Deadline: COB Tuesday, June 10th
Call
(202) 224-3121
Senators can be
reached through the
Capitol switchboard
E-mail
your Senator
Find
your Senator
Info/Questions
Contact Rachel Charles
(202) 639-5203
rcharles@aipac.org Urge Senators to Sign the Cardin-Collins Letter on Palestinian Aid
Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) are
circulating a bipartisan letter addressed to President Obama in the wake
of the recent formation of a Palestinian Authority government backed by
Hamas. The Palestinian unity government represents a serious setback to
peace efforts. The letter urges the President to impress on President
Abbas the need to cease any alliance with Hamas and return to the
negotiating table with Israel. It also makes clear that U.S. assistance
to the Palestinian Authority should only be provided when "we have
confidence that this new government is in full compliance with
restrictions contained in current law."
"I am calling the Senator to urge him/ her to sign the Cardin-Collins
letter to the President. The letter outlines how a Hamas backed unity
government deeply undermines the cause of peace and calls for a review
of aid to the Palestinian Authority."
Background
The
formation of a Palestinian Authority unity government backed by Hamas
is a disturbing setback for peace. Rather than pursue a peace agreement
with his willing Israeli partner, PA President Mahmoud Abbas chose to
align with an Islamist terrorist organization that seeks Israel’s
destruction and continues to perpetrate terror attacks against Israel.
Aid should be suspended to the PA while a thorough review should be
conducted of continued U.S. assistance to ensure that U.S. law, which
prohibits funds to a Palestinian government in which Hamas participates
or has undue influence, is completely followed and implemented.
Talking Points
The United States must ensure that any aid to the unity government
remains consistent with existing U.S. law, which stipulates that no
funds can be provided to a Palestinian government in which Hamas
participates or has undue influence.
Hamas’ role in the
unity government is not merely symbolic. Hamas leaders approved of the
ministerial slate and now intend to help determine government policy,
including the pathway forward to elections.
The new
government allows Hamas to participate in the PA even though the
Islamist group has not accepted the Quartet’s demands to renounce
violence, recognize Israel’s right to
exist, and accept previous agreements.
The United States has consistently declared Hamas a terrorist
organization and rejected any attempts to engage Hamas prior to its
acceptance of the three criteria. President Clinton first designated
Hamas a terrorist organization in 1997, and this policy has been fully
supported and strengthened by subsequent U.S. administrations
Monday, June 9, 2014
Friday, June 6, 2014
Why is MET broadcasting antisemitism?
Why is MET broadcasting antisemitism?
The Jewish News Service published an open letter to Peter Gelb, general manager of The Metropolitan Opera at Lincoln Center in New York, concerning the HD transmission of a live performance of the opera, "The Death of Klinghoffer."
The letter, written by Myron Kaplan, an analyst from the organization CAMERA, which monitors anti-Israel and antisemitic media for accuracy in reporting, calls upon the venerable Metropolitan Opera to reject the opera for its "tendentious story line and an inflammatory libretto that falsely maligns Israel and the Jewish people."
The opera is based on the 1985 murder of a 69-year-old American Jewish man, Leon Klinghoffer, confined to a wheelchair, who was shot in the head while vacationing with his wife on a cruise ship in the Mediterranean Sea. He was murdered by Palestinian Arab hijackers belonging to the Palestine Liberation Front, and his body dumped into the water. As Kaplan points out, the opera would more appropriately be titled, "The Murder of Klinghoffer."
Kaplan cites several examples of anti-Jewish and anti-Israel lyrics from the opera. It has been reported that Klinghoffer’s two daughters, Lisa and Ilsa, attended a New York production of the opera in 1991, which they described as "appalling" and "antisemitic."
In response to the open letter, the Met responded, in part, "'The Death of Klinghoffer' is an opera about a terrible incident that has become part of a pattern of violence that in the ensuing decades continues to repeat itself. Mr. [John] Adams (composer) has said that in writing the opera he tried to understand the hijackers and their motivations, and to look for humanity in the terrorists, as well as in their victims. Tom Morris, the director of the Met's new production, believes that the opera’s most important contribution is in providing an opportunity for the audience to wrestle with the almost unanswerable questions that arise from this seemingly endless conflict.
"Since this opera dramatizes a horrific act of violence, the Met acknowledges that some members of its audience may disagree with the decision to present this work. However, the Met believes that in staging it, audiences are being given the opportunity to hear one of the best operas of the late 20th century."
The Jewish News Service published an open letter to Peter Gelb, general manager of The Metropolitan Opera at Lincoln Center in New York, concerning the HD transmission of a live performance of the opera, "The Death of Klinghoffer."
