Tag: Bibi Netanyahu

Posted on

THE WAR WITHIN: Israel and the USA Now Share a Deep State

We often speak about the unique relationship the United States of America has with Israel.  No where has this been as beautifully expressed as John Winthrop’s City Upon the Hill speech, made nearly 350 years ago in new England, which saw America’s future as being bound with ancient Israel.

Yet, with all of the fanfare this special relationship has, the two countries share something antithetical to the foundation of freedom. Israel was founded in 1948 from the outgrowth of the partition plan of the British mandate. There were three main groups fighting for the control of the nascent State of Israel: The Haganah, the Irgun, and Lehi.  With British backing and the need for unity in face of five Arab armies, the latter two groups agreed to work under the leadership of Mapai and the Haganah.  Essentially they ceded power to Ben Gurion and his political apparatus.

The Mapai party was not a Western style political movement, but rather the most moderate of the socialist Zionist political movements.  From the very beginning Ben Gurion and those around him went out to assert their control over the State of Israel at all levels.  They created a bureaucracy so penetrative to the normal Israeli, the State could barely breathe.  In 1977, Menachem Begin surprised the establishment and became the Prime Minister of Israel.  He was the feared leader of the Irgun, demonized by Ben Gurion and the Mapai, but unlike his Mapai counterparts Begin believed in an open economy and the freedom of ideas.

With Begin’s victory and the changing demographics of Israel, the Left realized it could not overtly control the country anymore.  It had to rely on the bureaucracy created in the beginning of the state. The Left embedded itself within Israel’s Justice system, media, and education system.  Despite Begin’s victory and Shamir’s continuance of his legacy, the Left drove the narrative of the country until Bibi became the Finance Minister.  Netanyahu realized the battle is far more deep than appears and went out to unleash the economic potential of Israel thus circumventing the Left’s ability to control events unchecked.  The Deep State continues in Israel through the courts and the media.  It coordinates with its counterparts around the world and seeks only one thing, control of Israel’s future. Economic freedom has pushed back on the Left, but if cannot have contol, the Left is willing to bring the country down.

Trump is Battling an Israeli Style Deep State in America

Obama realized early on that he could be America’s shadow president through the injection of loyalists into the expanding bureaucracy his team was setting out to create. Regulation after regulation and federal job after federal job, Obama’s influence became ever lasting within the confines of Washington DC.  Like the Arabists in the State Department who have controlled Foggy Bottom from the shadows of their offices since World War 2, Obama remade the Federal bureaucracy to follow his orders whether he is in office or not.

This Deep State is real and has no loyalty to the constitution or nationalism.  The Deep State in Israel and the USA is concerned only with its own self-preservation.  It is this Deep State that both Donald Trump and Bibi Netanyahu are fighting.  The shadows are strong and they change location and tactics, but they must be removed for freedom to truly reign.

Posted on

Why the So-Called ‘Palestinians’ Don’t Deserve a State

For decades the two-state solution has been repeatedly floated as the preferred goal of peace between Israel and the Arabs (‘Palestinians’). Yet it has never been realized. Accusations have been tossed around by various voices laying blame on both sides for the failure of the two-state solution to be implemented.

In light of the recent summit between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump, it would appear the long standing position of the US promoting the two-state solution is fizzling out. In my opinion this is long overdue.

Simply put the so-called ‘Palestinians’ don’t deserve a state.

Allow me to make the case.

Perspective

In order to have an appreciation for today’s stalemate, it’s important to understand how it came about.

The concept of a two-state solution has already been attempted with the 1947 UN partition of two states, one Arab, one Jewish. (the original two-state solution) It failed. Why? The Arab nations rejected and ignored the resolution, attacking the fledgling Jewish state one day after it declared independence in 1948. Six decades and seven wars later (three with Hamas) what has changed?

