Op-Ed Columnist - Fayyad's Road to Palestine - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - Fayyad's Road to Palestine - NYTimes.com
This op-ed is a perfect example of the distortions of the left against Israel.
As usual, Mr. Cohen manages to adopt someone else's narrative and demonize Israel at the same time, without a word on how Israel (the dreaded Netanyahu, no less) has helped Fayyad be successful, such as removing scores of road blocks, facilitating the arming and training of his security forces, loosening economic limitations on business with the Palestinians by Israel, the Palestinians' biggest market, and overall encouraging Israeli cooperation in the development of the Palestinians' economy. Don't take my word for this, google Tony Blair, the Quartet's economic representative to the Paelstinians.

And by the way, Cohen, stop perpetuating the fiction of Israel's massive taking of West Bank land, implying the Palestinians are limited to small corners of the West Bank. Look at the map -- it is simply not true. Yes road blocks still exist, though they have been drastically scaled back, and yes, the security fence does still exist, but for the most part it follows the pre-1967 line, and no more than several percent of Palestinian territory are on the Israeli side of the fence. Then again, Palestinian Arabs are allowed to live in relative peace in Israel proper, while Palestinian territory must remain eternally Judenrein by right -- another of the many double standards applied by Cohen and his fellow travellers towards the Jewish state.

With respect to proactive actions to defend Israel's security, Israels have learned the hard way from a myriad of brutal Palestinian attacks against Israeli civilians that they must remain vigilant, even more so when the PA, led by Fayyad, continues to demonize Israelis and Jews to its people, starting with vicious anti-Semitic teachings at the elementary school level, and do nothing to prepare their people to accept the concept of living side by side with a Jewish Israeli nation. Naming squares, streets and schools after terrorist murderers of civilians does not accomplish this task. It is different to prepare your people for independence, than to prepare it to live peacefully alongside its enemy, and Cohen misses this distinction. One would think that Cohen would at least mention this critical factor in really achieving peace, but he doesn't, showing that painting his political narrative is his be all and end all.

The Israelis have been far from perfect, but these simplistic one sided opinion pieces do nothing to elucidate the issues.

Senators vs. Goldman Sachs - WSJ.com

Senators vs. Goldman Sachs - WSJ.com: "Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri veered closer to the truth when she described Goldman's facilitation of trading in mortgage-related instruments as 'pure gambling' and told the executives: 'and you are the house.'

This was a valuable contribution. It reminded spectators that the transactions getting all of the attention—synthetic collateralized debt obligations (CDOs)—did not contain any mortgages. These were side bets. One could argue, as an astute reader did in a recent letter to the Editor, that investors like Mr. Paulson may even have helped reduce the impact of the housing crisis because they allowed stupid housing bulls to make their bets without actually creating any more bad loans.

If yesterday's hearing had any value, it was the recognition, even by the Senate inquisitors, of the real root causes of the crisis: too many bad mortgage loans with poor underwriting, and too many pools of these bad loans carrying a triple-A rating. Exploring the creation of junk loans should lead Senate investigators to the same place where most of the taxpayer losses are occurring—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Former Fannie Mae Chief Credit Officer Edward Pinto calculates that as of June 2008, the toxic twins and other government entities were responsible for more than $2.7 trillion in subprime and Alt-A mortgage exposure. Goldman's mortgage business was small potatoes in comparison; in fact this figure is three times Goldman's entire balance sheet.

The Senate's pending financial-regulation bill has no reform of Fannie and Freddie. Fresh off their meeting yesterday with the marketplace, the committee members might start on the road to useful reform by insisting on a rewrite."

Op-Ed Contributor - Meet the Real Villain of the Financial Crisis. - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Contributor - Meet the Real Villain of the Financial Crisis. - NYTimes.com: "Yet, in the end, it comes down to this: Goldman Sachs, ACA Capital, IKB Deutsche Industriebank and even the rating agencies never had any duty to protect us from their greed. There was one entity that did — our government.

But it was the purported regulators, including the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision, that used their power not to protect, but rather to prevent predatory lending laws. The Federal Reserve, which could have cracked down on lending practices at any time, did next to nothing, thereby putting us at risk as both consumers and taxpayers. All of these regulators, along with the S.E.C., failed to look at the bad loans that were moving through the nation’s banking system, even though there were plentiful warnings about them.

