After pandering to Jews to get elected to her New York Senate seat, Hillary, now Obama’s Secretary of State, is criticizing Israel in no uncertain terms.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has relayed messages to Israel in the past week expressing anger at obstacles Israel is placing to the delivery of humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip. A leading political source in Jerusalem noted that senior Clinton aides have made it clear that the matter will be central to Clinton’s planned visit to Israel next Tuesday.
Ahead of Clinton’s visit, special U.S. envoy to the Middle East George Mitchell is expected to issue a sharply worded protest on the same matter when he arrives here Thursday.
“Israel is not making enough effort to improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza,” senior U.S. officials told Israeli counterparts last week, and reiterated Washington’s view by saying that “the U.S. expects Israel to meet its commitments on this matter.”
Now, why would Israel possibly be concerned about aid moving into Gaza?
You see, the aid is being distributed by the U.N. there’s no way it could possibly end up in the hands of Hamas, right? What could possibly go wrong?
UNRWA informed the IDF on Friday it is suspending humanitarian aid deliveries to the Gaza Strip after Hamas stole supplies it had transferred to the Palestinian territory.
The seizure of 200 tons of supplies, included flour and other staples, took place on Thursday night. In response, UNRWA (UN Relief and Works Agency) officials informed the IDF’s Gaza Coordination and Liaison Administration that it was suspending the deliveries until further notice.
Hamas steals blankets, food from U.N. warehouse
U.N. Accuses Hamas of Stealing Aid
Hamas confiscates U.N. Gaza aid
Hamas Stealing Food and Medicine Sent By International Donors
Hamas police accused of stealing aid
And what does Hamas do with the supplies they steal, the humanitarian aid intended for the displaced population of Gaza? Why, they sell the aid to buy more weapons to attack Israel with of course!
In Gaza, the criminal Hamas government has been caught red handed time and again stealing international aid – either selling it back to the people to fund their war crimes, or diverting it directly to their guerilla terrorist forces. And Hamas keeps firing rockets into Israeli towns using their own human shields every day. And the smuggling tunnels bring in more weapons all the time.
So, why is the Obama administration criticizing and pressuring Israel to go against her own self interest and allow aid to pour into Gaza via the U.N. when the U.N. itself admits that it can’t keep the aid out of the hands of Hamas? Good question, bad news for Israel. But wait, there’s more.
The appointment by the Obama administration of Charles “Chas” Freeman as chairman of the National Intelligence Council on Thursday caused a real brouhaha in Washington.
Freeman served as US ambassador to Saudi Arabia during the 1991 Gulf War and has major expertise regarding China. His appointment brought praise from many but criticism from elements of the pro-Israeli community and pro-Israeli Congressmen.
Pro-Israeli publications are attacking his appointment as something close to betrayal — Why? He’s been called everything from “a Saudi puppet,” “Chas of Arabia” to being “linked to Saudi cash.”
The “link” goes back to 2007, when as president of the Washington-based Middle East Policy Council (MEPC) he accepted a $1 million donation from Prince Alwaleed bin Talal for the council.
Not only is he is being attacked for being pro-Saudi, but also for his calls for a more balanced US foreign policy between Israel and the Arab world.
Back in 2007, Freeman addressed the pro-Israeli Washington Institute of Foreign Affairs, and said: “Israel no longer even pretends to seek peace with the Palestinians; it strives instead to pacify them.”
The primary reason America confronts a terrorism problem today, he continued, is “the brutal oppression of the Palestinians by an Israeli occupation that is about to mark its fortieth anniversary and shows no sign of ending.”
National Security: Imagine one of China’s and Saudi Arabia’s mouthpieces in America writing intelligence reports for the White House. Meet Chas Freeman, who will soon fill all three roles.
National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair has named Freeman to head his council of advisers, an influential post that, regrettably, does not require Senate confirmation.
As National Intelligence Council chairman, Freeman will serve as a key intelligence adviser to President Obama and will prepare his daily briefings and the all-important National Intelligence Estimate on foreign threats.
The job demands an uncompromising objectivity that Freeman can’t possibly deliver, given his conflicts of interest involving two nations potentially hostile to the U.S.
Freeman for years has showed an almost slavish zeal in defending Riyadh and Beijing from well-deserved criticism. This has undermined Israel and Taiwan, both key American allies.
So why would Obama allow the appointment of someone so blatantly anti-Israel to advise him and prepare his daily intelligence briefings? Good question, bad news for Israel. But wait, there’s more.
Samantha Power, who famously called Hillary Clinton a “monster,” is going to get a key spot on President Obama’s National Security Council team.
Samantha Power to the NSC
Samantha Power ’99 to join National Security Council
Samantha Power to join National Security Council team
Will Samantha Power have a role in giving aid to Hamas?
Appointment of Power angers some Jews
National Security Council
Of course calling Hillary Clinton a monster isn’t the only statement Samantha Power is famous for. She’s also famous for calling for the U.S. invasion of Israel.
Power made her most problematic statement in 2002, in an interview she gave at Berkeley. The interviewer asked her this question:
Let me give you a thought experiment here, and it is the following: without addressing the Palestine-Israel problem, let’s say you were an advisor to the President of the United States, how would you respond to current events there? Would you advise him to put a structure in place to monitor that situation, at least if one party or another [starts] looking like they might be moving toward genocide?
Power gave an astonishing answer:
What we don’t need is some kind of early warning mechanism there, what we need is a willingness to put something on the line in helping the situation. Putting something on the line might mean alienating a domestic constituency of tremendous political and financial import; it may more crucially mean sacrificing—or investing, I think, more than sacrificing—billions of dollars, not in servicing Israel’s military, but actually investing in the new state of Palestine, in investing the billions of dollars it would probably take, also, to support what will have to be a mammoth protection force, not of the old Rwanda kind, but a meaningful military presence. Because it seems to me at this stage (and this is true of actual genocides as well, and not just major human rights abuses, which were seen there), you have to go in as if you’re serious, you have to put something on the line.
Unfortunately, imposition of a solution on unwilling parties is dreadful. It’s a terrible thing to do, it’s fundamentally undemocratic. But, sadly, we don’t just have a democracy here either, we have a liberal democracy. There are certain sets of principles that guide our policy, or that are meant to, anyway. It’s essential that some set of principles becomes the benchmark, rather than a deference to [leaders] who are fundamentally politically destined to destroy the lives of their own people. And by that I mean what Tom Friedman has called “Sharafat” [Sharon-Arafat]. I do think in that sense, both political leaders have been dreadfully irresponsible. And, unfortunately, it does require external intervention…. Any intervention is going to come under fierce criticism. But we have to think about lesser evils, especially when the human stakes are becoming ever more pronounced.
Now why would Obama have someone who thinks about invading Israel as one of his closest foreign policy advisors? Good question, bad news for Israel.
/if you’re starting to get the picture that electing Barack Obama as President of the United States is bad news for Israel, you might just be onto something
Filed under: Blog Entry | Tagged: Barack Obama, Charles W. Freeman Jr., Chas Freeman, Dennis Blair, Gaza, Hamas, Hillary Clinton, Israel, MEPC, Middle East Policy Council, National Intelligence Council, National Intelligence Director, National Security Council, New York, NIC, NID, NSC, Riyadh, Samantha Power, Saudi Arabia, Secretary of State, U.N., UN Relief And Works Agency, United Nations, UNRWA | 3 Comments »