By Jonathan S Tobin, COMMENTARY
President Obama was at pains to express his devotion to the U.S.-Israel alliance during a webcast conversation with the Jewish community broadcast by the Jewish Federations of North America today. But amid the bromides about his administration and the Jewish community being part of one big pro-Israel family, was the sort of hypocrisy and misleading arguments that we have come to expect from the president during the course of the debate about his nuclear deal with Iran. The hypocrisy stems from his whining about the nastiness of the pact’s critics while at the same time being unwilling to own up to the toxic tone and insults that he has employed to pressure Congress to back the deal.
But as insufferable as that may be, the real problem remains the disingenuous spin he uses to defend a deal that failed to achieve the objective that he set for the negotiations when they began: end the nuclear threat from Iran.
Obama claims to be only arguing from facts but at the core of his spin are two indefensible notions: a dismissal of the concerns of Israel and its friends as being “visceral” rather than his supposedly rational stand and a refusal to acknowledge that Iran is not planning to change and that the deal doesn’t give the U.S. the ability to do much to stop it from getting a bomb when the deal expires.
The president and his team were badly outfoxed in the negotiations by the Iranians. At every point when they refused his demands, he gave in demonstrating his desperation for a deal at virtually any price. But his skill at politics is unmatched as his chutzpah. Thus although the ostensible purpose of the webcast was to soothe relations with an angry and divided Jewish community, Obama stuck to his talking points and refused even to acknowledge that he is even partially responsible for injecting a toxic tone into the debate while delegitimizing his critics.
Perhaps it was too much to ask of federation leaders to ask him a pointed question about the way he sought to smear the deal’s critics as a powerful “lobby” that was using “big money” to oppose him in the same terms that earned President George H.W. Bush universal opprobrium when he challenged AIPAC in 1991. But when they asked him a more anodyne question about what could be done to heal the wounds from the debate that he has poured salt on, the president responded with self-righteousness and hypocrisy rather than conciliation.
Obama falsely claimed there was no moral equivalency between the administration’s efforts to delegitimize its critics with the admittedly bitter and nasty pushback they’ve gotten from some on the other side. In particular, he complained about some harsh rhetoric aimed at the deal supporters like Rep. Jerry Nadler. But are a few random powerless citizens insulting a congressman really worse than a president claiming his opponents are warmongers who make common cause with Iranian extremists or are mindless partisans?
The president’s trademark sophistry was on display when in one sentence he claimed he had never called anyone a warmonger but then in the next went on to falsely claim that the only alternative to his policies was war. Though he claims that he only argues from logic, his dismissal of the claim that tougher sanctions had the potential to get a better deal was completely illogical. After all, Obama opposed the sanctions that brought Iran to the table. Just as the world was forced to reluctantly follow the U.S. on the issue before, they could do so again.
Also hypocritical were his promises to maintain Israel’s qualitative military edge over its opponents. Its not a secret that he has tried to bribe Israel to stop criticizing the Iran deal with more arms. But the deal undercuts the entire concept of a qualitative edge since allowing Iran to become a threshold nuclear power as well as enriching it by ending sanctions changes the balance of power in the region.
He completely ignores the way his agreement destabilizes the region and while claiming to be sober-minded about the nature of the Iranian regime. At the heart of his arguments remains the same problem that is the foundation of the deal: a belief that Iran is changing.
But most worrisome of all is the president’s misleading arguments about what the deal will accomplish. He claims the deal will create inspections in perpetuity and that the U.S. will be in as strong a position to deal with the threat after it expires in 15 years. But in order to do that he has to ignore the way the deal will not only strengthen Iran’s nuclear project but also the regime itself while also undermining the West’s will to resist it.
As for the threat of Iranian-backed terrorism, the president pooh-poohed Tehran’s capacity to spread terror throughout the region, especially after it gets $100 billion in unfrozen funds. That shows he doesn’t take seriously the way Iran funds Hamas and Hezbollah terror. As he spoke, Hamas crews working with Iranian aid were digging tunnels under Israel’s border and preparing rockets for the next attacks. But these are irrelevant to Obama’s big vision of Iran “getting right with the world.” He claimed that while the deal didn’t address Iran’s role as the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism but that it also wouldn’t stop the U.S. from combating them. The problem with that is that Obama has consistently failed to curb Iranian adventurism and is, instead, partnering with the regime in Iraq.
Obama adopted a different tone about Iran’s future with a Jewish audience than he usually does. But even though he claimed to have no illusions about Iran, he repeated his dismissal of Iran’s Supreme Leader Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as “just a politician,” rather than a tyrannical, anti-Semitic theocrat whose threats at the West and Israel deserve to be taken seriously. While he says he understands Iran, it’s clear his belief in détente with the regime is the key to understanding his acceptance of a weak deal that will let it do as it likes when it expires.
Just as offensive was his attempt to demonstrate understanding of his critics. He called Israeli worries about Iranian threats “visceral” to be contrasted his supposedly purely rational arguments. Though he claimed to want reconciliation, the only thing that came through clearly in this webcast was his arrogance and unwillingness to demonstrate respect for opposing views. It is that quality that caused him never to question his policies even as he made concession after concession to Iran.
This is a president whose policies have shown that he is obsessed with downgrading the alliance with Israel while reaching out to its most vicious foes. If Obama were capable of listening to his critics rather than dismissing him, we might not be embroiled in the current nasty debate. If, as is likely, the deal proves to be a windfall for Iran and a strategic defeat for the West, it is that failing that was so clearly on display today that will be responsible for it.
