From Obama with Love
While preaching to their allies, the leaders of the democratic administration handed over the keys to the Middle East to Tehran. Along the way, they offer us an "amnesty" in exchange for a Palestinian dictatorship
About two months before the October 7 massacre, Tablet magazine published a large article by David Samuels about former U.S. President Barack Obama. Beyond the interesting details about the real reason for Obama's separation from one of his companies, which exposed his disregard for blatant anti-Semitism, Samuels summarizes the president's approach to the State of Israel: "Obama's hostility to the idea of American uniqueness is also connected to his hostility to Israel. Or, to be more specific, (his hostility) to America's identification with Israel. The result of this view ultimately led to the nuclear agreement with Iran during his second term, with the main goal of the agreement being the integration of this country into the security structure of the Middle East. At the same time, Obama's Iranian strategy is aimed at limiting Israel's power in the region. And again, why?"
It is increasingly clear that Biden's presidency is Obama's third term. When you see the verbiage about international organizing against the Houthis and Hezbollah in the face of inaction, you really ask again, why? Why is Israel really the focus of international criticism, when it is the only element fighting with genuine motivation against Iran and its terrorist proxies? Why aren't the international pressure, the sanctions, the military attacks, directed at the state that is the source of chaos on the maritime routes, and is also the initiator of violent aggression against neighboring countries?
Biden and Obama on other days, photo: Reuters
In Israel, these concepts, which guide American policy toward Iran, are almost unknown. Researchers Drs. Michael Duran and Tony Badran have been writing about it for nearly ten years. Handing over the keys to the Middle East to the ayatollahs. The Democratic administration has succeeded, with the help of the media echo chamber it controls, and with the help of the ideological and anti-Semitic left, to normalize the irrational policy that benefits Iran so much and threatens Israel.
The same reasons that caused the anti-Semitic outbreak in the United States are also the ideological basis of a policy that is ostensibly presented as a cold strategic security consideration by the Americans. This is not a cold consideration. In the face of a totalitarian Islamist state, Iran, Obama and Biden come and present the evil of Saudi Arabia, which has grinded an Islamist ideologue from the Washington Post. The Iranians are wholesale executing their own citizens, arresting hostages, oppressing their people, building terror networks and pursuing nuclear power, while threatening to destroy the State of Israel; But the State of Israel is the sinner: why? Because it is governed by the most extreme right-wing government in the history of the country. After all, Itamar Ben-Gvir is a tolerant liberal compared to Rashida Tlaib and the resigning president of Harvard. Raisi specialized in destroying dissidents, but the bad guy is Egyptian President el-Sisi.
At the center of this crooked ideology is the Palestinian idea, which has become one of the pillars of every left-wing organization. Even Greta Thunberg forgets about the melting of the icebergs when she is called to the flag to destroy Zionism. The propaganda against Zionism is dozens of times stronger than the propaganda that existed in the past against Nazism. According to Obama, Biden and Blinken, Israel can be pardoned – after all, the death penalty hangs over it constantly – only if a Palestinian state is established alongside it according to the parameters of Yossi Beilin, Ehud Barak, Ehud Olmert and, of course, Abu Mazen, if he is kind enough to knock out a ticket.
In other words, the pro-Iranian doctrine of the Obama and Biden administrations fits in with the Osloid outlook of the Israeli left. But the problem begins when the ideologues of the defense establishment adhere to the same doctrine, which decrees a left-right walk with the Americans under all conditions and in any case. They just don't understand or don't want to understand that Americans in the form of a democratic government are no longer the same Americans. It is true that the Americans are still supplying Israel with combat equipment; But on all other dimensions, they oppose Israel, which is fighting for its independence, its security spaces, and its standing in the Middle East and the world.
The one who insists on Israel's independence and status is Prime Minister Netanyahu. Therefore, it must be fought in every way, except head-on, as is customary in a democratic regime. No one today has an argument that can contradict Netanyahu's political and security positions. But there is a way to fight it, and this is according to the doctrine of Saul Alinsky, the subversive revolutionary: every struggle and every dispute must be personalized. Ideas should not be attacked, but people on their merits. And it's not just Netanyahu. Every slip of someone's mouth must turn into a lasso tied on a high branch.
Israel is fighting against the greatest enemy of the West and the free world, in fact alone, with limited material support from the United States. But its prime minister will not step on the carpet in the White House. After all, his war is far more fateful than Zelensky's, but he is the Darling of the Democrats. According to former Prime Minister Bennett, the Biden administration even torpedoed the possibility of a ceasefire in the first phase of the Ukraine war.
It was Iran's perception of integration that caused the panicked flight of Blinken, who canceled his visit to Israel following the premature evaporation of the damned Saleh Arouri, a senior Hamas official who was staying in Beirut. That is why American officials immediately declared Israel responsible for the explosion in Lebanon. They will do anything to frame Israel and distance themselves from it. Moreover, for some reason, Arouri's assassination occurred the day after the well-publicized withdrawal of the American aircraft carrier from the eastern Mediterranean.
End times
The High Court of Justice and the security establishment justify their aggressiveness by saying that they are the last defender of democracy. This is the original Israeli contribution to the definition of democracy
The High Court ruling invalidating the cancellation of the reasonableness cause was a blow to public morale. There was a very broad consensus on this. Who needs this dividing blow in the middle of unity, in the middle of the difficult war? But what is all this compared to the megalomaniac need to demonstrate that the Golem in the legal cloak is still walking on his cracked crutches? More power but impotent power. Another demonstration of mastery of the kind that can be seen today on the streets of Tel Aviv, when statements about how the war endangers the lives of the abductees turn into advertising slogans, flickering with red lights on the roofs of office buildings at the Kaplan-Menachem Begin intersection.
