans than they are defending their votes to pass this wretched bill?

Since members of Congress have received death threats since time immemorial, why all of a sudden this hand-wringing over the issue?  And why suddenly accuse the GOP of inciting this so-called spate of violent threats?  My guess is that they know the lapdog media will try to put Republicans on the defensive and get them off their game of attacking the policies of the Democrats.

Based on the video I have seen of the comments of John McCain, Eric Cantor and Michael Steele, it looks like the Republicans aren't taking the bait.  In various interviews they were asked if they would urge their supporters to refrain from threats of violence.  Instead they forcefully called out the Democrats for their insidious and shameless attempts to politicize allegedly criminal behavior and to criminalize political discourse.

The only question after the Democrats year-long march to pass a bill unwanted by the majority of the American people and the attendant corruption of the political process is what, if anything, will Democrats NOT do to advance their thirst for absolute power and control?

I fear that we'll find out soon enough that the answer is "nothing."

Sometimes a picture really is worth 1000 words

"A Dark Day for Freedom in America"

What we have just witnessed is a massive slap in the face for limited government and the principle of individual responsibility. Its net result will be the erosion of freedom in America, and a further undermining of the country’s economic competitiveness. This may be a political victory for the president and his supporters in Congress, but it is in reality a defeat for America as a great power, and another Obama-led step towards US decline.


--Nile Gardiner, Foreign affairs analyst, The U.K. Telegraph

Joe Biden--In His Own Words

‘Why is it that the one ally we have in that part of the world [Israel], that we have the right to publicly chastise them? We would not do that with any other friend.”  Sen. Joe Biden, 2001

“As much as the Middle East is always on our minds, the best thing we can do is keep it off the U.S. and world press...[criticism] emboldens those in the Middle East and around the world who still harbor as their sacred goal the elimination of Israel."  Sen. Joe Biden, 2001


“It is not right for you to tell them [Israel], nor for me, what is in their best interests...we should give them the right to determine what chances they will take.” Sen Joe Biden, 2001

"I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem...The substance and timing of the announcement, particularly with the launching of proximity talks, is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I’ve had here in Israel.”
V.P. Joe Biden, March 2010

Peter Schiff: Krugman is Krazy

Or something.

Palestinian "Day of Rage" Sponsored by Obama

Oh, thats not me saying that.  Its the Palestinians:

Palestinian leaders are taking encouragement from the Obama administration's harsh campaign against Israel of the last five days as their big chance to embark on another violent war of "resistance" to Israel. They are convinced that the Jewish state is in such bad odor with its best friend, America, that it will be held responsible for the outbreak by the entire world, even if it is initiated by the Palestinians.

Do you suppose the Administration might have assumed this would be the necessary and logical consequence of its intimidation campaign against Israel?  If not, they are idiots.  If so, they are bastards.

Perfidy, Too.

Many years ago Ben Hecht, the famous Jewish playwright and Zionist, wrote a book called "Perfidy," which chronicled a libel trial in post-war Israel involving a Hungarian Zionist named Dr. Rudolf Kastner.  Dr. Kastner claimed that Machiel Greenwald, a writer, wrongfully accused Kastner of collaborating with the Nazis in Hungary, resulting in the death of thousands of Hungarian  Jews.  Kastner, who became something of a cause celebre among many of Israel's elites, lost the case, appealed, lost the appeal and then died under mysterious circumstances before he could be called to account under Israel's anti-collaboration laws.

The book is  a gripping tale of intrigue and betrayal in which Hecht lays out a case against not only Kastner but the entire left-wing Zionist political establishment for selling out the Jewish people in furtherance of its own political and ideological agenda.  In Hecht's telling, the true heroes of Israel's founding were the followers of rightist European intellectual Zev Jabotinsky, like Menachem Begin and other leaders of the Irgun.  David Ben-Gurion, Chaim Weitzman and the Jewish Agency establishment were no better than the British overlords who ruled over Palestine with a fist clenched toward the Jews, a view crystallized by the incident involving the weapons ship Altalena in 1948.