The letter, written by Myron Kaplan, an analyst from the organization CAMERA, which monitors anti-Israel and antisemitic media for accuracy in reporting, calls upon the venerable Metropolitan Opera to reject the opera for its "tendentious story line and an inflammatory libretto that falsely maligns Israel and the Jewish people."
The opera is based on the 1985 murder of a 69-year-old American Jewish man, Leon Klinghoffer, confined to a wheelchair, who was shot in the head while vacationing with his wife on a cruise ship in the Mediterranean Sea. He was murdered by Palestinian Arab hijackers belonging to the Palestine Liberation Front, and his body dumped into the water. As Kaplan points out, the opera would more appropriately be titled, "The Murder of Klinghoffer."
Kaplan cites several examples of anti-Jewish and anti-Israel lyrics from the opera. It has been reported that Klinghoffer’s two daughters, Lisa and Ilsa, attended a New York production of the opera in 1991, which they described as "appalling" and "antisemitic."
In response to the open letter, the Met responded, in part, "'The Death of Klinghoffer' is an opera about a terrible incident that has become part of a pattern of violence that in the ensuing decades continues to repeat itself. Mr. [John] Adams (composer) has said that in writing the opera he tried to understand the hijackers and their motivations, and to look for humanity in the terrorists, as well as in their victims. Tom Morris, the director of the Met's new production, believes that the opera’s most important contribution is in providing an opportunity for the audience to wrestle with the almost unanswerable questions that arise from this seemingly endless conflict.
"Since this opera dramatizes a horrific act of violence, the Met acknowledges that some members of its audience may disagree with the decision to present this work. However, the Met believes that in staging it, audiences are being given the opportunity to hear one of the best operas of the late 20th century."
Tuesday, June 3, 2014
Obama sides with the terrorists vs Israel
Obama's complete betrayal of Israel again
From today's world Jewish Digest
Remember all that bunk about Barack Obama being the most pro-Israel president ever, the chief executive who was going to save Israel from itself, the one who always had Israel's "back"?
That same president has sided with unrepentant terrorists who wish to destroy the Jewish state. Indeed, Hamas is proud of its mission, which it broadcasts daily on Palestinian television.
In a turn of events that surprised Obama critics, the president has said he will work with a new Fatah-Hamas alliance whose only purpose is to destroy any chance of peace and work toward the destruction of the Jewish state. The State Department claimed that Mahmoud Abbas had formed a government of "technocrats" with whom the United States could work.
Yes, a government of technocrat puppets whose strings are pulled by terrorists.
Israeli officials were swift to the condemn the move, which they rightly characterized as a betrayal of the longstanding U.S. -Israel relationship.
Reacting to the news last night, Israel's ambassador to Washington, Ron Dermer, said:
“Israel is deeply disappointed with the State Department’s comments today on the Palestinian unity government with Hamas, a terrorist organization responsible for the murder of many hundreds of Israelis, which has fired thousands of rockets at Israeli cities, and which remains committed to Israel’s destruction,” Dermer wrote in a Facebook post. “This Palestinian unity government is a government of technocrats backed by terrorists, and should be treated as such,” he said. “With suits in the front office and terrorists in the back office, it should not be business as usual.”
Another Israeli official added:
“Cooperation with Hamas, designated in the US as a terror group that murders women and children, is unfathomable,” he added.
"Unfathomable" because no one could have imagined that Obama would sink this low, that he would betray the Jewish State to such a degree. But such is his hatred for Israel (and in particular Binyamin Netanyahu) that he will go so far as to contribute to the cause of terrorists whose only purpose is to "liberate Palestine" and murder the Jews.
Any Jew who supports such a president should be ashamed.
From today's world Jewish Digest
Remember all that bunk about Barack Obama being the most pro-Israel president ever, the chief executive who was going to save Israel from itself, the one who always had Israel's "back"?
That same president has sided with unrepentant terrorists who wish to destroy the Jewish state. Indeed, Hamas is proud of its mission, which it broadcasts daily on Palestinian television.
In a turn of events that surprised Obama critics, the president has said he will work with a new Fatah-Hamas alliance whose only purpose is to destroy any chance of peace and work toward the destruction of the Jewish state. The State Department claimed that Mahmoud Abbas had formed a government of "technocrats" with whom the United States could work.
Yes, a government of technocrat puppets whose strings are pulled by terrorists.
Israeli officials were swift to the condemn the move, which they rightly characterized as a betrayal of the longstanding U.S. -Israel relationship.