??? ???? ?? ???? ????? ????, ????? ??? ?????, ????? ?? ???? 1, ?? ??????, ??????? 97400
David Lloyd ben Yaacov Yehuda Klepper, Yeshivat Beit Orot, Shmuel ben Adiya 1, Mt. of Olives, Jerusalem 97400 ISRAEL
14 Elul 5775, 29 August 2015 Email: daveklepper@yahoo.com 29.08.15, ??’ ???? ???”?
Memo to President Barack Obama regarding talk to USA Jews 27 August
.1. American Jews are just as concerned as other Americans about USA Security
Your talk discussed USA – Israel relations and did you did not discuss the effect of the agreement on USA security. I assure you that USA Jews (including those now living in Israel, Judea, and Samaria) are as concerned about USA security as other Americans. You have stated that he expects Iran to be a stabilizing force in the Middle East. But the mentality of the Ayatollas that run Iran is identical in every respect to the terrorists that flew the planes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Their comments to their own people prove this. They have stated a willingness to sacrifice a good portion of their own population to further their aims of regional and eventual world domination. The “agreement” can easily allow the bomb to proceed secretly, and their form of Islam specifically permits braking agreements in the interest of furthering their form of Islam. Even if they should magnanimously release the four USA hostages, the agreement is a surrender, and money released is already on its way to produce further terror and the purchase of long-range weapons that can target America. They continue to label the USA as the “Great Satan” and teach their children hatred of America.
.2. Israel must insure its own security
Israel has never required or asked for USA servicemen to risk their lives in defense of Israel. Your assurances of aid to Israel if attacked by Iran might be believed if:
On your first visit to Israel prior to success in the year 2008 election, after seeing the results of Hamas rockets in Sidom, you had stated that Arab refusal to tolerate a Jewish state in their midst was the main block to peace, not the “settlers” or “settlements.” Dayyenu!
Immediately on taking office you had reviewed the files on Shalom Rubashken and Jonathan Pollard, and concluded that their sentencing reflected anti-Semitism and not real justice, and granted the long-overdue Presidential Pardons. Dayyenu!
When speaking in Cairo, instead of inflaming Arab sensibilities by pointing out a justification for the State of Israel based on Jewish suffering and losses in the Holocaust, you had instead pointed to the justification for the State of Israel in the Koran, the invitation by Muslims for 70 Jewish families to return to Jerusalem after the European Crusaders were expelled, the Caliph of Jerusalem going to the Jaffa dock to welcome Jewish refugees from Torquamada’s Spain, Jews of the Holy Land having representation in the Turkish Parliament and the right to pray at the Western Wall, and King Feisel’s statement to the League of Nations welcoming a Jewish Homeland, and of course the fact that Abraham/Ibrehem was the Father of both peoples. Dayyenu!
You had not allowed the State Department to consistently balance terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians with housing starts (housing that can be occupied by Arabs as well as Jews, by the way) in the eastern portion of a United Jerusalem. Dayyenu!
The negotiations with Iran included some consideration of Israel’s immediate security needs. Dayyenu!
What all Iranian leaders, not in exile, have been saying, proves Iran is still the enemy of the United States and will continue to seek Israel’s destruction, and thus continue to fund terror. The agreement gives them additional funds and less need for secrecy to pursue those goals. Remember that the rockets used by Hesbolla and Hamas are largely made in Iran or use materials from Iran.
Iran already has declared war on Israel. Do you and Kerry expect Israel to sit around and be nucked before any real USA aid arrives? Thus the agreement is a step to more war and more violence, not peace.
3. Doctors identify a disease before curing it
Treating a symptom as the disease, instead of the disease, can result in the death of the patient. The main problem the World faces today is Islamic Fundamentalism. When confronted with this statement, your habitual response has been “America is not at war with Islam.” But Islamic Fundamentalism is already at war with the USA. Sure, by-and-large, Islam was a religion of Peace and tolerance. As noted earlier, after driving out the Crusaders, the Arabs invited 70 Jewish families to return to Jerusalem. Also, specific Convents and Monasteries were allowed to continue to function. But in 14 years the Mufti appointed by the British changed all that. (There remain pockets of traditional Islam. I would never accuse the Kings of Morocco and Jordan or Sissi of Egypt to be Islamic Fundamentalists, and there are ex-Soviet Islamic states with relations with Israel.) Iran’s current leaders are Islamic Fundamentalists, and the ONLY path to peace is a change of regime there. Your agreement preserves the present despotic regime.
Air traffic controllers go through an intensive and thorough selection process and an excellent and thorough training program. But the following is an excerpt from a WABC-TV news broadcast, after a light plane crash-landed on Long Island Railroad tracks. I got it from the website http://www.trains,com, under Trains Magazine, Forum, Transit, Light plane lands on LIRR tracks.
Joseph Milo was the type of person that everyone loved because he cared about everyone he came across… The 59 year old was flying his plane from Westhampton Beach to New Jersey Sunday morning when around Bethpage he reported to air traffic control that he was experiencing difficulty maintaining altitude. The controller at LaGuardia Airport responded, “There’s a strip right about your 12 o clock and 3 miles. It’s the Bethpage strip right there. And again Farmingdale about 10 o clock and 6.”
However there hasn’t been a landing strip in Bethpage for years.
Apparently, you do not believe that the theology of Islamic Fundamentalism exists. For you, the Pentagon and World Trade Center disasters, Fort Hood, the continuation of the quarrel over Israel’s existence among Muslims, Bengazi, ISIS, and the Iranian purchase of heavy weapons and nuclear facilities, are all separate items to be dealt with separately. So any country taking your advice or following your leadership may be on its way to the fate of Joseph Milo.
Best wishes and all possible respect,
David Lloyd (ben Yaacov Yehuda Klepper, student of the Yeshvia and US Army veteran, co-author, Worship Space Acoustics, http://www.jrosspub.com
Why would the Muslim be any different? That is an Islam product.