A dramatic shift took place in 1967 when Yasser Arafat decided the Arabs who were displaced from the 1948 and 1967 wars deserved to have their own unique identity. He renamed them “Palestinians.” For the record before 1967 the term “Palestinians” referred to Jews. Walid Shoebat, an Arab who was living in Jericho during the ’67 war said “On June 4 I went to sleep as an Arab. The next day, without moving anywhere I am suddenly a “Palestinian.”

Arafat’s campaign included more than just an identity change for these newly renamed ‘Palestinians.’ He demanded an independent state, and laid claim to the entire area west of the Jordan River which Israel captured during the war. This is biblical Judea/Samaria, commonly referred to as the West Bank. As far as Arafat was concerned all this land was ‘Palestinian’ land, in spite of the fact International law affirms any land captured during a defensive war belongs to the victor, which was Israel.

His original goal when he founded the PLO in 1964 was to ‘liberate’ (destroy) all of Israel and replace it with a single ‘Palestinian’ state. Since Israel captured Judea/Samaria during the Six Day War he now added this to his goal.

The Age of Terror

After the 1967 war other terror groups sprung up including, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (1967), Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (1969), Islamic Jihad (1979), Hezbollah (1985) Hamas (1987), and several others. For the past 15 years the Fatah Party has been the dominant party in Judea/Samaria. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is the party Chairman.

Each of these groups is dedicated to ‘liberating’ (destroying) the state of Israel.

So why don’t the ‘Palestinians’ deserve a state? First off their claim to the land has no basis in reality. It’s not as though Arabs have no history in the land. They do. However the greater and more historical association belongs to the Jews. The Bible tells us it is this very land which was given to the Jews as “an everlasting inheritance.”  This land, including Jerusalem is the ancestral home of the Jewish people, superseding ‘Palestinian’ claims by thousands of years. This is a simple indisputable fact.

Present Day

However, let’s transition from the legitimate historical connection the Jews have to this land to present day.

Let’s examine today’s Israeli/Palestinian relations a little closer.

Israel has made several attempts to appease the ‘Palestinians,’ through agreements and offers. In 2000 for example, Prime Minister Ehud Barak made an unprecedented offer to Yasser Arafat. It included turning over roughly 99% of Judea/Samaria (aka: West Bank), dividing Jerusalem, and compensation for so-called “refugees.” Additionally, the Gaza Strip would be contiguously linked, effectively splitting Israel in two. By any definition this was a huge sacrifice on the part of Israel. President Clinton who was brokering the negotiations later said he “couldn’t believe how good the offer was.” Yet Arafat rejected it and the talks collapsed.  Clinton laid blame squarely where it belonged, on Arafat.

Why was such an incredibly generous offer rejected? Simple, the Muslims refuse to accept the existence of a Jewish state under any circumstances, no matter what the borders are. They are firmly convinced every square inch of the state of Israel is Muslim land. Thus, to accept the existence of a sovereign Jewish state on land which they consider theirs is viewed as blasphemy, which is punishable by death. Never mind that they have no legitimate claim to the land.

Not only do they refuse to accept the existence of Israel, or peacefully co-exist, they have mounted a decade’s long campaign to destroy the Jewish state.

Doctrines of Destruction

For example, look at some points in their founding charters:

Fatah Charter (party of Mahmoud Abbas)

Article 12- “complete liberation of Palestine, and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence”

Article 13- “Establishing an independent democratic state with complete sovereignty on all Palestinian lands, and Jerusalem is its capital city”- Armed struggle is a strategy and not a tactic, and the Palestinian Arab People’s armed revolution is a decisive factor in the liberation fight and in uprooting the Zionist existence, and this struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished and Palestine is completely liberated.”  

 

PLO Charter

Article 9- “armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine”

Article 19- “The partition of Palestine in 1947 and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal”

Hamas Charter

Preamble: “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.”

Article 6-  “The Islamic  Resistance  Movement  is  a  distinguished  Palestinian movement, who’s allegiance is to Allah, and  whose  way  of  life  is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine.”

