Powered by WebAds

Tuesday, August 04, 2009

An Obama court Jew smears... Aluf Benn?

The Jerusalem Post publishes an outrageous article from one Marc R. Stanley, the chairman of the National Jewish Democratic Council, who accuses "the small anti-Obama wing of the Jewish community" (including Haaretz's leftist columnist Aluf Benn) of having 'chutzpah.'
US President Barack Obama and his administration are making an unprecedented effort to reach out to the Jewish community.
The Obumbler has to make an 'unprecedented effort to reach out' because it was the way he fooled 78% of American Jewry into voting for him despite his association with the likes of Jeremiah "Them Jews" Wright, Rashid "Where's the videotape" Khalidi, Edward Said, Samantha "Let's send troops to make a 'Palestinian' state" Power and others whose hostility to Israel was clearer than even Obama's. How successful has that 'outreach' been? Suffice it to say that 94% of Israeli Jews aren't buying it.
The president has made moving the Middle East toward peace a priority and has spoken of the "unbreakable" bond we share with Israel.
Every President has tried to move the Middle East toward peace and every President has spoken of an 'unbreakable bond' with Israel. But no President - not even Jimmy Carter - has placed the entire burden of peace on Israel like this hostile anti-Semite has.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons "futile,"
And that just had Ahmadinejad and Khameni quaking in their boots. Especially when Clinton admitted that the Obumbler is resigned to a nuclear Iran.
and last week Obama had some of his most senior foreign policy figures meet with top Israeli officials - in Israel.
To try to persuade Israel to be the sacrificial lamb to prove that no, Iran really doesn't want to negotiate about its nuclear weapons.
Yet, there are still those who leap at any chance to attack the president, including in an op-ed in last week's The New York Times, "Why Won't Obama Talk to Israel?" by Aluf Benn.
If the Leftist Aluf Benn can't be friends with Obama then no Israeli Jew can. Good grief! Who ever thought I'd be defending Aluf Benn!
First, it is important to bring perspective to the vocal group of individuals in our community who remain unhappy with our president. Despite this group's extraordinary efforts to smear Obama in the Jewish community during last year's campaign, the president received 78% of the Jewish vote.
All that proves is that 78% of American Jewry voted wrongly. And that 70% of American Jewry is psychologically incapable of voting for Republicans. That proves that they are fools. After all, as Obama himself has apparently said, "F**k the Jews, they'll vote for us anyway."

Stanley then goes on to take a swipe at American Thinker (whose Ed Lasky in particular has done a yeoman's job of digging up background on Obama that ought to be important the Jewish and pro-Israel communities) and then he goes back to ripping Aluf Benn! At this rate, we'll never get Aluf Benn - who was trying to help Obama solve his unpopularity in Israel - to write an impartial piece again!
One can't get past the title of Benn's op-ed in the NYTimes without being struck by the question he poses: "Why won't Obama talk to Israel?" Benn asserts that "neither the president nor any senior administration official has given a speech or an interview aimed at an Israeli audience." He then dramatically writes, "The Arabs got the Cairo speech; we [Israel] got silence."

Beyond the notion that Obama happened to be standing in front of an Arab audience, it is hard to understand how Benn misses the fact that Obama was not only speaking to the people in the room. In this digital world with the power of the Internet and a 24/7 news cycle, the president was addressing all of us - including Israel. This was especially true when the president spoke clearly and powerfully about America's unbreakable bond with Israel in front of that Arab audience. The message to Israelis was clear: You do your part for peace and I'll pressure the Arab states to do the same. Meaning, Obama is not going to rely on the political playbook of platitudes when dealing with Israel and her neighbors.

If Benn did not hear that Obama aimed elements of his Cairo speech at Israelis, he was not listening.
Unfortunately for Obama and Stanley, Israelis were listening when Obama spoke in Cairo. We heard him ignore 3,000 years of Jewish history and claim that the State of Israel's existence is justified only by the Holocaust. We heard him declare a moral equivalence between hundreds of years of pogroms and Jewish suffering and the self-inflicted suffering of the 'Palestinian refugees' (an odious comparison he repeated at Buchenwald a few days later). We heard him call for all three monotheistic religions to 'share' control of Jerusalem, even though with Israel in control, everyone has access to their holy sites, while with anyone else in control, the Jews were kept out. And we heard him state a moral equivalence between 'Palestinian' terrorism and the self-inflicted tragedy of the 'Palestinian refugees.'

