Posted on 07/07/2009 7:46:51 AM PDT by SJackson
President Barack Obama’s foreign policy inclinations are a threat to Israel’s survival. That’s the no-holds-barred assessment by one of Israel’s leading American publicists, Norman Podhoretz, the prominent neo-conservative long associated with the American Jewish Committee’s influential magazine, Commentary. Podhoretz made the inflammatory charge against the U.S. president in an article in the May 2009 issue of Commentary in an article entitled “How Obama’s America Might Threaten Israel,” one of a series of polemics addressing the subject: “Israel at Risk.”
This is no surprise to AFP readers. On Dec. 1, 2008, AFP surprised many by suggesting that Barack Obama might “pull a JFK” and begin putting pressure on Israel. Six months later, AFP’s prediction appears on the mark. The difference between JFK and Obama, though, is that JFK’s pressure was applied privately, through diplomatic channels. Obama’s pressure has been both public and forthright.
The most recent frenzy from Israel and its American supporters in response to initiatives from the Obama administration came when the president forcefully demanded that Israel cease building settlements in the occupied West Bank. The president further inflamed the Zionist state and its American lobby by reiterating that demand in his widely heralded address to the Muslim world, delivered in Cairo.
In fact, the confrontation between the United States and Israel has been simmering for some time, beginning with the Obama administration’s open call for Israel to submit to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
banner_newsletter
On May 7 the Philadelphia Bulletin carried a report headlined “Obama Follows JFK Example and Pressures Israel to Limit Nuclear Capability.” The Bulletin stated: “For the first time since the Kennedy administration, a senior American official has commented explicitly and negatively about Israel’s nuclear capability.”
Shock waves rolled through Israel and the Jewish lobby in Washington after President Obama’s assistant secretary of state, Rose Gottemoeller—speaking on May 5 at a meeting on the international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty—said Israel should become a signatory to the treaty. By doing so, Israel would be required to open up its secret nuclear arsenal to international inspection, something Israel has consistently refused to do.
The Bulletin noted that “The Obama administration’s newfound opposition to Israel’s formally undisclosed nuclear program reverses nearly 50 years of American silence on the subject,” adding that after JFK struggled with then Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion over the issue of Israel’s nuclear arms, “President Kennedy refused to budge and continued to push Israel to abandon its nuclear option until his death on Nov. 22, 1963. No American president has made an issue of Israel’s nuclear capability—until now.”
In response to the perceived danger posed by Obama, the Jewish lobby rallied its troops. A leading voice for the lobby, The Washington Times, featured a front page headline story on May 6 shrieking “Secret U.S.-Israel nuclear accord in jeopardy,” a clarion call for Republicans, conservatives, fundamentalist Christians, and those who want to curry favor with pro-Israel money barons, to join together to stop President Obama from pressuring Israel to sign the treaty.
Editorially, the Times asked if the United States would “sell out its strongest ally” by forcing Israel to come clean on its nuclear arsenal (which some say is the fifth largest in the world). The Times expressed fear the United States might close ranks with other nations that have repeatedly called for Israel to adhere to the non-proliferation treaty and open its nuclear installations for inspection.
A former Israeli foreign ministry advisor, Alan Baker, said the comments from the Obama administration were “surprising and worrying.”
For its part, The Jerusalem Post asserted Israel sees no reason to sign the nuclear treaty because—according to Israel—the treaty is “ineffective.”
Israel and its supporters believe Israel is the only nation in the Middle East that should be permitted to have nuclear weapons and that Israel (and the United States) must stop other nations, especially Iran, from developing a nuclear counter to Israel, the only nation in the Middle East that does have atomic weapons.
In fact, the statement by the Obama administration differs in no way from a 2006 position paper by the distinguished Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College, the training ground for the “best and the brightest” among up-and-coming officers. The War College asserted that neither talk of a military attack on Iran nor ongoing American diplomatic initiatives are likely to stop Iran and that either course could result in disaster.
The report said Israel should take the initiative, close its nuclear reactor, turn over nuclear materiel to a third party, and allow the International Atomic Energy Agency to maintain regular inspection of Israel’s nuclear operations.
The report urged the United States to put pressure on Israel to make this possible.
America’s military thinkers believe if Israel were to curtail its nuclear arms, the United States would be more able to convince other Middle East states with nuclear ambitions to do likewise. In truth, Israel’s determined push for nuclear supremacy—a foundation of Israel’s national defense policy—led Arab nations as well as Pakistan and Iran to also pursue a nuclear option.
