► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Caroline Glick’

A license to hate

by Mojambo ( 106 Comments › )
Filed under Israel, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, UK at July 8th, 2010 - 7:00 pm

Caroline Glick points out that in Britain and in other countries, the legal system is being used to license pure hatred against Israel. She notes that Israel did not expel any British or Australian diplomats in retaliation after those nations expelled an Israeli diplomat and like Robin Shepard wrote the other day regarding the Methodist boycott against Israel, there is no reason why Israel should not retaliate against senior Methodist church officials stationed in the “Holy Land”. I would go further and ban reporters from al-Guardian and the B.B.C. from working in Israel.

by Caroline Glick

In Britain today, hating Israel has become a valid criminal defense. Last week five people charged with destroying property valued at some $225,000 at the EDO MBM arms factory in Brighton during a January 2009 break-in were found not guilty of all charges. They were found innocent although all five admitted to having committed the crime.

As the Guardian reported, the defendants boasted in on-line forums at the time of the incident, their crime was premeditated. It took place during the IDF’s campaign against Hamas in Gaza. Their declared aim was to “smash up” the factory. And they achieved their goal.

The jury found the five innocent because it accepted as a valid defense their claim that they vandalized the plant because they wanted to prevent Israel from carrying out war crimes in Gaza. EDO MBM does business with the IDF, therefore, the defendants claimed and the jury agreed, it deserved to be attacked.

In finding as they did, the jurors were acting in accordance with the guidance they received from the presiding judge. As the Guardian reported, Judge George Bathurst- Norman instructed the jury, “You may well think that hell on earth would not be an understatement of what the Gazans suffered in that time.”

[…]
THE PERVERSION of the legal system in England isn’t unique. Take the situation in Malmo, Sweden, for instance. In an almost one-to-one parallel of the arguments that won the day in the Brighton courtroom, in January Malmo Mayor Ilmar Reepalu used the occasion of Holocaust Remembrance Day to bash Israel and Israel supporters and equate them with Nazi Germany.

Over the past few years, Malmo’s Jewish community has been fleeing the city due to the massive increase in anti-Jewish violence conducted by an alliance of Muslims and leftists. Reepalu denied there is anti-Jewish violence in his city and then went on to blame the city’s Jewish residents for the violence launched against them. As he put it to the Skanska Dagbladet newspaper, if the city’s Jews don’t wish to be attacked, all they have to do is denounce Israel. But, he said, “instead the community chose to hold a pro-Israel demonstration,” adding darkly that its action, “may convey the wrong message to others.”

So like the EDO MBM plant, Malmo’s Jews deserve to be attacked.

[…]

To sum up the situation Down Under, an Israeli diplomat got expelled because Israel allegedly used Australian passports to kill a senior member of an organization dedicated to the eradication of Jewry. And an Australian judge ruled that a Nazi war criminal who actively participated in the genocide of Jewry can live out the rest of his life in peace in the bosom of his family.
[…]

ONE QUESTION that necessarily arises amid any discussion of this legalistic-political assault and the worldwide perversion of law in the service of Israel’s enemies is where is our government in all of this? Where are our leaders? Where is the Foreign Ministry? Where is the Justice Ministry? Last week Britain’s Methodist Church voted to boycott all products emanating from Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria and from Jewish neighborhoods in east Jerusalem.

It probably goes without saying that the Methodist Church has levied no similar boycott against any other country. Indeed, as Robin Shepherd wrote in “The banality of Methodist evil” in Monday’s Jerusalem Post, not only did the Methodist Church never consider boycotting say Sudan or Iran or Saudi Arabia for their human rights abuses, the only countries the Methodists considered attacking other than Israel were Britain and the US for having relations with Israel.

As Shepherd relates, among other factors guiding the church’s decision was its members’ assertion during the boycott deliberations that Jews worship a racist God.

Read the rest:  Standing down the hate-filled jury

Playing for time

by Mojambo ( 91 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Israel at July 2nd, 2010 - 7:00 pm

Caroline Glick points out that in regards to the upcoming meeting between Netanyahu and Obama, that this time Israel actually will be dealing from strength. The  backlash against the unbelievably rude reception that he received last time he was in Washington from Obama, has hurt the Democrats coming into an election in November in which they are expected to lose big. Netanyahu needs, to stall (essentially play “rope-a-dope”) in the hopes of a more sympathetic congress curtailing Obama’s wings.

by Caroline Glick

Just ahead of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s trip next week to Washington, Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas went on a charm offensive towards the Israeli media. On Tuesday, Abbas invited representatives of the Hebrew-language press to his office in Ramallah and assured them of his good intentions towards Israel.

We have been here before. In Netanyahu’s last go-around as prime minister, it seemed like every time he was due to visit Washington, then president Bill Clinton’s advisers would set up a meeting for Abbas’s predecessor Yasser Arafat with the Israeli media. Arafat would talk about how much he wanted peace with Israel, and how he was just waiting for Netanyahu to agree to embrace the cause of peace.

The peace-crazed Israeli media enthusiastically reported Arafat’s lies to the Israeli people without questioning either Arafat’s motives or his honesty.