Article 13- “…There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility.”

With the exception of Hezbollah in Lebanon, these three organizations are today’s main players in the conflict. Their charters represent the principles upon which each organization was founded. Based on the quotes from each of their charters it is unquestionable none of them seek a two state solution, or peaceful co-existence with a Jewish state of Israel. They all seek its destruction.

Ignoring the Truth

Yet, instead of calling out these organizations world leaders and the UN continue to blame Israel’s construction of homes as the main obstacle to a peace agreement. Recently the UN made this their official position with the passage of resolution 2334. Their action ignores the Palestinian’s indisputable requirement of the annihilation of Israel. Keep in mind-

  • Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has repeatedly said he will never accept Israel as a Jewish state.
  • He glorifies those who murder innocent Israeli civilians by naming parks and schools after them.  
  • The PA pays large salaries to jailed murderers of Israelis.
  • When young Arabs stab Israeli’s or run them over with vehicles, Abbas refuses to condemn such terror.
  • He considers every drop of Muslim blood holy in its pursuit of Palestine’s liberation. In other words he is blessing murder in cold blood, while world leaders consider him a ‘moderate.’ Calling him a ‘moderate’ is redefining the very meaning of the word.
  • Curriculum in Palestinian schools teaches students the Jews stole their land, and they should strive to retake every inch of ‘Palestine,’ by jihad. Moreover, they are taught it is holy to murder Jews and be a martyr for Allah.

 

Some might suggest the terrorists don’t represent the Arab Palestinian population as a whole. If this is true why has there not been any outcry from the general Palestinian population against the terror? Why has there not been a single demonstration for peace with Israel on the Palestinian street? Where are the editorials condemning the terrorist in the Arab Palestinian press?

If the Palestinians are committed to peacefully co-exist with a Jewish state of Israel shouldn’t we see visible evidence of this? Instead, we see continued terror amid calls for Israel to cease construction. World leaders and the UN are ignoring the Palestinians true agenda. They need to realize the true obstacle to peace is not Israel’s construction. In 1948 or 1967 there were no “settlements,” nor were there any settlements in 1964 when the PLO was founded. Yet even though the land areas have changed, the goal was the same then as today- rejection of Israel’s right to exist.  The ‘Palestinians’ must be held accountable for this. Saying construction is the obstacle to peace makes as much sense as blaming the Jews for the Holocaust.   

The reality is the Arab Palestinians need a civilized gut check. Until such time as they renounce all terror, recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state with Jerusalem as its capital, drop all future land claims and amend their charters, they are undeserving of a state.

A civilized world should not reward murderers committed to destroy their presumed peace partner with nationhood. Moreover, Israel has every right to oppose sacrificing precious land to unreformed terrorists. Such action would be tantamount to handing bullets to your assassin.

Posted on

THE TRUMP-NETANYAHU ALLIANCE

The two-state model is widely viewed as the formula for Middle East peace. But the fact of the matter is that it makes peace impossible to achieve, by holding normal relations between Israel and its Arab neighbors hostage to grandiose peace deals.

When they met on Wednesday, US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin were both walking wounded.

Netanyahu arrived in Washington the center of a criminal investigation the chief characteristic of which is that selected details of the probe are regularly leaked to the media by anonymous sources who cannot be challenged or held to account.

These anonymous sources, from inside the police and state prosecution, use hand-picked reporters who all share a visceral hatred of Netanyahu, to present a version of the probe to the public that besmirches Netanyahu and his family.

The prospect that Netanyahu may face indictment weakens his position in his party. Likud ministers, unsure of the future, but certain that they cannot challenge the credibility of unnamed sources without risking their own reputations and political futures, refuse to stand with Netanyahu and defend him. And so, with each additional anonymously sourced, incriminating story, the prime minister finds his political power diminished.