Although many Obama critics find it hard to believe his administration would pressure Israel, noting that Israel’s stalwart, Rahm Emanuel, is White House chief of staff, AFP noted on Dec. 1, 2008 that even though President Kennedy had placed Myer Feldman—a pro-Israel hardliner—in a key post in his White House, JFK and his brother, Attorney General Robert Kennedy, and other administration insiders, worked assiduously to keep Feldman out of the loop on the conduct of U.S. Middle East policy. The president and his brother were even known to remark critically of Feldman behind his back.
JFK even sent word to friends of the Arab world at the State Department that even though JFK had won 90 percent of the Jewish vote that it should not be assumed that he was “in their pocket.”
As part of their effort to destabilize Obama, Israel’s advocates in the so-called “neo-conservative” network have deployed one of their longtime front men, ex-ambassador Alan Keyes, into the field.
The former Harvard roommate of Bilderberg figure William Kristol—the powerful neo-conservative publicist who remains a close Keyes friend—Keyes has been promoting an array of questionable allegations about Obama, some of which—a point little known—actually originated in Israel among supporters of Obama’s 2008 opponent, John McCain. (Although Obama won 75 percent of the Jewish vote, McCain was favored over Obama in polls in Israel, the only foreign nation where McCain was the preferred choice. And note, too, as related by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his book The Samson Option, that following John F. Kennedy’s 1960 election victory, one of the first things JFK did upon assuming office was to assure State Department officials who were sympathetic to the Arab world that they should not assume that the new president was “in their [the Jews’] pocket.”)
In any case, the questionable stories about Obama being promoted by Keyes have been picked up by independent “patriot” media in the United States and loudly publicized by three widely circulated supermarket tabloids, The National Enquirer, The National Examiner and The Globe, which are all owned by one company, American Media Inc., a subsidiary of Evercore Partners, a shadowy consortium of pro-Israel financial interests under the direction of Wall Street operator Roger Altman.
Although Israeli propagandists have—for years—had a stranglehold on conventional “conservative” think tanks and media, Israel’s disinformation specialists are filtering Keyes’ stories into the “patriot” movement to checkmate the Obama administration’s effort to put the reins on Israel.
This is no surprise to anyone, is it?
As part of their effort to destabilize Obama, Israel’s advocates in the so-called “neo-conservative” network have deployed one of their longtime front men, ex-ambassador Alan Keyes, into the field.
If you'd like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
Does the Pak Times consider this a news report or an editorial?
The former Harvard roommate of Bilderberg figure William Kristol—the powerful neo-conservative publicist who remains a close Keyes friend—
As might be expected from such a silly piece and source, this is simply a flat-out lie. The two men's roads, to whatever degree they ran together, parted ways many years ago.
What’s unclear is this. Does Obama wish to undermine Israel because it’s a Jewish state, because it’s a US ally, because he favors Hamas and Hezbollah, or because it’s a democracy in a sea of dictatorships? What’s equally uncertain is how any Jews in America could not realize that Norman Podhoretz is the best analyst of American interest, and spot on about Obama and his overt plans to aid the PLO.
Wow...and ONLY a year too late!
Ouch. Alex Jones and the Pak Times. Perfect together.
Hombre, you raise good points. From the article:
“(Although Obama won 75 percent of the Jewish vote, McCain was favored over Obama in polls in Israel, the only foreign nation where McCain was the preferred choice..)”
There are obviously two elements in that statement. American voters (pro-Obama) and Israel (pro-McCain).
The important distinction arises from the fact that many of the top officials in Lenin and Stalin’s Russia during the 1920-40’s were Jews. When the movement was introduced to America during the same time frame, American Jews were a valuable and important asset.
Stalin was one of, if not the first government leader to formally recognize the new state of Israel in 1948 - but only because he thought it would be a natural outpost for communism. When he saw by 1953 that was not to be the case he renounced his support and began to demote, mistreat and deport Russian Jews.
Not all American Jews, recognized that communism had abandonned them then or even now; although there were notable exceptions. Israel, of course, clearly recognizes Obama for what he is.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2285551/posts
The former Harvard roommate of Bilderberg figure William Kristol
Ouch. Alex Jones and the Pak Times. Perfect together.
Don't forget the John Birch Society. They're probably saying the same things about Alan, all because he's not anti-Israel.
Like most of the Arab world, probably an article of faith.
Despite the number of Jews in the Communist movement in Russia, the Bolsheviks condemned and outlawed Zionism as "bourgeois nationalism" (while supporting other nationalisms, such as Irish nationalism, as "revolutionary"). The party line only shifted in 1947 when Stalin decided the Israelis would be useful in combating "British imperialism," but the shift didn't last very long. In the Fifties the line shifted right back to support of the Arabs.