More important, it was Congress that sat by idly as consumer advocates warned that people were getting loans they’d never be able to pay back. It was Congress that refused to regulate derivatives, despite ample evidence dating back to 1994 of the dangers they posed. It was Congress that repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, which separated investment and commercial banking, yet failed to update the fraying regulatory system.

It was Congress that spread the politically convenient gospel of home ownership, despite data and testimony showing that much of what was going on had little to do with putting people in homes. And it’s Congress that has been either unwilling or unable to put in place rules that have a shot at making things better. The financial crisis began almost three years ago and it’s still not clear if we’ll have meaningful new legislation. In fact, Senate Republicans on Monday voted to block floor debate on the latest attempt at a reform bill.

Come to think about it, shouldn’t Congress have its turn on the hot seat as well? Seeing Goldman executives get their comeuppance may make us all feel better in the short term. But today’s spectacle shouldn’t provide our government with a convenient way to deflect the blame it so richly deserves."

Burgeoning Indian-Israeli Alliance is the counter to the Islamization of Turkey

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security

Watchdog: BBC biased against Israel

Watchdog: BBC biased against Israel

David Harris: There's a Whiff of McCarthyism in the Air

David Harris: There's a Whiff of McCarthyism in the Air: "Sometimes it's stated openly, other times it's more veiled. The charge of dual loyalty is back."

JPost.com | BlogCentral | The Warped Mirror | Obama's challenger

JPost.com | BlogCentral | The Warped Mirror | Obama's challenger

The View From Jerusalem: Israel is Anxious about the Obama Administration - WSJ.com

The View From Jerusalem: Israel is Anxious about the Obama Administration - WSJ.com: "For all the current talk about Israel costing America lives and treasure, the striking fact is that the U.S. has never had to go to war to defend the Jewish state. This is more than can be said for Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Bosnia, Kosovo and the people of Afghanistan and Iraq. That's because for 62 years Israelis have provided for their own defense, in an alliance with the U.S. that has reflected American values and—in both the Cold War and the war on terror—advanced American interests.

The Obama Administration seems not to grasp this point, which is why these are anxious days for Israel and its American friends."

Europe's VAT Lessons - WSJ.com

Europe's VAT Lessons - WSJ.com

Washington Institute --Inside the Syrian Missile Crisis

Inside the Syrian Missile Crisis: "Israel has traditionally responded to threats such as these by bombing Hezbollah missile sites in Lebanon. However, Israel has indicated privately over the last year that the next conflict could include strikes inside Syria as well, or perhaps target weapons convoys as they cross the porous Syrian-Lebanese border.

Although the risks of a Syrian counterstrike are great, some Israeli officials might see an advantage in striking at both Syria's and Lebanon's military hardware. Analysts say most decisions to go to war would be based on Israel's strategic calculations in the north. But there are regionwide calculations over Iran as well. If Israel destroys Hezbollah's weapons, it could provide a window of time in which Israeli cities are under a decreased threat of missile attack. This would give Israel a perfect opportunity to strike Iran without risking an immediate retaliation from Tehran's allies to its north. This scenario would not be cost-free for Israel, but given its overriding concern over Iran's possession of a nuclear weapon, Israeli leaders might judge it to be an acceptable level of risk. Given that an Israeli strike on Iran still seems out of the question for the time being, however, this may be one of the reasons why cooler heads have prevailed so far."

What Does "Pro-Palestinian" Really Mean? - Hudson New York

What Does "Pro-Palestinian" Really Mean? - Hudson New York: Great piece from last year, but more timely than ever. Excerpt:
"Here is an idea: Let’s substitute Israel Apartheid Week with Palestine Democracy Week, where Palestinians would be urged and encouraged to demand an end to financial corruption and bad government.

The “pro-Palestinian” activists in the West clearly do not care about reforms and good government in the Palestinian territories. As far as these activists are concerned, delegitimizing Israel and inciting against “Zionists” are much more important that pushing for an end to financial corruption and violence in Palestinian society.

