اضيف الخبر في يوم الثلاثاء ٠٦ - أبريل - ٢٠١٠ ١٢:٠٠ صباحاً.

The newest, and most dangerous, argument being offered by those who seek to damage the US-Israel alliance is that Israeli actions, such as issuing building permits in Jerusalem, endanger the lives of American troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This phony argument -- originally attributed to Vice President Biden and General David Petraeus but categorically denied by both of them -- has now taken on a life of its own in the media. …

It is a dangerous and false argument. It is dangerous because its goal is to reduce support for Israel among mainstream Americans who understandably worry about our troops fighting abroad. This is ironic since the major pillar of Israel's policy with regard to US troops is that Israel never wants to endanger our troops. That's why it has never asked US soldiers to fight for Israel, as other allies have asked our soldiers to fight for them. By seeking to scapegoat Israel for the death of American troops at the hands of Islamic terrorists, this argument blames those who love America for deaths caused by those who hate America. …

In considering the relationship between the United States and Israel, several points must be kept in mind. First and foremost, the US and Israel are on the same side in the continuing struggle against Islamic extremists who endanger the lives of American troops and American civilians. Second, Israel is one of America's most important strategic allies, providing us with essential intelligence, research and development and other important assets. Third, there is nothing that Israel or the United States can do that will turn these extremist enemies into friends. It is what we are, rather than what we do, that enrages those who wish to turn the entire world into an Islamic caliphate and subject us all to Islamic sharia law. Fourth, any weakening of the alliance between the United States and Israel will make it far less likely that Israelis -- who get to vote on these matters -- will take significant risks for peace. Fifth, the Obama administration's public attacks on Israel will harden Palestinian demand and make it less likely that they will accept a compromise peace. Sixth, if Israel's enemies were to lay down their arms and stop terrorist and rocket attacks against Israel, there would be peace. Seventh, if Israel were to lay down its arms, there would be genocide. And eighth, when the Palestinian leadership and population want their own state more than they want there not to be a Jewish state, there will be a two-state solution.

Israel’s official position for the last forty years has been that East Jerusalem’s status will not be negotiable in any future land-swap agreement with the Palestinians.

This policy, however distasteful it may be to the Obama Administration, did not prevent the conclusion of peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan, nor did it preclude the Palestinians from negotiating with Israel for more than fifteen years after the Oslo Accords of 1993. Now, suddenly, it has become a major issue with this administration, and an impediment to world peace. ...

Netanyahu’s acquiescence to a Palestinian state, a ten-month moratorium on Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria that specifically excluded Jerusalem (a fact this Administration now dismisses), and the dismantling of hundreds of checkpoints and roadblocks apparently means nothing to an administration whose long term strategy seems to demonstrate to America’s enemies that the U.S. is prepared to force a Czechoslovakian type of deal on Israel to concede everything, while giving the Palestinians a pass -- including their dedication of tournaments, streets, marketplaces and a town square outside Ramallah to “martyrs” whose sole “accomplishments” have been slaughtering Israeli men, women and children. ...

The President has spent more time provoking our friends than he has challenging our enemies. His constant attempts to engage with Iran, Syria and Turkey combined with his delay in signing the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act, suggest that he views developing U.S. relations with these anti-American regimes as his primary foreign policy goal. ...

When the U.S. distances itself from Israel, it does not win influence with the Arab world. It only justifies the Arab world backing away from any peace settlement.

What we have, for the most part, is an Arab Middle East that wants to put the Israeli conflict on ice and resist the Iranian-led "resistance" instead -- which is more or less what the Israelis want to see happen. It's an unusual alignment of interests, but it is authentic.

President Barack Obama clearly wants to tilt U.S. foreign policy more toward the Arabs, but he doesn't have to do it at the expense of our alliance with Israel.

Just start with what Washington, Jerusalem, and most of the Arab states have in common and build outward from there.