[…]

Last year, Obama and his advisers justified their demand that Netanyahu act to strangle the Jewish communities of Judea and Samaria by claiming that doing so would make the Arab world begin normalizing its relations with Israel.

Obama’s Jewish surrogate, former congressman Robert Wexler, told Netanyahu last July that in exchange for barring Jews from building kindergartens in Israel’s heartland, Israel would see 20 Arab embassies open in Tel Aviv.

Of course not only did that not happen, moments after Netanyahu announced the prohibition on Jewish building, Obama’s peace mediator George Mitchell claimed that his massive and unprecedented concession was insufficient

[…]

Netanyahu’s desire to avoid a confrontation with the Obama administration is understandable.

Given the nature of the Israeli media, Netanyahu would certainly pay a political price if he were to be blamed for making the administration turn against Israel. But the truth is that today more than ever, Obama shares Netanyahu’s desire to avoid an open clash.

THE MIDTERM congressional elections are just four months away and Obama’s Democratic colleagues are running scared. Polls show that the Democratic Party is likely to lose control over the House of Representatives. The Democrats will also likely see their control over the Senate weakened if not lost. As The Wall Street Journal’s political analyst John Fund reported this week, out of 70 competitive congressional districts, the Democrats will likely lose 60 and so lose control over the House.

Going into such a problematic electoral season, the last thing Obama needs is an open confrontation with Israel. A new row with Netanyahu will not only harm Democrats in key states like Florida, New York, New Jersey, Illinois and Pennsylvania.

It will harm the Democrats’ fund-raising efforts among Jewish American donors. Over the past several months, there have been repeated reports that Jewish Americans are drastically cutting back their donations to Democrats. The trend will likely escalate if Obama forces Netanyahu into a corner next week.

What this means is that Netanyahu is well placed to stand up to Obama’s pressure. If he plays his cards wisely, he can say no to Obama and avoid an open confrontation. For instance, instead of agreeing to extend the building prohibition, Netanyahu should say that he is willing to discuss that demand in face-to-face negotiations with Abbas. Rather than agree to Abbas’s preconditions, Netanyahu should say that he is willing to listen to Abbas’s position in face-to-face negotiations. And so on and so forth. Such statements by Netanyahu will take the pressure for making concessions off him and put Obama and Abbas on the spot.

Even more importantly, it will buy Israel time.

And buying time should be Israel’s chief goal with respect to Washington today. Since taking office, Obama has repeatedly demonstrated that he will not reconsider his fundamentally hostile view of Israel. Obama’s basic belief that Israel’s strength and size are to blame for all the violence and radicalism in the Arab world is not subject to change, regardless of how clearly and continuously events on the ground prove it wrong.

Read the rest here: Netanyahu must play for time

There are alternatives to surrender

by Mojambo ( 182 Comments › )
Filed under Hamas, Israel at June 29th, 2010 - 7:00 pm

Last Friday was the fourth anniversary of the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit. In order to bring him home Israel needs not to lessen the screws on Gaza but to tighten them. Gaza is at war with Israel and there is no sane reason why Israel needs to supply that rats nest with electricity,  fuel, and water. Let the people of Gaza know that elections have consequences (as Americans should have learned by now). Caroline Glick points out that Hamas (and Iran) is not all powerful and is vulnerable to discontent in Gaza.

by Caroline Glick
To the roaring cheers of the local media, on Sunday the Schalit family embarked on a cross-country march to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s residence. They set out two days after the fourth anniversary of IDF Sgt. Gilad Schalit’s captivity.

Outside their home in the North on Sunday, Gilad’s father Noam Schalit pledged not to return home without his son. The Schalit family intends to camp out outside of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s home until the government reunites them with Gilad.

For weeks the local media – and especially Ma’ariv and Yediot Ahronot – have portrayed the Schalit family’s trek to Netanyahu as a reenactment of Moses’ journey to Pharaoh. Like Pharaoh, the media insinuates that Netanyahu is evil because he refuses to free Gilad from bondage.

The only drawback to this dramatic, newspaper-selling story is that it is wrong. Gilad Schalit is not a hostage in Jerusalem. He is a hostage in Gaza. His captor is not Netanyahu. His captor is Hamas.

And because the story is wrong, the media-organized cavalcade of ten thousand well intentioned Israelis is moving in the wrong direction. And not only is it going in the wrong direction, it is doing so at Gilad Schalit’s expense.

The truth that Yediot and Ma’ariv’s marketing departments ignore is that Schalit’s continued captivity is a function of Hamas’s growing strength. To bring him home, Israel shouldn’t release a thousand terrorists from prison. It shouldn’t strengthen Hamas.

To bring Gilad Schalit home a free man, Israel must weaken Hamas. And this is an eminently achievable goal. Gilad’s father Noam knows it is an achievable goal. That is why last week Noam Schalit was the most outspoken critic of Netanyahu’s decision to abandon Israel’s economic sanctions against Hamas-controlled Gaza. That is why over the past four years the Schalit family has staged countless protests against Israel’s massive and continuous assistance to Hamas-controlled Gaza.

