Tuesday, February 22, 2011


By Schmoel Yitzhak

If Barack Obama and his Sweetheart of Sigma Chi Secretary of State are so fanatically opposed to Jews building in East Jerusalem or the West Bank, have they ever considered where else in the Middle East Jews can build a home? Apparently not.

Surely, Hilary Clinton knows that Jews are verboten in Saudi Arabia. They haven't got a chance in Gaza or Lebanon because neither Hamas nor Hezbollah want Jews in their midsts.

And, when you think about it, that truth holds for virtually every single country in the Arab world.

Which really doesn't leave much room other than in Israel; and that happens to include Jerusalem; East, West, North and South.

If you had listened to America's president you would get the idea that if American pressure had broken Benjamin Netanyahu on the "settlement" issue, peace would reign from Tunisia to Egypt; from Libya to Iran.

Over and over and over again -- like a kettle-drummer's beat on his tympani -- Uncle Sam's State Department stooges have repeated the "settlement-freeze-brings-peace" mantra as if it were as factual as the sun rising in the East.

It was a propaganda line that America's left-wing media sprinted with like the last runner in a relay race because the New York Times and Los Angeles Times -- among other faux newspaper -- desperately want the empty suit in the White House to succeed.

On precious few occasions do we find a deviation toward the Jewish side and only when the Arabs (Palestinians) commit such outrageous faux pas that even notorious
Israeli-bashers such as the Washington Post concede that the likes of Mahmoud Abbas are simply as phony as a three-dollar bill.

In a recent editorial, the Post slammed the Palestinian President for the fraud that he is and its headline says it all: ABBAS PROVES HE PREFERS POSTURING TO A PEACE PROCESS.

"Abbas," says the Post editorial, "has mostly refused to participate in the direct talks that Obama made one of his top foreign policy priorities."

The Post revelation isn't quite as sensational as the discovery of electricity because any fair-minded person with a knowledge of the Palestinian Authority knows that what Abbas -- along with Hamas, Hezbollah and the Iranian mullahs -- wants is the extermination of Israel. The Arabs differ only in the means to achieve this end.

Meanwhile, media types such as the Post are ever-so-slowly beginning to see the light and are fingering Abbas for his congenital lying. Exhibit A is oft-repeated promise of presidential elections.

"Abbas," the Post notes, "has failed to schedule overdue elections, including for his own post as president."

Should we be surprised? Not a bit.

Too slowly, the civilized world is wising up to the uncivilized behavior of militant Islam and even the less-militants such as the Saudis.

"The cesspool of human oppression in the Arab world has been opened for all to see," notes columnist David Suissa. "Don't you wish the Arab world had a modicum of Israel's civil society?"

This is the same State of Israel that stands out as a beacon boasting the only true democracy in the Middle East. Yet Uncle Sam's commander-in-chief has yet to set foot in the Jerusalem over which he fusses or Tel Aviv where he houses an Amertcan embassy that -- by rights -- should be in Israel's capital city.

While Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, et. al. erupt with protests, Obama remains totally without clue as to positive action. That has been his trademark dating back to the last Iranian uprising that begged for American intervention.

"In 2009, following Iran's rigged election," writes the Jerusalem Post's Sarah Honig, "thousands took to the streets in defiance of the theocracy that Jimmy Carter piteously enabled.

"As pro-democracy demonstrators were killed in Teheran and as its ayatollahs furthered their designs to arm themselves with nukes, the current leader of the free world (Obama) spared no effort to stress the need to downplay the Iranian fuss."

This is the same Obama who couldn't wait to stab Mubarak in the back after years of embracing him as America's partner.

This is the same Obama who -- in the Spring of 2010 -- picked a fight with Bibi over building houses in an existing Jewish neighborhood of Jerusalem. These are homes that President George W. Bush conceded were established facts that must be respected.

As columnist Jonathan Tobin notes, America's commander-in-chief is willing "to treat 40-year-old Jewish neighborhoods in Israel's ancient capital as illegal settlements."

What is it with Obama and Secretary of State Clinton? Have they no sense of political fair play or is that the stupid question of the month?

Perhaps David Suissa has the best answer: "Maybe it's just easier to beat up on a free and open society like Israel."

This much is certain: Israel is the only free and open society where Jews can live because no Arab country would dare let them in; and that's a fact.

And while Libya burns and Egypt wrestles with a leadership quandary and the rest of the Arab world becomes restless, it become more and more apparent how utterly asinine the settlement-building fuss had become!

1 comment:

  1. Once again Simon I like your style, you tell it like it is. I am of the opinion that the entire settlement issue has been asinine from the very beginning. I am very concerned about the very near future, with all of the unrest, Iran, Egypt, Libya, along with everything else going on there, what is to become of Israel? Will she have any allies?