With the countless accusations that Vice President Dick Cheney and other top administration officials “politicized intelligence,” it is amazing that so little has been made of [the] outrageous case [of the 2007 NIE], a far more clear-cut example of pursuing a policy agenda by twisting intelligence than anything Cheney et al. did. Worse, Cheney was elected to his position. Who did [its purported principal author] Van Diepen and friends represent? Worse, still, as Royce put it, “the stakes could [not] be any higher.” I imagine Van Diepen and his collaborators patted themselves on the back for their coup: They succeeded in shielding Iran’s nuclear weapons program from George Bush’s sword. Millions may yet die as a consequence.

[T]here is something strange and otherworldly about the announced START deal with Russia at the very moment at which Iran is said to be building multiple nuclear enrichment sites. Does the administration really suppose we are safer because of the START deal or that the mullahs are impressed with our efforts? It defies logic. But it fills the time and tends to distract the media from the abject failure of the Obami to impede the Iranian regime’s nuclear ambitions. …

Gasoline sanctions may be a critical tool in dissuading Iran from its nuclear weapons program. They should not be viewed as collective punishment against the Iranian people, but rather a part of Obama's strategy of engagement with Iran. The mere threat of sanctions has already encumbered the Islamic Republic's gasoline supply chain.

To be effective in statecraft, both carrots and sticks are used to reward and cajole. A dangerous regime like Iran will not cease its actions simply because it is asked. It is more likely to curtail its behavior if it knows there are immediate and significant consequences. As such, by adding gasoline sanctions to his arsenal, President Obama could move one step closer to derailing Iran's nuclear weapons program thereby increasing stability in the Middle East.

• The United Nations Security Council has been demanding for years that Iran cease its uranium enrichment program. Barack Obama made clear when he was a candidate for President that diplomacy without precondition was his preferred policy to address Iran’s nuclear program.

• As President he implemented that policy, saying he would give it until the end of 2009 to see “serious movement on the part of the Iranians.” Secretary of State Clinton agreed that “crippling sanctions” should be the consequence if diplomatic offers to Iran “are either rejected or the process is inconclusive or unsuccessful.”

• The process has certainly been unsuccessful. There is little more to show for the year of engagement than an additional year’s worth of enriched uranium and functioning centrifuges. A publicly revealed covert uranium enrichment facility is just the most recent evidence Iran has no intention of halting its nuclear program.

• Tough sanctions are intended to prevent Iran from continuing its nuclear program in defiance of international demands. If the U.S. does not impose them after insisting it would, both allies and enemies will question our credibility.

• Candidate Obama said such sanctions would include banning the export of refined petroleum to Iran. Both Houses have overwhelmingly passed bills accomplishing this, and a final bill should be sent to the President now.

• These bills should not be weakened in conference committee to provide additional waiver authority for “cooperating countries.” If the Administration wishes to exempt companies engaged in economic activity supporting the Iranian regime, the bills currently contain all the waiver authority necessary. In any event, China and Russia should not qualify as cooperating countries.

• It does not upset President Obama’s policy to implement sanctions concurrently with diplomatic engagement, as sanctions can provide leverage in negotiations. Additional sanctions should remain in place until Iran verifiably and comprehensively complies with all international demands on its nuclear program.

Thanks to dogged investigative work (here and here) by Debra Burlingame and Tom Joscelyn (of, respectively, Keep America Safe and the Foundation for Defense of Democracies), we now know a good deal about several of these volunteer lawyers. To take just a few examples, they provided al-Qaeda detainees with a brochure that instructed them on how to claim falsely that they had been tortured; fomented a detainee hunger strike that disrupted security and precipitated fabricated reports that prisoners had been tortured and force-fed; provided the detainees with other virulently anti-American propaganda (for example, informing them about the Abu Ghraib scandal, comparing U.S. military physicians to Josef Mengele, and labeling DOJ lawyers “desk torturers”); gave the enemy-combatant terrorists a hand-drawn map of Gitmo’s layout, including guard towers; helped the enemy combatants communicate messages to the outside world; informed the detainees of the identities of other detainees in U.S. custody; and posted photos of Guantanamo security badges on the Internet in a transparent effort to identify U.S. security personnel.