Needless to say, the book was and remains controversial.  Some suggest that facts revealed in the decades since the book was published tend to support Hecht's stark accusations of the Left's collaborations with the Nazis.  Others, including most American mainstream Jewish intellectuals and organizations, reject that charge strenuously, arguing that the real "perfidy" was in Hecht's imaginative rewriting of history to suit his own rightwing political agenda.  (Hecht had been reviled by the Jewish establishment ever since--over their objections-- he joined with Hillel Kook (aka Peter Bergson) in the 1940s to pressure the U.S. government to take more aggressive actions to save European Jewry from the Nazi death machine).

The book was immediately banned in Israel.  It is almost impossible to find in libraries, and its subject matter has been off limits for discussion in polite, elite circles for decades.  One cannot help but wonder: if the historical narrative presented in "Perfidy" was as inventively fictional as Hecht's detractors suggest, why did the Jewish Establishment go to such lengths to hide it from public view and analysis?

I mention all this because the public reaction this past week of the American government to the announcement by Israel of its intent to build 1600 units in the Jerusalem community of Ramat Shlomo carries a stench that is reminiscent of the sort of political betrayal by putative allies which was the subject of "Perfidy."  The week's events present a shocking example of how the United States of America treats one of its most faithful allies even while it bows and appeases it enemies.  Even the Jewish elites have taken notice of what appears to be an intentional ratcheting up by the Obama Administration of diplomatic hostilities with Israel. 

By all accounts, the Interior Ministry's announcement of the planned construction caught visiting V.P. Joe Biden off guard, and reportedly even the Prime Minister was surprised by the timing, which is not hard to believe given Israel's fractious political climate.  Still,  Biden's reaction was

swift and severe, if not unprecedented.  In a statement drafted by the White House, Biden "condemned" Israel for its decision and accused Israel of "undermining the trust" needed for continued discussion with the Palestinians.

In pure diplomatic terms, the statement is an outrage, and an intended one.  The term "condemn" is used sparingly in public diplomacy, and typically against a nation's adversaries.  A case in point: in December, after almost a year's worth of provocation and indisputable evidence of brutality, President Obama condemned the "violent and unjust suppression" by Iran of its citizens.  Obama has also condemned violence against Americans in Mexico, anti-semitic language by Louis Farrakhan, an anti-gay bill in Uganda, the nuke policies of Iran and North Korea and the virulent comments of his own pastor.  But I am hard pressed to find the term employed against any actions of our allies.

Many sources in diplomatic circles believe that the Obama administration is deliberately overblowing a diplomatic faux pas into a crisis.  According to Abe Foxman, executive director of the Anti-Defamation League and a figure with whom I have taken issue publicly, none of this is accidental.  "We are shocked and stunned at the Administration’s tone and public dressing down of Israel on the issue of future building in Jerusalem," he said. "One can only wonder how far the US is prepared to go in distancing itself from Israel in order to placate the Palestinians."

Then came Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the once and (hopefully) not future presidential candidate, to warn Israeli prime minister Netanyahu that the relationship was at risk unless Israel toed the administration's line in renewed talks with the Palestinians.  This included the outrageous demand that Israel puts Jerusalem in play in talks with the Palestinians.  According to Debkafile, Clinton threatened Israel with the possible withholding of arms and military equipment in any upcoming engagement with Iran if Israel didn't bend to the will of the U.S.  

(Late breaking news suggests that Netanyahu has caved to U.S. pressure by now extending the freeze on building that was in place in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) to Jerusalem as well.  The irony here is that Ramat Shlomo is an area never considered subject to negotiation with the Palestinians.)

It is clear that Obama has taken advantage of a misstep by Israels' diplomats to turn the screws against Israel publicly in a manner that is unprecedented, at least since the days of President Eisenhower. In forcing this crisis the administration seems to be the doing the bidding of American left-wing organizations like J Street, Israeli academic leftists, Netanyahu's Laborite opponents and even Israel's Arab enemies by trying to bring Israel's government to its knees.  A humiliated and weakened Netanyahu will either do Obama's bidding or pave the way for a Leftist government that will.