Telling the world how bad and evil Israel and the Jews are does not help the Palestinians as much as demanding good government and encouraging the emergence of young and “clean” leadership in the Palestinian territories.

If the “pro-Palestinian” camp in the West were investing a similar amount of its anti-Israel efforts in promoting moderation and civil society among Palestinians, it would be doing them a great service."

PMW Bulletins:From the "No Partner In Peace" Files

PMW Bulletins: "Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad is sponsoring a fencing tournament for youth named after the terrorist leader Abu Jihad.

'The Baladna Club will hold the Shahid (Martyr) Abu Jihad Fencing Championship on [Palestinian] Prisoners' Day and under the auspices of the Prime Minister [Fayyad]... in the club's building located in the Shahid (Martyr) Yasser Arafat Center... The girls' groups are [divided according to] age 13 - 20 and boys' groups from age 16.'
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, April 13, 2010]

Honoring terrorists who have killed Israelis by naming sports facilities, tournaments and summer camps for Palestinian youth after the terrorists, is a policy of the Palestinian Authority, and part of its program to turn terrorists into heroes and role models for children. Palestinian Media Watch has documented this PA glorification of terrorists.
For more examples of Fayyad and Abbas honoring terrorists, see below."

Putin's Pro-Israel Policy :: Middle East Quarterly

Putin's Pro-Israel Policy :: Middle East Quarterly

While this article is a bit dated, its underlying premise is not -- the Russians, under Putin-Medvedev, have shown a much more balanced foreign policy towards Israel, and less shrill than Europe, based on a number of factors: Putin's antipathy towards Muslim terrorists, which could only be heightened by the subway terrorist attacks in Moscow several weeks ago, his empathy towards Israel as it is continuously castigated on the world stage for defending itself against Islamic extremists, the fact that one in five Israelis is Russian, and Putin's mystical attachment to the Russian Orthodox Church and great interest in its properties in Israel.

In addition to all of that, now consider the following: Obama's clear hatred of Israel and ridiculously naive/weak policy towards the Iranians offers Putin a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to radically alter the strategic picture in the Middle East. As Obama tries to permanently change US foreign policy away from a pro-Israel stance based on common values and security interests, the Israelis will find they need another big friend on the world stage pretty soon, one with a veto on the security council and with real influence over European foreign policy. Likewise the Saudis, moderate Arab nations like Jordan and the Gulf states need a counterbalance against Iran, because Obama's behavior towards America's erstwhile (to him) ally in the Mideast, Israel, and its feckless behavior towards Iran shows these Arab nations very clearly that they are on their own, and that, without a strong global voice behind them, they will become Finlandized by the new Middle Eastern superpower, a nuclear Iran.

Watch the Russians carefully. There is a good chance the Russians are about to undo fifty years of US influence building in the Middle East, because of Obama. This could make the disaster of Carter's Middle East foreign policy look like child's play.

Erdogan of Turkey Attacks Israeli Nukes

Here is the difference between Israeli nukes and Iranian nukes: no Arab country has ever made a big deal about Israeli nukes until now because they understood Israel's purpose for the Bomb -- as a final point of defense against Arab onslaught, not as a tool with which to terrorize its neighbors into submission, and therefore it was not worth their political embarrassment to raise publicly (the Arab street -- "Then why don't WE have nukes"). Ask the Saudis or the Egyptians how much they fear an Israeli nuke vs an Iranian one. Erdogan is simply an evil Turk trying to reestablish Turkey's Middle Eastern empire by moving the Turks towards lowest common denominator common cause with the Arab street. The best thing the entire civilized world can do with him is to show him the respect he deserves -- none.
By the way -- why don't I hear anything from Erdogan about proven Pakistani nuclear proliferation to terrorists, or Indian nuclear weapons? Answer: the traditional anti-Israel double standard.
Whether the US administration vigorously protects Israel from these evil attacks will be a litmus test of the US administration's intent to throw Israel under a bus and tie Israeli disarmament to Iran's. This would be an elegant way to explain away Obama's diplomatic failure at stopping the Iranian nuclear effort -- blame it on the intransigent Jews.