And that’s not the worst of it -- not by a long shot. Bill Gertz of the Washington Times has uncovered the Gitmo Bar’s shocking effort to identify CIA interrogators. The lawyers -- from the ACLU and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, perversely calling themselves “the John Adams Project” -- actually had investigators stalk U.S. intelligence officers, surveilling them near their homes and photographing them with or near their loved ones. The photos were then smuggled into Gitmo and shown to top terrorists to determine whether they recognized which intelligence agents had questioned them.

Interestingly, the attorney general claimed that al-Qaeda’s volunteer lawyers deserve the public’s “respect” because they “accept our professional responsibility to protect the rule of law.” All of the above-described activities not only violated the law; they occurred in flagrant contravention of court-ordered conditions that were placed on the lawyers’ access to their “clients.” Evidently, violating statutes and contemptuously flouting court orders protects the rule of law in the same way that coming to the enemy’s aid exhibits patriotism. That’s “our values” for you.

highly optimistic time-frame Mr. Obama has set for the completion of the mission could seriously undermine the counterinsurgency strategy currently implemented by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. commander of NATO troops.

"I was advised last night about a significant shipment of weapons from Iran into Kandahar.... I ha">According to his lawyer, Sibat would predict the future on his show and give out advice to his audience. [He] was arrested by Saudi Arabia's religious police (known as the Mutawa'een) and charged with sorcery while visiting the country in May 2008. Sibat was in Saudi Arabia to perform the Islamic religious pilgrimage known as Umra.

Sibat was then put on trial, and in November 2009, a court in the Saudi city of Medina found him guilty and sentenced him to death.

State Department Legal Advisor Harold Koh presented a broad assertion of the U.S. right to pursue and kill terrorists overseas, on or off an active battlefield. …

Contrary to those who claim targeting a particular person represents unlawful extrajudicial killing"2" width="100%" />

 

"Even if the U.S. were to announce a total military and economic boycott of Israel tomorrow, nothing would induce radical Islamists to lay down arms against America. Even if America joined the global jihad and offered to fight shoulder to shoulder with al-Qaeda, the extremists would not accept the offer, and give up their attacks against U.S. targets. For extremist regimes like Iran, Israel is a secondary target. Their main problem is the Western world and its leader, the United States."
(03/16/2010) Centcom commander Gen. David Petraeus in Congressional testimony.

"We must declare that Palestine, from the [Jordan] River to the [Mediterranean] Sea, is an Islamic land, and that Spain -- Andalusia -- is also the land of Islam. Islamic lands that were occupied by the enemies will once again become Islamic. Furthermore, we will reach beyond these countries, which are lost at one point. We proclaim that we will conquer Rome, like Constantinople was conquered once, and as it will be conquered again. … We will rule the world, as has been said by the Prophet Muhammad…. We will face a battlefront that is broader and stronger. Its beginnings were in Palestine, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and in Chechnya. What has begun will be completed. It will not stop."
(05/02/2008) Former Jordanian Minister Ali Al-Faqir.

"Peace-loving people must take every peaceful step possible to prevent Iran from going nuclear. There is no certain means of achieving this goal, but I can think of no more likely way to achieve it than through strong sanctions. ... Sanctions may not work, but, for the sake of peace, they are worth a try. Sanctions that hurt the Iranian economy will impose painful nukes-or-butter choices on a regime that is already tottering."
(01/04/2010) Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-CA), chairman, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, remarks to Americans for Peace Now.

 

IN THE MEDIA

---

Turban Renewal?
04/1/2010, Jonathan Schanzer, The Jerusalem Post
In his new book, After Khomeini, Said Amir Arjomand, a professor from Stony Brook University, writes in three different voices - the professor, the reformist and the apologist - that contradict each other on key issues. Arjomand the professor explains how the Islamic Republic of Iran was an attempt at the "pouring of Islam into the ideological framework borrowed from Marxism." He explains that it has not been easy to build a functioning government from this framework.