Some observers suggest that  having failed to rally America's allies to take substantive action against Iran, Obama has no choice but to bully Israel into refraining from military action against Iran using the "bluntest instruments in its diplomatic armory to a degree unheard of against a friendly government."  The implications are breathtaking: because America has failed to remove the greatest existential threat to Israel in its history, Israel must be prevented from doing so.  It is almost as if Israel must risk annihilation so as not to show America to be the feckless power that it appears to be.

As a conservative critic of Obama, the open hostility towards Israel by Obama is neither surprising nor unexpected.  Anyone who did even cursory reading into Barack Obama the candidate (and church-goer) could have seen this coming.  But as a Jew and a frequent visitor to Israel, the events of this past week have been shocking and dispiriting.  Someone ought to write a book about this frightening turnabout in American-Israeli relations.

If there wasn't already a book by the same name they could call it "Perfidy.

Scott Brown: Healthcare Bill a "disastrous detour."

Not bad for a Massachusetts Republican.

GOP Leadership: All Hat, No Cattle

Sadly and accurately that appears to be the conclusion of Andy McCarthy over at nationalreview.com.

McCarthy laments the manner in which the GOP let Sen. Jim Bunning hang out to dry in the latest budget battle on Capitol Hill.  Bunning objected to the Senate passing by unanimous consent a $10 billion bill extending unemployment insurance (yet again) without offsetting these expenditures with spending cuts or revenue increases as required by the PAYGO rules adopted by Congress.  While the bill's cost is modest when compared to the $3.6 trillion in 2010 anticipated outlays, the GOP had before them an excellent opportunity to highlight the hypocrisy and irresponsibility of the Dem's spending addiction.  All they had to do was to stand with Bunning and refuse to join in the passage of an extension of unemployment benefits without corresponding offsets.

Instead, Bunning stood alone as he took waves of withering fire from Democrats and their sycophantic allies in the press for daring to oppose our compassionate and beneficent government's  gift of taxpayer dollars to the poor,  hungry and pitiful masses who remain on the government dole primarily because of the self same government's incompetent stewardship of our economy.  He clearly had no desire to take the proverbial food out of the mouths of the unemployed; rather he was trying to make a rather serious point, to wit: if extending a helping hand to our unemployed fellow citizens is a priority then we ought to be able to cut a measly $10 billion from some dreary corner of the unspent stimulus to pay for it.

And what did his Republican colleagues do? Why, they ran for the hills of course.  According to McCarthy, Susan Collins of Maine took to the floor to declare that  Bunning's views about accountability “do not represent a majority of the Republican caucus.”  Indeed.  For all the talk by GOP leaders of how they have learned from their mistakes leading up to their election debacle in 2006, when it comes time to act they shrink from the fight.

In fairness to the Senate GOP, its leaders may have concluded that they have to carefully husband the "shoot" in their eyes, and that this was not the time to pick a fight with the Dems.  There is no question that they have held the line to oppose big ticket items like the stimulus and health care reform (to this point, anyway), and there will be higher-stake opportunities to stand firm against Leviathan. 

In truth, Bunning's procedural ploy could not have changed the outcome, and indeed he finally relented to give the Dems the victory that was assured them from the beginning.  Still, it would have been nice if his fellow Republicans had reinforced his message that a government that cannot pay for unemployment benefits for its citizens out of an existing $3.6 trillion budget is a government that is truly out of control

Health Care: Giant Gov't Leap Backwards

So says Larry Kudlow in his March 5 commentary. Among others, note especially this insight:

A government takeover of health care will cripple one of our most productive job-creating sectors. Over the deep two-year recession, while overall corporate payrolls fell by about 7.5 million, private health-care firms created almost 700,000 new jobs.

And the health-care industry is one of our fastest-growing, most technologically advanced areas. With constant breakthroughs in biotech, pharmaceuticals, medical equipment, and diagnostics, the growing demand for more health care could elevate this prosperous job-creating sector to a third of the economy in the decades ahead. What’s wrong with that? Why crush it?

Where is The Mainstream Media on this story?

Jeez. This guy is shameless.

Obama Caught Lip-Syncing Speech.

Warning: this is satire. Something else that Americans used to be good at.