Amid all the back and forth between the pols and the pundits over Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech before congress tomorrow, I think Caroline Glick best explains what’s at the bottom of the political fracas in her Feb. 20th article: Netanyahu’s true electoral rival.
Forget all the faux outrage over a “snub;” this is ultimately about Israel’s upcoming election. On March 17th, Israelis will decide whether to keep Netanyahu in office, or replace him with the opposition: Issac Herzog & Tzipi Livni.
Here in the U.S. – for the most part – Republicans, conservatives, and those who support Israel’s right to exist and defend herself from crazy Muslims, all back the Prime Minister. American leftists, progressives and anti-Semites side with Herzog/Livni.
It’s pretty obvious who Obama & Co. are rooting for ~
As the White House sees it, if Herzog/Livni form the next government, then Jerusalem will dance to Obama’s tune. If Netanyahu is reelected, then the entire edifice of Obama’s Middle East policy may topple and fall.
The administration’s trumped-up offense over a breach of protocol is nothing but a smoke-screen for their real mission: undermining Netanyahu. And here’s how devious and malicious they really are ~
Shortly after Kerry gave his Israel apartheid speech, his Middle East mediator Martin Indyk attacked Israel and the character of the Israeli people in an astounding interview to Yediot Aharonot.
Among other things, Indyk hinted that to force Israel to make concessions demanded by the PLO, the Palestinians may need to launch another terror war. 😯
Indyk also threatened that the Palestinians will get their state whether Israel agrees to their terms of not. In his words, “They will get their state in the end – whether through violence or by turning to international organizations.”
Indyk made his statements as an unnamed US official. When his identity was exposed, he was forced to resign his position.
In case you never heard of Martin Indyk before either, here’s a bit more info ~
Following his departure from government service he returned to his previous position as vice president of the (Left-wing) Brookings Institution and the director of its foreign policy program. Last September, The New York Times reported that the Brookings Institute received a $14.8 million, four-year donation from Qatar, the chief financier of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.
[Coincidence? Sure.]
Last month, Indyk was back in Israel, speaking at the annual conference of the Institute for National Security Studies. But essentially making veiled threats ~
On the Palestinian front, Indyk warned that Israel shouldn’t be worried about the Palestinians getting an anti-Israel resolution passed in the UN Security Council. Rather, it can expect that the US will join with the other permanent members of the UN Security Council to pass a resolution “against Israel’s will” that will “lay out the principle of a two-state solution.”
As Indyk intimated, Israel can avoid this fate if it elects a Herzog/Livni government. Such a government, he indicated, will preemptively give in to all of the Palestinians demands and so avoid a confrontation with the US and its colleagues at the Security Council […]
As for Iran, Indyk shrugged at Israel’s concerns over the agreement that Obama is now seeking to conclude with the Iranian regime regarding its nuclear weapons program. That agreement will leave Iran as a threshold nuclear state. Indyk suggested that the US could assuage Israel’s concerns by signing a bilateral treaty with Israel that would commit the US to do something if Iran passes some nuclear threshold.
(Would Obama sign that treaty with the same pen he uses to re-write the U.S. Constitution?)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So what does the Prime Minister’s appearance tomorrow really represent?
When Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner announced last month that he had invited Netanyahu to address the joint houses of Congress on the threat emanating from Iran’s nuclear program and from radical Islam, he unintentionally transformed the Israeli elections from a local affair to a contest between Obama and Netanyahu.
Obama’s response to Netanyahu’s speech has been astounding. His ad hominem attacks against Netanyahu, his open moves to coerce Democratic lawmakers to boycott Netanyahu’s speech, and the administration’s aggressive attempts to damage Israel’s reputation in the US have been without precedent. More than anything, they expose a deep-seated fear that Netanyahu will be successful in exposing the grave danger that Obama’s policies toward Iran and toward the Islamic world in general pose to the global security.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In the end, Binyamin Netanyahu is by far the better man. So let’s pray he wins this one. Israel’s future depends on it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Related:
Why Netanyahu Will Trump Obama in the Iran Nuclear Deal Showdown ~
The “crisis” with Israel has been manufactured because the White House doesn’t like what Netanyahu has to say, and so they are working diligently to undermine it.
Bibi’s Breach of Protocol ~ Interesting article compares Netanyahu’s appearance in Congress to Queen Esther’s intervention on behalf of her people.
Totally undermining any credibility the Obama administration might have in nuclear agreement negotiations with Iran ➡ Alongside negotiations with the US on a nuclear deal, Iran practices destroying American Gulf vessels
The latest argument for the homeschooling movement comes to us from the “Nutmeg State,” where a high school teacher was suspended last week after reading a poem that graphically described a gay sex encounter to his advanced English class. This story is from the Blaze who says that the poem in question (“Please Master” by 60’s radical Allen Ginsberg) is so offensive they chose not to print any of it.
“Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”