The old Israel consensus "is breaking down" -- Republicans and Independents Support Israel Overwhelmingly, Democrats, Not

JPost.com | BlogCentral | Rosner's Domain | The old Israel consensus "is breaking down": Republicans and Independents Support Israel Overwhelmingly, Democrats, Not

Rosner readers should know by now that Republicans and Democrats don't share the the same views when it comes to Israel. But here's another writer discovering that support for Israel runs on party line. Or as the article claims: 'the old political consensus that brought Republicans and Democrats together in support of the Middle East's only flourishing democracy is breaking down'.
look at the disparity that emerges when those results are sorted by party affiliation. While support for Israel vs. the Palestinians has climbed to a stratospheric 85 percent among Republicans, the comparable figure for Democrats is an anemic 48 percent. (It was 60 percent for independents.) And behind Israel's 'Top 5' favorability rating lies a gaping partisan rift: 80 percent of Republicans - but just 53 percent of Democrats - have positive feelings about the world's only Jewish country.

Similarly, it is true that 333 US House members, a hefty bipartisan majority, endorsed the robustly pro-Israel Hoyer-Cantor letter to Clinton. But there were only seven Republicans who declined to sign the letter, compared with 91 Democrats - more than a third of the entire Democratic caucus. (Six Massachusetts Democrats were among the non-signers: John Olver, Richard Neal, John Tierney, Ed Markey, Michael Capuano, and Bill Delahunt.)

From Zogby International, meanwhile, comes still more proof of the widening gulf between the major parties on the subject of Israel. In a poll commissioned by the Arab American Institute last month, respondents were asked whether Obama should 'steer a middle course' in the Middle East - code for not clearly supporting Israel. 'There is a strong divide on this question,' Zogby reported, 'with 73 percent of Democrats agreeing that the President should steer a middle course while only 24 percent of Republicans hold the same opinion.'"

RubinReports: Listen to the Two Best Arab Journalists Warning What A Nuclear-Armed Iran Means

RubinReports: Listen to the Two Best Arab Journalists Warning What A Nuclear-Armed Iran Means

Israel and Iran: Obama's End Game

For any Obama supporter who had hopes that our president's "new ideas" diplomacy would lead to a solution to the Iranian problem without harming Israel much in the process, the jury is in and the verdict is not a pretty one. For those who thought that Carter, Brzezinski, Baker and MacFarlane were bad for Middle East stability generally, and for Israel specifically, wait until you see where Obama is taking this issue, particularly after the mid-term election when he will be unrestrained by US public opinion. Make no mistake abut it -- Obama intends to turn American foreign policy as it relates to Israel 180 degrees, and make the world a much more dangerous place for every American ally as a result. It is almost unbelievable.

Obama takes us back a generation in his radical views, in that he has a leftist intellectual's obsession with broader nuclear proliferation, without differentiation between allies and enemies or their respective intents, and a zero sum approach to Middle East peace -- one side must win, the other must lose (and we have become familiar enough with Obama's world view to know where Israel stands in this equation). It is not only with healthcare that he has obsessively pursued an agenda item that is at the top of his list, but not at the top of America's. Broad nuclear proliferation (i.e., not just focusing on rogue states like Iran and North Korea, but on everyone, INCLUSIVE of the U.S.) has proven to be another deeply held priority of Obama's -- his "important" UN speech on nuclear non-proliferation, his new treaty with the Russians (was THAT really a high priority?), his historic change this week in American nuclear deterrent policy, and the upcoming nuclear conference in Washington. At the same time, he has utterly failed to make any discernible progress in his attempts to control Iran's march towards a nuclear arsenal, even throwing under the proverbial bus a budding Iranian democratic velvet revolution, in the naive belief that this would increase his ability to persuade Iranian theocratic revolutionaries to abandon their nuclear program (by the way, why is it that, for all their supposed worldliness and multicultural understanding, that liberal globalists seem to have an absolute inability to listen to and understand the motives and thought processes of our enemies, instead transferring their hopeful and "rational" thought processes to our adversaries?).