The Spy Who Loved Peace
04/1/2010, Clifford D. May, Scripps Howard News Service
President Obama thinks Israel's policies are the biggest obstacle to peace in the Middle East. Hamas disagrees. The problem for Hamas, writes Mosab Hassan Yousef, has never been "Israel's policies." The problem for Hamas is "Israel's very existence." Hamas, Yousef adds, is "animated by religious fervor and the theology of jihad," and it is "dedicated to the extinction of Israel."

Obama's Anti-Missile Defense Adviser
03/31/2010, Rebeccah Heinrichs, Politico
President Barack Obama has nominated an anti-missile defense adviser who may soon receive congressional approval - and put Americans in danger. Russia and China, two countries with nuclear weapons and effective long range ballistic missiles, have helped Iran develop its missile program.

AFRICOM: Terrorism and Security Challenges in Africa
03/31/2010, Dr. J. Peter Pham, in US Strategy in Africa: AFRICOM, Terrorism and Security Challenges, edited by David J Francis
AFRICOM is not merely a post-Cold War experiment to respond to the security challenges of the twenty-first century, but also a much-needed updating of the internal structural framework that has long handicapped efforts by the U.S. military to build bilateral and multilateral partnerships and engagements with Africa.

For A Change, The Arabs Were Divided
03/30/2010, Tony Badran, NOW Lebanon
This past weekend was that time of year again when the Arab League holds its summit and Arab leaders try to scramble together some sort of consensus position on pressing issues. Usually an occasion for melodrama, grandstanding and little substance, this year's summit in the Libyan city of Sirte deviated little from that norm.

Should Terrorism Suspects be Tried in Federal Court?
03/30/2010, David B. Rivkin Jr., Lee A. Casey, The New York Times Upfront
Terrorism suspects like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the admitted mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, should be tried in military commissions, not in U.S. courts. Military commissions are a form of military court that the U.S. has used since the Revolutionary War. Spies, saboteurs, and other fighters who don't obey basic rules of war, such as wearing uniforms, have traditionally been tried and punished by military commissions.

'Representing' al-Qaeda
03/29/2010, Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review Online
Bravely entering the lion's den - delivering a speech in praise of left-wing, "pro bono" lawyering to a group of left-wing, pro bono lawyers - Attorney General Eric Holder recently declared that "lawyers who provide counsel for the unpopular are, and should be, treated as what they are: patriots."

 

America's Newsroom
04/4/2010, Dr. Walid Phares, Fox News Channel
Is domestic terrorism on the rise?

 

America's Newsroom
04/1/2010, Kathleen Troia "KT" McFarland, Fox News Channel
Will Russia and China comply with energy sanctions against Iran?

 

News Update
04/1/2010, Dr. Walid Phares, France 24 Arabic
UN Sanctions against Iran.

 

News Update
04/1/2010, Dr. Walid Phares, Russia Today Arabic
Suicide bombings in the Moscow metro.

 

America's Newsroom
03/30/2010, Clifford D. May, Fox News Channel
Former Guantanamo detainees returning to terrorism.

 

Cavuto
03/30/2010, Kathleen Troia "KT" McFarland, Fox Business News
The relationship between the United States and Israel.

 

Happening Now
03/30/2010, Kathleen Troia "KT" McFarland, Fox News Channel
Sanctioning Iran's energy sector to derail its nuclear program.

 

News Update
03/30/2010, Dr. Walid Phares, Russia Today America
Recent bombins in Moscow.

 

The Alyona Show
03/29/2010, Dr. Walid Phares, Russia Today America
Terror networks behind the Moscow metro bombings.

 

The World
03/31/2010, Dr. Walid Phares, Public Radio International
The vulnerability of the US metro system to terror attacks.

The Rob Breakenridge Show
03/30/2010, Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, CHQR - Calgary (Canada)
The Moscow subway bombings and Hutaree militia case.

The John and Ken Show
03/30/2010, Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, KFI - Los Angeles (CA)
The Moscow subway bombings.

The Jon Justice Show
03/29/2010, Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, KZPT - Tucson (AZ)
Suicide bombings in the Moscow subways.