The amazing thing about all this--something I have remarked on for the ten years I have been here--is that for some mysterious reason the domestic political spectrum in the United States refused to recognize this. Until relatively recently the American Left was pro-Israel while the American Right was pro-Arab. This means the American Left took a position in opposition to the Left everywhere else (the Right didn't have this problem, since the American Right's antipathy to Israel was shared by the Right internationally). They (the American Left) found themselves supporting every single ally of the Palestine Liberation Organization while opposing the PLO itself. At the same time, while at war with every government under attack by the Left, the American Left supported Israel against the same forces they supported everywhere else.
One reason for this is that the vast majority of American Jews (politically liberal and non-observant) actually saw Israel as a radical beachhead in an otherwise conservative region (a position shared by the Right). As Alan Dershowitz has often claimed, the Zionist position is the "true radical position."
During all this time American Biblical Fundamentalists bucked the tide by supporting Israel. Unfortunately for them, this was not appreciated either by Jewish liberals (who rejected them for their domestic positions and their religious motivations) or by the political Right, which for the longest time was strongly anti-Israel. Pro-Israel Fundamentalists simply do not understand how anti-Israel their conservative "friends" were for so long (only recently has this situation happily changed). Even Jesse Helms, the ultimate Southern Baptist, was originally fanatically anti-Israel, even calling for America to break off relations with Israel at one time. Fortunately, after his first term in the Senate he changed his position (I've heard several stories of why he did so). Thank G-d that today the American spectrum is more reflective of the spectrum elsewhere and that the conservative movement has finally joined its Fundamentalist contingent in supporting Israel.
But while the American conservative movement is now strongly pro-Israel (though anti-Israel pockets remain), American liberalism still for the most part imagines itself to be consistent in supporting Israel over Communist Arab guerrillas. The attachment of liberal Jews to Israel is not based on the Bible, Halakhah, or even ancient Jewish history but is tied to that communities self-definition of super-secular, super-liberal, super-democrats. They imagine the State of Israel to be the national manifestation of their own values. Unfortunately this is to a large degree true, as the State of Israel and the Zionist movement that preceded it was largely based on secular nationalism, which is a no-go so far as Torah is concerned.
May Mashiach come soon, speedily, and in our day!
It appears you have been with this issue much longer than I. While I disagree with the relevance of many of your statements this one, depending on the definition of your terms, particularly stands out as open to debate:
“American liberalism still for the most part imagines itself to be consistent in supporting Israel over Communist Arab guerrillas.”
I will have to find time to read more of your posts, it may be I will learn something.
Regards,
I knew he was up to something. Can’t never trust those people (conservative blacks), not when they become race traitors.
The loaded 'Zionist Agenda' term is predictably typical of the anti-Israeli/anti-Jewish press, both overseas and also on the domestic front.
The former Harvard roommate of Bilderberg figure William Kristol -- the powerful neo-conservative publicist who remains a close Keyes friend -- Keyes has been promoting an array of questionable allegations about Obama, some of which -- a point little known -- actually originated in Israel among supporters of Obama's 2008 opponent, John McCain. (Although Obama won 75 percent of the Jewish vote, McCain was favored over Obama in polls in Israel, the only foreign nation where McCain was the preferred choice. And note, too, as related by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his book The Samson Option, that following John F. Kennedy's 1960 election victory, one of the first things JFK did upon assuming office was to assure State Department officials who were sympathetic to the Arab world that they should not assume that the new president was "in their [the Jews'] pocket.")Joe Kennedy, Sr. was a really ugly, nasty anti-Semite.
In any case, the questionable stories about Obama being promoted by Keyes have been picked up by independent "patriot" media in the United States and loudly publicized by three widely circulated supermarket tabloids, The National Enquirer, The National Examiner and The Globe, which are all owned by one company, American Media Inc., a subsidiary of Evercore Partners, a shadowy consortium of pro-Israel financial interests under the direction of Wall Street operator Roger Altman.
Although Israeli propagandists have -- for years -- had a stranglehold on conventional "conservative" think tanks and media, Israel's disinformation specialists are filtering Keyes' stories into the "patriot" movement to checkmate the Obama administration's effort to put the reins on Israel.
“Norman Podhoretz, the prominent neo-conservative long associated with the American Jewish Committee’s influential magazine, Commentary.”
Wrong.
Commentary split with AJC in 2007.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.