Reacting to the news last night, Israel's ambassador to Washington, Ron Dermer, said:
“Israel is deeply disappointed with the State Department’s comments today on the Palestinian unity government with Hamas, a terrorist organization responsible for the murder of many hundreds of Israelis, which has fired thousands of rockets at Israeli cities, and which remains committed to Israel’s destruction,” Dermer wrote in a Facebook post. “This Palestinian unity government is a government of technocrats backed by terrorists, and should be treated as such,” he said. “With suits in the front office and terrorists in the back office, it should not be business as usual.”
Another Israeli official added:
“Cooperation with Hamas, designated in the US as a terror group that murders women and children, is unfathomable,” he added.
"Unfathomable" because no one could have imagined that Obama would sink this low, that he would betray the Jewish State to such a degree. But such is his hatred for Israel (and in particular Binyamin Netanyahu) that he will go so far as to contribute to the cause of terrorists whose only purpose is to "liberate Palestine" and murder the Jews.
Any Jew who supports such a president should be ashamed.
Sunday, June 1, 2014
Iran is playing us
Iran's Strategy to Develop Nuclear Weapons
 |
Comment
|
Western concessions have therefore only bolstered the determinations of the Iranians to maintain their nuclear program until they can run out the clock on negotiations and achieve their goal of acquiring nuclear capability. But it is we in the West who are eagerly allowing them to do so.When the Iranians, then one of the most advanced and mightiest empires on earth, were conquered in 636 CE by what they deemed one of the most primitive peoples on earth – the Muslim Arabs – they felt deeply shamed. Ancient Persian descriptions reportedly refer to Arabs as "rodent eaters and lizard eaters."[1]
At that time, Iranians, also known as Persians, who had ruled over countless ethnic and religious nationalities for more than 1,110 years, may have felt superior to the nomads inhabiting the border areas of their vast empire.
It was these desert nomads, however, the Muslim Arabs, who, within 100 years after the death of their prophet, Muhammad, in 632 CE, transformed the Middle East into today's Arab World – except for Iran.
Although possibly devastated by the rapid spread of Arab culture and influence, the Iranians soon developed effective measures to bend this arc of Arab influence towards Iranian culture. The Iranians apparently indicated to the Arabs that it was all right to be ruled by them, but, as they, the Iranians, had more than a millennium of experience in ruling a vast empire, kept offering to show them how do it properly.[2]
Persian culture eventually defeated the culture that the victorious nomadic Arab Muslims had brought with them from Arabia. Although the rulers were Arab Muslims, pre-Islamic Persians would have had no trouble recognizing the cultural similarities between both empires.
But the indigenous Arabs may not have been willing recipients of this gift; the Iranians began smothering the Arab desert culture by deception – essentially superimposing Persian culture on the Abbasid Empire.[3] Even the name of the capital of the great Abbasid Empire, Baghdad,[4] is Persian (meaning, "God gave").
Eventually, the Persians seem to have perfected the "art of deception" (in Persian: ketman or taqiyah). Taqiyah means dissimulation; ketman means paying lip service to someone in a position of authority while disagreeing with what they are saying. Both methods consist of telling someone who might harm you what you think they want to hear, as telling the truth might be dangerous.[5] The Persians also perfected ta'arof – the use of extremely polite gestures to demonstrate to others that you are superior to them.[6] As one pursues dominance and control, the enemy becomes overpowered. One rarely even grasps that he or she is being humiliated – and ultimately defeated – until it is too late. This concept is totally alien to Western culture.
Iran's President, Hassan Rouhani, is likely wielding this strategy against President Obama and the other European leaders, with whom Iran is "negotiating" over its nuclear program. Iranian rulers have employed ketman and ta'arof to lull their modern day opponents – the P5+1 – into a false sense of complacency. They have been using deception, obfuscation, and extreme outward politeness to outmaneuver their opponents. This is especially clear from the way Rouhani constantly talks about the chances of success for the negotiations, while at the same time setting demands which the West cannot tolerate. If things go as the Iranians plan, Iran will have the time it needs to acquire nuclear capability. In turn, America and its P5 +1 allies will be humiliated.
In the meantime, the Iranians have extracted substantial, irreversible concessions from the West in exchange for illusory, reversible limits on its nuclear program. Western concessions have therefore only bolstered the determination of the Iranians to maintain their nuclear program until they can run out the clock on negotiations and achieve their goal of acquiring nuclear capability.
Westerners seem to have a massive capacity to ignore bad news – as if dispensing with information that is either harmful or inconvenient will simply make problems go away. The Europeans and Americans seem to know perfectly well what Iran's strategy is, but appear to have chosen to ignore how the Iranians are succeeding at pursuing their goals.