Obama has been so completely unsuccessful with the Iranians that he is now changing his tone clearly to the language of containment. Our Arab Gulf allies and Saudi Arabia have lost any confidence that Obama is willing or capable of dealing with the Iranians, and they must be increasingly skeptical that we will allow Israel to do what we should do. Indeed, some theorize that the increasing demonization of Israel in official and unofficial Washington (as well as the dual nationality canards that have appeared recently on Politico.com and from Professor Walt) is partly to send the message to Israel not even to try anything in Iran -- we will not be there to protect you. Rumors have surfaced of US air force training focusing on interdicting against aircraft employing "Israeli tactics", and the most recent report that Israeli nuclear scientists have become persona non grata in the US by the Obama administration (I wonder if Pakistani nuclear scientists face similar restrictions).

So what is next? How is Obama going to turn this sow's ear of Iran policy into a purse? Perhaps a closer look at his recently revised nuclear doctrine should give a hint. The changes made not only keeps the door open to using nuclear weapons to attack Iran as a non-proliferation treaty signatory that is violating the treaty, but it also keeps the door open to using nuclear weapons to attack a non-signatory which develops nuclear weapons, like Israel. While I am not suggesting seriously that Obama would go that far, the leaking of information that Israel might be ganged up upon at the Washington nuclear proliferation conference next week is no surprise, and leads to where Obama is taking this. He was a part time law professor and likes symmetry. Quite simply, his Hail Mary pass on Iran will be to push forward the conversation, by the end of the year, of "trading" Israel's nuclear ability for Iran's, turning the Middle East into a nuclear free zone for Israel's own good (which it can do nothing else but refuse). This will allow Obama to further isolate Israel and turn it into an international pariah, which will both deflect blame from his utter failure to effectively deal with Iran and further pressure Israel to make unrequited concessions to the Palestinians.

If not exactly as described here, variants of this scenario surely await us, if concerted and effective pressure is not placed on all levels of the Obama administration. This course of events will surely result in a multitude of repercussions that are difficult to fathom. People talk about the horrible unforeseen events that could result from a military attack on Iran. Think about what could happen if we don't.

A Defense of Drones - WSJ.com

A Defense of Drones - WSJ.com: I applaud the Obama administration for getting it right on this score, even if they are incapable of admitting that their predecessors in the bush administration got it right too. Yes, there are collateral civilian casualties to these targeted killings, but that is the regrettable cost of war when the terrorists literally hide behind civilians.
Now, may i ask, why is it any different when Israel attacks terrorists with blood on their hands in such a way? Why are those actions 'not helpful' to the 'peace process' or otherwise worthy of condemnation? Why the double standard by the world when Israel (supposedly) assassinates a terrorist in Dubai with blood on his hands? Is the fraudulent use of EU passports merely an excuse to apply this double standard? If and when Israel attacks the mothers of all terrorists, Iran, which threatens Israel's very survival by word and by action every day, how strong will the international condemnation of Israel be, starting from the mouth of the hypocritical Obama administration? For that matter, with the Iranians arming insurgents in Afghanistan to kill OUR soldiers, why are we not engaged in targeted killings of Iranian terrorists leaders? Perhaps the experience of having their comrades killed by hellfire missiles on their home territory would bring Iranian leaders to the nuclear negotiating table a bit quicker. Something to think about, Barack....

A Defense of Drones - WSJ.com

A Defense of Drones - WSJ.com
Its great that our government is defending the targeted killing of terrorists and their leaders as an "inherent right of self defense" with faceless drones from thousands of feet in the sky that, unfortunately, also kill civilians.
Now why is Israel's targeted killings of terrorists any different? Double standard?

Video - The Link between Nazism and Arab Anti-Semitism

Video - The Link between Nazism and Arab Anti-Semitism
Click on thus link that will take you to an incredible German documentary video (8 minutes) discussing the links of Nazism to Arab Nationalism and Islamic Fundamentalism. In their hatred of democracy, Western capitalism and multi-party political participation, elevation of physical morality, worship of honor and war making, and tying these factors to quotes from the Koran and Nazi racial anti-Semitic ideology (that lives on in the Arab world today), Nazism infused fundamental Islam with its ideological roots., truly melding fundamental Islam with evil Europeam seeds that genuinely result in something called "Islamofascism" (when studied in this context, not just a neo-Conservative buzz word).
For more on this subject, see a fascinating book review on the subject in the current issue of Commentary, "Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World" by Jeffrey Herf (sorry, you need a subscription to access it).