As for Trump, he met with Netanyahu two days after his loyal national security adviser, Lt.-Gen. (ret.) Michael Flynn, was forced to resign.

Flynn’s resignation was the culmination of a continuous campaign of defamation waged against him that began even before Trump was elected.

Flynn rose to national prominence in 2014 after then-president Barack Obama, who promoted him and appointed him to head the Defense Intelligence Agency, summarily fired him. Obama fired Flynn because the general opposed his nuclear deal with Iran, and opposed his supportive view of the Muslim Brotherhood, among other things. Since he was forced into early retirement, Flynn became an outspoken critic of the politicization of US intelligence agencies under the Obama administration.

The campaign against Flynn was based on highly classified information regarding conversations Flynn held with Russia’s ambassador to the US during the transition process in December. Under US law, intelligence agencies are prohibited from divulging the identity of US citizens whose conversations with foreign intelligence targets are intercepted.

The law is in place for good reason. As Eli Lake wrote in Bloomberg on Tuesday, “Selectively disclosing details of private conversations monitored by the FBI or NSA gives the permanent state the power to destroy reputations from the cloak of anonymity. This is what police states do.”

In the event, an FBI investigation of the conversations after they were leaked concluded that Flynn did nothing illegal in his dealings with the Russian ambassador. But criminalizing Flynn was never the object of the leaks – making him politically toxic was the aim. And it was accomplished on Monday when he resigned.

It appears likely that Trump became convinced that by sacrificing Flynn, he would end the insurrection US intelligence operatives are waging against his presidency. But as The New York Times made clear on Wednesday, the opposite is true.

Following Flynn’s resignation, the same intelligence sources that caused his downfall told sympathetic reporters that they have the top secret transcripts of conversations that other Trump staffers held with Russian regime officials. The fact that the transcripts indicate no wrongdoing on the part of any of Trump’s staffers is neither here nor there. The drumbeat of defamation will continue.

Flynn was the first target. But he will not be the last.

Selective leaks are not the only way that the permanent state intends to hamstring Trump. On Wednesday, The Wall Street Journal reported that US intelligence agencies are hiding intelligence from the White House.

On Thursday, without provocation or legal requirement, the FBI released records from a 45-year-old civil rights investigation of the Trump family’s real estate firm.

And of course, the decision by radical courts to block implementation of Trump’s executive order on immigration to the US from seven terrorism-stricken states shows that empowered political foes in the legal establishment intend to prevent him from governing.

To a certain degree, Trump’s first month in office bears a striking similarly to Netanyahu’s first term in office 20 years ago. When Netanyahu was first elected prime minister in 1996, he was an inexperienced politician. Before winning the election, Netanyahu had never held a cabinet level appointment.

Netanyahu, who opposed the phony peace process with the PLO, was viewed as the root of all evil by Israel’s security and legal establishment whose members had adopted the two-state formula as their catechism. After he was elected they joined forces to subvert his authority.

In 1997, the legal fraternity, in alliance with the media, alleged that Netanyahu’s decision to appoint Likud attorney Ronnie Bar-On attorney-general was the product of a criminal deal he cooked up with then-interior minister Arye Deri. In the fullness of time, the allegations were exposed as utterly groundless.

But at the time, they sufficed to torpedo Bar- On’s appointment. More important, the fake Bar-On scandal gave the legal fraternity the opportunity to turn the relationship between the attorney-general and the government on its head. Following the affair, the legal fraternity coerced a weakened Netanyahu to transfer the authority to select the attorney-general to the legal fraternity. Moreover, Netanyahu agreed to subordinate the government to the attorney-general’s legal decisions.

Then there was the security establishment. From the beginning the military establishment set out to block efforts by Netanyahu to diminish the centrality of the peace process with the PLO in Israel’s strategic planning. The fact that the security establishment was not faithfully serving Netanyahu and his government was exposed for all to see in September 1996, when the PLO-led Palestinian Authority launched a terrorist campaign against Israel following Netanyahu’s decision to order the opening of a subterranean tunnel spanning the walls of the Temple Mount.