If anything positive is to come from this march, then when the Schalit family arrives in Jerusalem they should abandon the newspapers’ demand that Israel surrender to all of Hamas’s demands. They should acknowledge that doing so will only guarantee that more Israelis will be kidnapped and murdered by Hamas and its allies.

Read the rest here: Alternatives to surrender

Friday with the ‘hammer; also strategy 1.0

by Mojambo ( 92 Comments › )
Filed under Ahmadinejad, Barack Obama, Iran, Israel at June 11th, 2010 - 3:00 pm

Charles Krauthammer and Caroline Glick have great columns today. Dr. K. points out that “isolation” is not an end game in and of itself especially when it will not deter Iran from acquiring nukes and that Iran has hardly been isolated in any case. Caroline Glick points out that the first rule of strategy is to make your enemy act according to what you do and  that you should not  get distracted over peripheral issues such as supplies to be delivered to Gaza. Keep your eyes on the big picture!

by Charles Krauthammer

In announcing the passage of a U.N. Security Council resolution imposing sanctions on Iran, President Obama stressed not once but twice Iran’s increasing “isolation” from the world. This claim is not surprising considering that after 16 months of an “extended hand” policy, in response to which Iran accelerated its nuclear program — more centrifuges, more enrichment sites, higher enrichment levels — Iranian “isolation” is about the only achievement to which the administration can even plausibly lay claim.

“Isolation” may have failed to deflect Iran’s nuclear ambitions, but it does enjoy incessant repetition by the administration. For example, in his State of the Union Address, President Obama declared that “the Islamic Republic of Iran is more isolated.” Two months later, Vice President Biden asserted that “since our administration has come to power, I would point out that Iran is more isolated — internally, externally — has fewer friends in the world.” At the signing of the START treaty in April, Obama declared that “those nations that refuse to meet their obligations [to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, i.e., Iran] will be isolated.”

Really? On Tuesday, one day before the president touted passage of a surpassingly weak U.N. resolution and declared Iran yet more isolated, the leaders of Russia, Turkey and Iran gathered at a security summit in Istanbul “in a display of regional power that appeared to be calculated to test the United States,” as the New York Times put it. I would add: And calculated to demonstrate the hollowness of U.S. claims of Iranian isolation, to flaunt Iran’s growing ties with Russia and quasi-alliance with Turkey, a NATO member no less.

Apart from the fact that isolation is hardly an end in itself and is pointless if, regardless, Iran rushes headlong to become a nuclear power, the very claim of Iran’s increasing isolation is increasingly implausible. Just last month, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad hosted an ostentatious love fest in Tehran with the leaders of Turkey and Brazil. The three raised hands together and announced a uranium transfer deal that was designed to torpedo U.S. attempts to impose U.N. sanctions.

Six weeks ago, Iran was elected to the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women, a grotesque choice that mocked Obama’s attempt to isolate and de-legitimize Iran in the very international institutions he treasures.

Increasing isolation? In the past year alone, Ahmadinejad has been welcomed in Kabul, Istanbul, Copenhagen, Caracas, Brasilia, La Paz, Senegal, Gambia and Uganda. Today, he is in China.

Read the rest here: The myth of Iran’s ‘isolation’

by CarolineGlick

The first rule of strategy is to keep your opponent busy attending to your agenda so he has no time to advance his own. Unfortunately, Israel’s leaders seem unaware of this rule, while Iran’ rulers triumph in its application.

Over the past few weeks, Israel has devoted itself entirely to the consideration of questions that are at best secondary. Questions like how much additional assistance Israel should provide Hamas-controlled Gaza and how best to fend off or surrender to the international diplomatic lynch mob have dominated Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s and his senior ministers’ agendas. Our political leaders — as well as our military commanders and intelligence agencies — have been so busy thinking about these issues that they have effectively forgotten the one issue that they should have been considering.

Israel’s greatest strategic challenge — preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons — has fallen by the wayside.

In the shadow of our distraction, Iran and its allies operate undisturbed. Indeed, as our leaders have devoted themselves entirely to controlling the damage from the Iranian supported, Turkish-Hamas flotilla, Iran and its allies have had a terrific past few weeks. True, Wednesday the UN Security Council passed a new sanctions resolution against Iran for refusing to end its illicit uranium enrichment programs. But that Security Council resolution itself is emblematic of their triumph.

It took a year for US President Barack Obama to decide that he should seek additional sanctions against Iran. It then took him another six months to convince Iran’s allies Russia and China to support them. In the event, the sanctions that Obama refers to as “the most comprehensive sanctions that the Iranian government has faced,” will have no impact whatsoever on Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

They will not empower the Iranian people to overthrow their regime. And they will not cause the Iranian regime to reconsider its nuclear weapons program. They won’t even prevent Russia from supplying Iran with S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to protect its nuclear installations from air assault.

[..]

And that’s the heart of the matter. The main reason that the past year has been such a good one for Iran and its allies is because they have managed to keep Israel so busy fending off attacks that Jerusalem has had no time to weaken them in any way.

Read the rest: The first rule of strategy