With patience and a deep sense of history, the Iranians apparently miss nothing. They, along with everyone else, can recall that the U.S. failed to prevent India, Pakistan, and North Korea from developing nuclear weapons. They may well have decided that they can acquire nuclear capability as well. Other countries in the Middle East seem to be deciding that, too.
The Iranians also appear to understand the nature of their opponents. They, along with everyone else, have observed President Obama, who has emphatically repeated that Iran will not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon on his watch. Indeed, the president has said, "all options are on the table" regarding Iran, including the "military component."[7]
But any threat of military force is credible only if the opposing party believes it is. President Obama has never displayed any credible action to back up his alleged threats.
He showed little support for the people of Syria when their government attacked them with chemical weapons, or for the people of Ukraine when Russia invaded. The latter was a clear violation of the Budapest Treaty, in which the Ukrainians gave up their nuclear program in exchange for guarantees of international of protection. They might now regret ever signing it.
The president did nothing either to protect, help, or retaliate against an attack on a U.S. Ambassador and four Americans in Benghazi, Libya on 9/11/12. The only person to spend time in jail for it was a filmmaker, scapegoated by the administration.
Indeed, the President has displayed behavior that has actually undermined his threats, not bolstered them. In 2012, President Obama was caught by a live microphone telling Russia's then-President, Dmitri Medvedev, that he would have "more flexibility" to negotiate missile defense after the 2012 U.S. presidential election. The Iranians must have wondered on what other issues the president might be "flexible."
Rather than project strong U.S. leadership with key American allies, President Obama's intentions seem to be a willingness to back down in front of any opponent for supposed political gain, even though the costs of addressing these accumulating threats later are growing every day.
Obama's policies toward Egypt, Libya, and Syria have further undermined America's influence in the Middle East, as well as the confidence of any country to count on America to protect it. In every upheaval, instead of making strong cases for either American intervention or non-intervention, President Obama described his overall foreign policy approach as "hitting singles,"[8] a cautious, diplomacy-first approach.
The Iranians do not seem to be deterred by a president who appears unwilling to use the levers of hard power to deter his enemies. More likely, the Iranians will bring in someone who will give up a few singles – although, so far, they have not even had to do that – in favor of long-term home runs.
In supporting the candidacy of Hassan Rouhani – a so-called "moderate," whose self-described negotiating strategy was to create "gaps in the Western front"[9] – Tehran has made its intention to accelerate its lunge toward nuclear capability unmistakably clear.
While some cultures stab their enemies in the back, the Iranians stab their enemies in the stomach. With a straight face, the Iranians have looked the West in the eye and effectively said: Hey, you don't mind if we enrich while you talk, do you?
To reassure the West after the failure of each round of talks, Rouhani has "expressed optimism" that an agreement will be reached in the future.[10] Such statements, among others, are the Iranian way of pacifying its enemy, while the Ayatollahs quietly continue enriching uranium and building intercontinental ballistic missiles – even faster.
A
visibly delighted Mohammad Javad Zarif, Foreign Minister of Iran, chats
with EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton in Geneva on Nov. 24,
2013, after announcing the nuclear agreement with Iran. (Image source:
Iranian Students News Agency).
|
A "good" deal for the West would consist of compelling Iran to comply fully with IAEA demands and six mandatory UN Security Council Resolutions, which demand that Iran suspend all enrichment, reprocessing, and heavy water activity. Parchin – a site which the IAEA believes contains "strong indicators" of having been used for explosives tests related to "possible nuclear weapon development"[12] – would be put under international scrutiny.
Many Iranians, however, have made clear they intend to expand their nuclear program – not restrict it. Ali Akbar Salehi, for instance, the head of Iran's nuclear energy agency, said he wants to install 30,000 additional centrifuges to enrich enough uranium to fuel Iran's Bushehr nuclear power station.[13] On May 25, 2014, Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan, Iran's defense minister, rejected the demands of U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, who demanded that Iran's missile program should come under negotiation in the talks. Dehqan described Iran's missile capability as "defensive and not negotiable."[14]
Meanwhile, the centrifuges keep spinning.