Rather than taking responsibility for failing to either foresee or quell the terrorist offensive, Israel’s security brass blamed Netanyahu for the PLO’s murder spree.

Instead of standing up to the rebellious bureaucracies, Netanyahu caved in. Consequently, he lost his base, and in 1999 he lost his office.

In a way, Netanyahu had no choice. He had no allies with the power to help him. The Clinton administration was implacably opposed to him and worked openly with the Israeli deep state to unseat him. The media hated him even more than they hate him today.

Trump’s decision to allow Flynn to resign was a dangerous sign that he is beginning to follow the same pattern of behavior that led to the failure of Netanyahu’s first term.

But his press conference with Netanyahu on Wednesday signaled that Trump may yet turn things around and gain control over the rebellious bureaucracy by leaning on an ally that wants him to succeed and needs him to succeed in order to survive himself.

From the statements they made at the joint press conference, it is clear that Trump and Netanyahu have decided to build an alliance. Its purpose is twofold. First, by working together, they can defeat the common foes of their countries. And second, the success of their joint efforts will bring about the defeat of their bureaucratic enemies.

The most significant development to come out of the Trump-Netanyahu press conference was their refusal to endorse the two-state policy doctrine.

This was a necessary move.

The only way to build a working alliance between the US and Israel – as opposed to the declarative alliance that exists at public ceremonies – is for both leaders to abandon the two-state paradigm for policy- making.

The two-state formula has been the foundation of US Middle East policy for a generation. It has also been the foundation of the tribal identity of the Israeli Left – led by the military and legal fraternities and the media.

The two-state model is widely viewed as the formula for Middle East peace. But the fact of the matter is that it makes peace impossible to achieve, by holding normal relations between Israel and its Arab neighbors hostage to grandiose peace deals.

Even worse, the two-state model is based on an anti-Israel and anti-US assumption that makes it impossible for either to advance their strategic interests vis-à-vis the Islamic world.

The basic idea behind the two-state paradigm is that the establishment of a PLO state is a precondition for winning the war against Islamic terrorism.

So long as Israel refuses to cede sufficient territory to appease the PLO, victory will be impossible, because the absence of a PLO state so angers Muslims that they will continue killing their enemies.

The defeatist notion that “there is no military solution” to terrorism that dominates the American and Israeli strategic discourses is based on the two-state model.

Given that at the heart of the two-state model is the conviction that Israel is to blame for the presence of Islamic terrorism and extremism, and that the only way to proceed is to establish a terrorism- supporting PLO state, it naturally follows that the policy’s adherents in the US cannot see any real purpose for the US alliance with Israel. It is also natural that they fail to see any potential for a regional alliance led by the US and joined by Israel and the Sunni states based on the common goals of defeating Iran and radical Islamic terrorist enclaves.

In other words, the two-state formula dooms its adherents to strategic myopia and defeatism while holding their strategic and national interests hostage to the PLO.

The insanity at the heart of the two-state formula, and the US and Israeli public’s desire to make a clear break with the strategic defeats of the past generation, makes its abandonment a clear choice for both Trump and Netanyahu. Abandoning it wins them support and credibility from their political bases when they need their supporters to rally to their side. And to the extent they are able to implement more constructive policies to defeat the forces of radical Islam, they will weaken the establishments that are working to undermine them.

By leaning on Netanyahu to help him to secure victories against the forces of radical Islam, and so putting paid to the bureaucracy’s most beloved policy paradigm, Trump can both secure his base and weaken his opponents.

So, too, by developing a substantive alliance with the Trump administration and increasing Trump’s chance of political survival and success, Netanyahu gains a formidable partner and makes it more difficult for the legal fraternity and its media flacks to bring about his indictment and fall.

