The Obama administration continues to ignore 'Palestinian' terror support
This is from Ben Smith's report on Friday's conference call between National Security Council official Dan Shapiro and American 'Jewish leaders.'One note on the call that left participants dissatisfied: The official said he wasn't aware of a recent letter from chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat to a Palestinian [Ahmed Sa'adat. CiJ] convicted in the assassination of an Israeli cabinet minister [Rechavam Zeevi. CiJ].I discussed the Erekat letter here.
Erekat described the letter as "humanitarian" and said it wasn't a gesture of support for the deed.
Let's face it folks: The Obama administration is turning a blind eye to terror in its zeal for the establishment of a 'Palestinian state.' Shapiro's claim that he wasn't aware of the letter is totally disingenuous.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Dan Shapiro, Palestinian incitement, Palestinian terrorism, Rechavam Zeevi
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 1:13 PM
3 Comments:
The Israeli government seems willing to extend the revanant freeze three more months.
Any bets the Palestinians will return to the table?
Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen. Its incredible Israel is negotiating this with the US rather with the Palestinians.
Abu Bluff can just sit back and relax. The US and the Jews will take good care of him and he doesn't have to lift a finger to do anything.
Life's good!
As long as the Israeli government doesn't make it an issue, it's not an issue. If the Israeli government made the PA's terror support, including its incitement broadcasts, etc., issue #1, and forced Obama to confront it, things would be different. But, as it is, it's not. Now, why they don't, I have no idea. That 30% support in the U.S., could go way down if Israel and its American supporters made this a big deal.
Actually, the situation is worse: The Israelis are the world's WORST negotiators. That is one of the world's enduring mysteries. Look at Oslo. What government in its right mind would invite terrorists committed to its destruction to live next to it? Am I wrong about this?
Post a Comment
<< Home