Should this activity continue, Iran's Sunni neighbors fear that they will have to kowtow to the Shiites – a major goal of Shiite Iran. Humiliating the Sunnis has been a Shiite goal since their prophet Muhammad died in 632 CE. [15]
Ketman and ta'arof have effectively enabled Iran to defeat its enemies, the Sunni Arabs, yet again – as well as the West. The Iranians have, in the words of one observer, sold us the same rug twice. But it is we in the West who are eagerly allowing them to do so. [16]
[1] In Persian "Mush-Khor" and" Marmulak-Khor"
[2] For a description of how the Persians explained the methods of kingship to the Arabs, see Nizam al-Mulk. His book is called Siyasat nameh, i.e. "Book of Government"or "Rules for Kings."
[3] Ibid.
[4] Baghdad was the capital of the Abbasid Empire from its founding in 750 until the Mongols sacked the city in 1258.
[5] For more on this concept, see Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, The Source of Iranian Negotiating Behavior, Example #4, Ketman/Taqiyah: Masking One's True Thoughts – Dissimulation
[6] For example, if three people are walking toward a door, one of them might rush ahead to open the door, meanwhile causing the other two to have a collision that will humiliate them.
[7] New York Times, Obama Says Iran Strike Is an Option, but Warns Israel
[8] Office of the Press Secretary, Remarks by President Obama and President Benigno Aquino III of the Philippines in Joint Press Conference
[9] Times of Israel, Iran's plan: Isolate US in P5+1 talks to gain advantage
[10] Press TV, Final nuclear agreement benefits all: Rouhani
[11] Institute for Science and International Security, Defining Iranian Nuclear Programs in a Comprehensive Solution under the Joint Plan of Action
[12] International Atomic Energy Agency, Implementation of the NPT Safeguards: Agreement and relevant provisions of Security Council resolutions in the Islamic Republic of Iran
[13] Press TV, Iran must build 30,000 more centrifuges to feed Bushehr: AEOI
[14] Fars News Agency, DM: Iran's Missile Program Not for Negotiations
[15] Khomeini himself alluded to this when he first stepped onto the tarmac, when he returned to rule Iran in February 1979. He stated that he had come to rectify a wrong that had taken place 1400 years ago.
[16] For more information on how Iranians negotiate, see: The Sources of Iranian Negotiating Behavior.
Obama's anti Israel efforts continue
Judge Orders IRS to Stop “Thwarting” Lawsuit and Respond to Complaint of Pro-Israel Group
On Tuesday, a federal judge refused to dismiss a suit brought by a pro-Israel group against the IRS. In her ruling, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson demanded that the agency stop “attempting to thwart this action’s advancement,” and ordered the IRS to respond to the complaint within thirty days.
The Philadelphia-based group, Z Street, applied for tax-exempt status in 2009 and the IRS responded slowly. In 2010, Z Street filed a lawsuit against the IRS. When asked why the application had not been processed, an attorney for the IRS responded that its application had been sent to a “special unit… to determine whether the organization’s activities contradict the Administration’s public policies.” The special unit was referred to as the “Touch and Go” division or TAG. Later an IRS manager acknowledged that pro-Israel groups were getting special scrutiny:
why checkpoints and a fence?
This is why Israel is forced to have checkpoints and a protective security fence. What rationale nation wouldn't? "Border Police forces at Tapuah Junction in the northern West Bank Friday morning discovered a Palestinian man wearing an explosive vest and thus prevented a planned suicide bombing.
Policemen from the Alon battalion of the Border Police saw the man, a 20-year-old Nablus resident, walking toward them wearing a heavy coat, despite the 35-degree-Celsius heat (95 degrees Farenheit). The policemen called on the man to stop, at which point he lay down in the road.
Read more: Israeli forces catch man wearing explosive belt | The Times of Israel http://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-forces-catch-man-wearing-explosive-belt/#ixzz33OL5sVy4
The US and Mexico share a common border of about 2,000-miles (3,200-km). As of February 10, 2012, the Department of Homeland Security had completed 651 miles of fencing out of nearly 652 miles mandated by Congress, including 299 miles of vehicle barriers and 352 miles of pedestrian fence. Is this an apartheid fence ?
Policemen from the Alon battalion of the Border Police saw the man, a 20-year-old Nablus resident, walking toward them wearing a heavy coat, despite the 35-degree-Celsius heat (95 degrees Farenheit). The policemen called on the man to stop, at which point he lay down in the road.
Read more: Israeli forces catch man wearing explosive belt | The Times of Israel http://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-forces-catch-man-wearing-explosive-belt/#ixzz33OL5sVy4
The US and Mexico share a common border of about 2,000-miles (3,200-km). As of February 10, 2012, the Department of Homeland Security had completed 651 miles of fencing out of nearly 652 miles mandated by Congress, including 299 miles of vehicle barriers and 352 miles of pedestrian fence. Is this an apartheid fence ?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