Did we miss anything?
NO ONE can credibly claim Obama and his administration are not talking to Israel. The reality is the administration is not only talking with Israelis, it is intensely collaborating and communicating with it- in person. In fact, Obama spoke with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu face-to-face about settlement growth. This administration is talking with Israel about the wide range of policies on which we agree - and those precious few areas on which we disagree.
What Benn was trying to say was that if Obama comes to Israel and uses his rhetorical skills to speak to Israelis (and not just to lecture Binyamin Netanyahu) that it might help his standing here. Benn - who would likely be more than happy to see Israel go back to the 1967 borders - is trying to put Obama in a position where he can convince Israelis that they should take that suicidal risk.

I don't believe Obama coming here would help because I don't believe most Israelis will ever trust Obama again, and frankly I'd rather not have that anti-Semite visit this country. But Stanley - like Obama - is so tone deaf to the nuances of this country that he's attacking someone who is likely his ally.
The long-term security of Israel will only be fully ensured if peace is achieved. Obama has made clear that the road is difficult, but the president is working hard to make that day come. However, there will still be those with the undying chutzpah to attack the president for not being sufficiently supportive of Israel. I urge them to actually listen to what the president is saying and watch what he is doing - they might be surprised.
You know, when 94% of Israeli Jews believe that Obama isn't pro-Israel, maybe it's not the Jews' or the Israelis' problem, and maybe pointing it out cannot be called chutzpah?

I have to go shower. I feel dirty after reading Stanley's article.


At 12:37 PM, Blogger NormanF said...

America's Leftist Jews are in denial. Hardly surprising in view of their willingness to believe in Obama. They got the President they wanted so I don't have much sympathy for them.

And the fact they attack their Israeli allies shows just how out of touch they are with how Israelis view the Administration. Its going to be a long four years.

At 2:43 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

Some people can be fooled all of the time. Who would have thought this group could include any Jews?

At 3:09 PM, Blogger Alpha3958 said...

The fact that they are attacking Israeli leftists shows that this is not based on "policy disagreements". They hate Israel, period.

At 5:07 PM, Blogger What is "Occupation" said...

As a lifelong democrat it took me all of 4 minutes to google obama when he was to speak at AIPAC a couple of years ago when he 1st appeared on the Presidential screen...

Sorry, I could not get past his terrorist loving friends, his terrorist friends & his anti-israel friends...

He was clear as a bell for those who wished to see what a douche bag he is..

For the 78% of American Jews that embraced him?

You got what you deserved...

But I didnt vote for him and quite frankly I'd love to see his real birth certificate.

But if he IS a USA citizen, then America has lost it's soul and voted a terrible man to be President...

All slick and no substance...

America voted into office a wolf in sheep's clothing...

At 5:24 PM, Blogger ais cotten19 said...

Total court Jew mentality. Aluf Benn understands (and Stanley doesn't) that when 94% of the people refuse to back a politician, it's POLITICIAN who must act to gain confidence. Is Stanley really that stupid? No. His movement is being undermined at an alarming rate. He is blaming the messenger.

At 6:40 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


you are no dem

not one birther is a dem

At 6:55 PM, Blogger Carl in Jerusalem said...



But 35% of Dems are truthers.

And that's even worse.

(28% of Republicans are birthers by the way).

At 11:10 PM, Blogger Michael B said...

Actually, there were ample numbers of Democratic birthers during the primaries, in Clinton's and in other camps. They are no longer vocal and it serves to partisan purpose for the Obama camp or the Democratic camp in general to hi-light this fact, but there were plenty of them.

Additionally, many are "birthers" in little more than name, i.e. those who have expressed a passing interest in the subject, given its Constitutional applicability and given the fact the full birth certificate has never been produced. (E.g., I haven't even expressed that much interest, but since I now bring it up in this comment, does that place me within the "birther" rubric? For those seeking partisan effect, the answer to that question is "yes," it would.)

At 11:04 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't care anything about Kenya.

I couldn't care less about that blond Israeli lady making all sorts of claims about Obama's past.

I couldn't care less about the arguments whether the digital version of the birth certificate is touched up or not.

I just want to understand why Obama does not release his ORIGINAL birth certificate.

The fact is he continues to refuse to do so. It should be a most innocuous document. The digital copy released is not the original and lacks data contained on the original.

Obama isn't a garage mechanic. He's the US president. This would not be acceptable behavior even for a low ranking politician's office assistant. Something stinks.

What has this most elementary point to do with someone's party affiliation? What happened to the most transparent president and administration in US history? That was quick!


Post a Comment

<< Home