Of course, the president and his handlers are using committed foot soldiers who are either Jews or people posing as 'friends' of Israel to do the dirty work. Last week, we saw Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, our Ambassador to Belgium Howard Gutman, American Jewish Committee chairman Jack Rosen and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton among others fire the opening salvos.
The latest soldier in the cause is the New York Time's Tom Friedman, who put out a column yesterday that represents yet another attempt by an Obama surrogate to delegitimize Israel and fool Jews into pulling the lever for the president.
Friedman used the occasion of the last Republican debate and the support for Israel voiced by the GOP presidential candidates to use the time-honored 'Jewish Lobby' and dual loyalty smears:
I sure hope that Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, understands that the standing ovation he got in Congress this year was not for his politics. That ovation was bought and paid for by the Israel lobby. The real test is what would happen if Bibi tried to speak at, let’s say, the University of Wisconsin. My guess is that many students would boycott him and many Jewish students would stay away, not because they are hostile but because they are confused.
Yes. Tom Friedman is now officially entered in the Mearshimer and Walt Jewish Lobby conspiracy sweepstakes. He's been there for years actually, but it's nice that it's official now.
Actually, If Bibi Netanyahu showed up on campus at a Madison or Berkeley or Columbia, he'd be greeted by howling mobs of Muslims mobilized by CAIR and the MSA along with the usual Leftist cadres and prevented from speaking, while any students Jewish or otherwise who wanted to hear what he had to say would be threatened and intimidated into silence. Which is exactly how Mr. Friedman likes it.
It's a pretty nifty argument he has here. People who actually love and support Israel really don't, and the best way for American Jews to show they support Israel is to vote against them and pull the lever for Obama, the most anti-Israel president in our history:
This works on two levels. On the one hand, Friedman gets to take a shot at the president's Republican opposition directly for being 'Israel firsters'. That will delight a lot of Friedman's New York audience as well as one group of Americans who give the president the highest approval rating he has - Muslims.
Newt Gingrich took the Republican competition to grovel for Jewish votes — by outloving Israel — to a new low by suggesting that the Palestinians are an “invented” people and not a real nation entitled to a state.
This was supposed to show that Newt loves Israel more than Mitt Romney, who only told the Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom that he would move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem because “I don’t seek to take actions independent of what our allies think is best, and if Israel’s leaders thought that a move of that nature would be helpful to their efforts, then that’s something I’ll be inclined to do. ... I don’t think America should play the role of the leader of the peace process. Instead, we should stand by our ally.”
That’s right. America’s role is to just applaud whatever Israel does, serve as its A.T.M. and shut up. We have no interests of our own. And this guy’s running for president?
On the other, he gets to slam Israel by mining the rich lode of the 'ungrateful ally' meme voiced by ex-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates upon his leaving the cabinet to return to the rich pastures of Arab financed six figure speaking fees and honorariums he was happily grazing in before he was called out of retirement by George W. Bush.
Friedman's assertion that the US is Israel's ATM is demonstrably ridiculous, considering what the US gets out of the deal. In fact, many analysts estimate that if we cut off all aid to Israel, it would cost us $10 to $15 billion to replace what Israel provides for us now for a mere $3 billion and some good will on our part.They remain one of our most important and valuable allies, and one of the few we have with a significant military quotient.
Those members of Congress from both parties who gave Netanyahu the reception Friedman is so jealous of didn't need to be bribed by any lobby.They respect him as the loyal American ally he remains, in spite of the disrespect and malice he's been shown by the Obama White House.
And never mind that the latest Gallup polls show that the support for our ally Israelis at an all time high, in spite of President Obama and tools like Tom Friedman's best efforts. I suppose Friedman sees them as bribed by the insidious Jewish Lobby as well.
While some people, like the Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin consider this a new low, the truth is that Friedman has always been willing to be a sour, egotistical shill for Israel's enemies. In fact, given that the Times itself reported in May of 2011 that Friedman had Obama's ear on Middle East policy and that the president was already known for his malign attitude towards Israel and his amateurish missteps in the region, it might very well be that Friedman was the actual inspiration behind President Obama's attempt to ambush PM Netanyahu on his last trip to America - the one that ended with Netanyahu's tumultuous reception in Congress.
So Friedman's willing recitation of anti-Zionist talking points and slurs is hardly surprising. Especially as this is obviously no coincidence, but part of an ongoing campaign by the White House to try to regain Jewish support for President Obama's re-election.
There's an odor surrounding this kind of activity...an unbelievably foul one. And all the expensive soaps and perfumes in the medicine cabinets of Tom Friedman's $10 million dollar Bethesda estate aren't going to wash it clean.
No comments:
Post a Comment