Once again, it is worth mentioning the late journalist Hagai Eshed, who was one of the first to use the word "junta" for both officers and jurists 36 years ago (1987, article in Davar). Eshed noticed that from the beginning in the 50s, there were serious points of friction between senior officers and the "security establishment" and the judicial system and the government. In 87, against the background of the Pollard affair, he wrote an article called "The Rule of Officers and Jurists." Everyone was waiting for some ruling by the "judges of the whole country," as he called them. "This will be another and perhaps last expression of the collapse of the two masters of the democratic regime in Israel – the helpless 'elected government' and the powerless 'elected Knesset', after the hollow and weak face of these two democratic institutions that have gone bankrupt is finally exposed – the political and public arena will finally turn to a serious struggle between the two real powers and authority in our country – whether it will be a regime of 'officers' rule' or of 'rule of jurists' in Israel."
"What will probably happen," predicted Hagai Eshed, "in these coming and coming days, is that our two juntas will have to divide the powers of government between them and maintain a modus vivendi between the two. Perhaps they will use the advice of ministers from time to time... Most importantly, each of the two juntas – military and judicial – will also have journalists, who will explain to public opinion in the people and around the world that without each of them and without the journalists who support them, it is impossible."
Isn't that just wonderful? These two establishments justify their aggressive rule by being the last defender of democracy. This is the original Israeli contribution to the definition of democracy.
During the war, the army was kidnapped by the people. The fighting people. Judging by the number of casualties from certain social groups, it is clear that these are members of Religious Zionism and Mizrahim from the periphery. Until the last week and a half, the People's Army, led by the Ogdonners and brigade commanders, dictated the path of victory brilliantly. But recently the General Staff took control of the war, and since then we have been in stages.
The security establishment is well aware of the legal establishment's arm, which cuts command powers and creates chilling pressure, which has even harmed the army's ability to defend the Gaza border. In his book "The Purse and the Sword," Prof. Daniel Friedman details how over the years the High Court of Justice intervened in security policy, thereby undermining security and undermining security considerations and the authority of the government and the IDF. The case of the release of Mustafa Dirani, a senior member of the Shiite Amal militia, is well known; considerations for demolishing terrorists' homes; And no less important is the approval of a ruling for supporters of terrorism and Islamo-Nazism to be elected and serve in the Knesset, with the most prominent cases being Ayman Odeh and Azmi Bishara – public favorites on the left, academia and the media.
In a chapter from Friedman's book entitled "While Sitting as General Staff," he writes that "the new starting point (in the days of Aharon Barak) was that the issue of security is no different from any other issue. The court has the power to deal with any matter, to examine in every area the question of reasonableness and to 'balance' between the security interest and other interests, as it does in any other sector." Thus, the High Court of Justice intervened in matters such as the "neighbor procedure" and the route of the security fence in Judea and Samaria. During the IDF's operation to locate tunnels in Rafah in 2004, the IDF was forced to surrender on the issue of electricity, water and other components of the siege because of petitions by left-wing organizations to the High Court of Justice. On the basis of the IDF's concessions on these issues, the organizations' petitions were rejected. The same thing has happened regarding the perimeter area of the Gaza border fence in recent years.
Optimism, in America
In the United States, the president of Harvard, who did not rule out calls for genocide against the Jews, resigned. In Israel, there is no chance that anyone from the establishment will quit, unless it is someone who is elected
The resignation of the president of Harvard University can also be called a targeted killing, and it is difficult to know what causes greater cheerfulness: the assassination of Arouri or the pressure that led to the resignation of Prof. Claudine Gay. She is very similar to Obama. She also accused her of being "the target of personal attacks and threats fueled by racial animosity." This is what Obama's spokesmen argued at the time, when the extent of Obama's negative treatment in Israel was revealed.
Former president of Harvard, photo: GettyImages
It is not because of his policy, which nurtures and encourages an anti-Semitic totalitarian state that wants to destroy the State of Israel; Rather, it is the aversion to the black president, which stems from reasons that are essentially racist. It's also no wonder that the former president served as a lobbyist for President Gay among the mysterious anonymous body, the governor of the prestigious university that fell from above.
But there is something optimistic about American democracy and society. In Israel, there is no chance that public pressure will cause any figure at the top of the academic or institutional pyramid to resign, to free the public from its presence. "Public pressure" of "public opinion" is always the well-known voices of the mouthpieces of the establishment. The establishments generate fanfare and condemnation through institutes such as the Israel Institute for... Something" or through one or two newspapers or one or two channels, and then someone elected by ordinary voters from the market or taxi station must resign.
Galit Distel. As if she submitted her resignation to Channel 13 News, Photo: Mark Israel Salem
Here, Galit Distal Atabrian as an example. Metaphorically, she submitted her resignation to Channel 13. Would one expect a similar "resignation" from someone from Channel 13 News, or from Esther Hayut? Resignation is intended to delay the publication of the ruling. In spite of all the scholarly articles and demonstrations, will anyone in the Bar Association decide to remove the corrupt Bureau from the Judicial Appointments Committee? Just, in a unilateral move, as a jeste in favor of "public opinion."
In the U.S., the various vectors operating in the public space can still make a difference. Even President Claudine Gaye can't say: The academy is me. Or the law is me. Or the meaning of the words is what I decide. Private lessons in reading comprehension with Fogelman and Hayut.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us