Amazingly then, to a significant degree, the survival of both leaders is tied up with their success in keeping their promises to their voters and defeating their foes – domestic and foreign.

Originally Published in the Jerusalem Post.

[huge_it_share]

Posted on

TRUMP, NETANYAHU SEEK COMMON GROUND

At Wednesday’s White House press conference for President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, both leaders clearly had a lot on their minds—in addition to the matters at hand.

For Trump it was, of course, the Flynn imbroglio. For Netanyahu there were two things. One involves unfortunate, inane investigations to which he’s being subjected in Israel, which could lead to an indictment. One investigation concerns alleged illicit receipt of gifts—cigars and champagne; the other concerns talks he held with a newspaper publisher—which mentioned possible shady deals that were never, however, acted upon.

In addition, Netanyahu is under heavy pressure from the right wing of his coalition—to renounce the two-state solution, to build settlements. At the press conference Netanyahu, in particular, sounded flustered and awkward at times, glancing for succor at his script, speaking without his usual assurance and aplomb.

On substance the two leaders’ words, too, raised problems at times.

The Palestinian issue appears, unfortunately, to have returned to center stage. It’s unfortunate because it remains an issue no more amenable to a solution that at any time in the past.

“The United States,” Trump told the reporters, “will encourage a peace, and really a great peace deal.” He also said, “I think the Palestinians have to get rid of some of that hate they’re taught from a very young age. They have to acknowledge Israel. They have to do that.”

The problem is that the Palestinians have “had to” do those things—stop hating; acknowledge the legitimacy of a Jewish political entity—since the Palestinian issue first arose almost a century ago.

They have “had to,” but are no closer to doing so today than they were in the 1920s; meanwhile the remedy for an entire generation raised in hate—a reality that Netanyahu, in his flustered way, tried to emphasize—is no closer to being found by any of the putative wizards in the West.

Indeed, neither the president nor the prime minister mentioned Gaza—where a leader who is radical even by Hamas standards has taken the helm; as usual, it was not explained how a solution could be found when the Palestinians west of the Jordan are themselves divided into two mutually antagonistic entities. Trump and Netanyahu’s words about a “regional deal” on the Palestinian issue, involving Arab states along with Israel, likewise fail to take into account intractable Palestinian reality.

Instead, Trump engaged in vague talk of “two states” and “one state,” not explaining what a “one-state solution” to the Israeli-Palestinian issue would be—Israel granting citizenship to at least two million mostly intensely hostile Arabs?—while Netanyahu, desperate to avoid the term “two states,” reiterated his insistence on Israeli security control and Palestinian recognition of Israel, but mainly appeared terrified of riling his right-wing critics at home.

On a matter vastly more important than the Palestinian issue, Trump’s words—“My administration has already imposed new sanctions on Iran, and I will do more to prevent Iran from ever developing—I mean ever—a nuclear weapon”—were more encouraging to Israeli ears.

The words appeared to jibe with a report that the Trump administration is working to create a “NATO-like mutual defense pact” of moderate Arab states that would “share intelligence with Israel and the US to counter the rising threat of Iran.”

Israel’s role, according to an unnamed diplomat, “would likely be intelligence sharing, not training or boots on the ground. They’d provide intelligence and targets. That’s what the Israelis are good at.”

In other words, what sounds like a sophisticated plan—taking regional realities into account—to form a bulwark against Iranian expansionism that threatens to engulf the region in war.

It can be hoped that, in their hours-long powwow after the press conference, the U.S. president and Israeli prime minister focused much more on the Iranian issue, which is incomparably more urgent and can be resolved with determined action, than on the Palestinian issue, which is relatively minor and cannot—for now—be resolved.

If Trump, nonetheless, has delusions of grandeur on the Palestinian issue, expect Netanyahu to play along with his policy. It will be a relatively small price to pay for dealing with the Iranian menace.

Originally Published in FrontPageMag.

[huge_it_share]