Thursday, April 8, 2010

Just for Show.


by  Jennifer Rubin

Many savvy observers of the Obami assault on Israel have concluded that the fuss over the Jerusalem housing permit was concocted by the Obami to ingratiate themselves with the Palestinians, who were threatening to walk from the proximity talks. There is ample support for this theory, not the least of which is the prior positions of the three players in the Obama freak-out drama — Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and the president. The colorfully named Sultan Knish has compiled a useful bit of history that includes Biden's co-sponsorship of Senate Resolutions 1322, 113, and 106 (between the years 1990 and 1995):

Biden co-sponsored three Senate resolution, all three of which insisted that Jerusalem should remain Israel's undivided capital. One of which insisted that it was vital for the peace process that Jerusalem should be affirmed by US policy as Israel's undivided capital. So naturally, like any good politician, he was insulted by Israel taking him at his word. To argue that Biden was gravely insulted by Israel, is to argue that he was insulted by the policies he himself supported.

Not just passively supported, but co-sponsored in three Senate resolutions which repeatedly stated that these were meant to be the policy of the United States.

But of course the hypocrisy train doesn't just stop at Joe Biden Station.

Hillary Clinton who claimed that Israeli housing "was not only an insult to Biden, but an insult to the United States", in 2007 (barely 2 and a half years ago) issued a paper stating,

"Hillary Clinton believes that Israel's right to exist in safety as a Jewish state, with defensible borders and an undivided Jerusalem as its capital, secure from violence and terrorism, must never be questioned."

And barely 2.5 years later, Hillary Clinton is vocally doing the questioning. And the woman who not that long ago said that an "Undivided Jerusalem" must never be questioned, was pretending that Israel approving housing in Jerusalem was a grave insult to the United States.

The question must then be asked, if Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton supported an undivided Jerusalem and if Israeli housing projects in Jerusalem are an insult to the United States– weren't Hillary and Joe insulting the United States. Or were they just insulting the Jewish voters who believed their empty promises?

(Obama made a similar statement in the 2008 campaign, which lasted 24 hours before it was qualified.) And, of course, there was an agreement between the government of Ariel Sharon and the administration of George W. Bush that did not include any freeze on Jerusalem housing and specifically designated that the resolution of  the capital as a final-status issue. But that's a no-nevermind sort of thing for the Obami crowd. Nor do they concede that every Israeli government since 1967 has allowed building in the Israeli capital.

We have two alternative explanations for the Obami's behavior: they are appallingly ignorant about previous U.S. policy and have forgotten their own roles in advancing the position that Israel is entitled to occupy and build in its eternal and undivided capital; or the administration seized on an opportunity to savage its ally for the purpose of trying to ingratiate itself with the Muslim World. You decide.


Jennifer Rubin

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.


No comments:

Post a Comment