Anti-Israel EU Labeling Ignores Real Occupations

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu criticized the European Union’s (EU) decision forcing importers to differentially label Israeli products from Judea and Samaria (aka West Bank) and the Golan Heights as “hypocritical and [that it] constitutes a double standard.”

The administration of US President Barack Obama expressed support for the EU effort.  But then, as US Senator and presidential candidate Marco Rubio noted, Obama “treats the Prime Minister of Israel with less respect than what he gives the Ayatollah in Iran.”

The EU seems obsessively anti-Israel with its decision not to identify products from the West Bank and Golan as “Made in Israel” as only the latest example of that obsession.  It calls ad nauseam for Israel-Arab negotiations as the only path to peace but has already pre-determined their outcome by saying that these disputed territories are not part of Israel.  In lock step, that Obama administration spokesman who expressed support for the labeling also said that “we do not consider settlements to be part of Israel.” 

The evidence of this “asymmetrical” warfare against the Jewish State goes beyond righteous indignation, however.  That same EU labeling that targets Israel’s unconfirmed "occupation” ignores real ones, most egregiously Iran and Pakistan’s occupation of   Baluchistan.

Baluchistan stretches across southwestern Pakistan, southeastern Iran, and a small section of southwestern Afghanistan.  When the British left India, they thought they were leaving an independent Baluchistan, but the Pakistanis ruthlessly crushed it and have been treating the Baloch as virtual serfs ever since.  I’ve never heard of the EU refusing to label Balochi exports as Made in Pakistan, and their occupation is not disputed, as is the one with which they are obsessed.  Moreover, there are massive human rights violations by both Pakistan and Iran against the Baloch, and the European Union remains silent about them.  Moreover, Iran’s violations (see as one example, http://www.interfaithstrength.com/Studies%20on%20IRAN.pdf, scroll to page 196) were never even raised during the ill begotten “negotiations” on Iran’s nuclear program.  And judging by the slobbering excitement with which Europeans are greeting prospects of commerce with Iran; don’t expect them to be.

Only about 60 percent of Iran’s population is Persian.  The rest are ethnic minorities (many Muslim) whose identity is being ruthlessly crushed.  There are Baloch, Sindhi, and Pashto independence movements within Pakistan, all Muslim.  Yet, none of them is being taken up by the anti-Jewish state obsessed European Union.

It seems that the EU’s finger wagging “morality” is selective and coincides with historical European  tastes and economic interests.  When will the world wake up and stop Europe's carnage-complicit hypocrisy?

Remember "The BDS 59" at election time

Those of us who feel passionately about our nation's security and the international fight against Islamists, and who are equally passionate about the State of Israel, have been snubbed time and again by the Obama administration and its fearful acolytes in Congress.  When that happens, people shake their fists and rant about those who are placing our security and that of our ally Israel in jeopardy, but too often we do nothing more.

I've spoken with so many individuals--passionate supporters of Israel--who have come to me with their anger about Barack Obama and his clearly anti-Israel actions.  Yet, when pressed, they admit that they voted for him not once but twice, the second time after his anti-Israel actions were--as they too admitted--on full display.  So with the 2016 US elections not that far away, from time to time, this blog will remind voters who snubbed them and did so expecting that they did not have the heft to administer the appropriate consequences.

Let's begin with "The BDS 59."

Do you remember when Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, addressed a joint session of Congress, and several members of that body publicly boycotted our friend and ally.  They did so even though were it not for our ally Israel, Saddam Hussein would have ten years of nuclear material for use against our troops in 1991; and even though were it not for our ally Israel, ISIS would have a bomb today.

Some of The BDS 59 tried to hide behind an excuse about protocol, however, there are historical precedents for the Netanyahu speech; and their anti-Israel boycott reflected their tacit or vocal support for the Obama's attempts to distance the US from Israel.  Here are The BDS 59 who do not deserve our votes in 2016 or any time:

Vice President Joe Biden

Sen. Al Franken (Minn.)

Sen. Martin Heinrich (N.M.)

Sen. Tim Kaine (Va.)

Sen. Patrick Leahy (Vt.)

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)

Sen. Brian Schatz (Hawaii)

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.)

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.)

Rep. Karen Bass (Calif.)

Rep. Earl Blumenauer (Ore.)

Rep. Corrine Brown (Fla.)

Rep. G.K. Butterfield (N.C.)

Rep. Lois Capps (Calif.)

Rep. Andre Carson (Ind.)

Rep. Joaquin Castro (Texas)

Rep. Katherine Clark (Mass.)

Rep. William Lacy Clay (Mo.)

Rep. James Clyburn (S.C.)

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (Mo.)

Rep. Steve Cohen (Tenn.)

Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (N.J.)

Rep. John Conyers (Mich.)

Rep. Elijah Cummings (Md.)

Rep. Danny Davis (Ill.)

Rep. Peter DeFazio (Ore.)

Rep. Diana DeGette (Colo.)

Rep. Lloyd Doggett (Texas)

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (Conn.)

Rep. Donna Edwards (Md.)

Rep. Chaka Fattah (Pa.)

Rep. Keith Ellison (Minn.)

Rep. Marcia Fudge (Ohio)

Rep. Raúl Grijalva (Ariz.)

Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (Ill.)

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.)

Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (Texas)

Rep. Marcy Kaptur (Ohio)

Rep. Rick Larsen (Wash.)

Rep. Barbara Lee (Calif.)

Rep. John Lewis (Ga.)

Rep. Dave Loebsack (Iowa)

Rep. Zoe Lofgren (Calif.)

Rep. Betty McCollum (Minn.)

Rep. Jim McDermott (Wash.)

Rep. Jim McGovern (Mass.)

Rep. Jerry McNerney (Calif.)

Rep. Gregory Meeks (N.Y.)

Rep. Gwen Moore (Wis.)

Rep. Beto O'Rourke (Texas)

Rep. Donald Payne (N.J.)

Rep. Chellie Pingree (Maine)

Rep. David Price (N.C.)

Rep. Cedric Richmond (La.)

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (Ill.)

Rep. Adam Smith (Wash.)

Rep. Bennie Thompson (Miss.)

Rep. Mike Thompson (Calif.)

Rep. John Yarmuth (Ky.)

They put partisanship over our security, and did so expecting that none of us will remember come election day.  We do remember, and this blog will put out more reminders in the coming weeks and months, including reminders of who voted for the Iran deal that places US and Israeli security in jeopardy.

Obama vs. Cameron. Who stands with Israel?

I was going to write an extensive blog about how the murder of three Jewish teens is a human rights violation that the world has a tough time treating as one.  Instead, I am reproducing statements about the murder by US President Barack Obama and British PM David Cameron.

Obama:  "On behalf of the American people I extend my deepest and heartfelt condolences to the families of Eyal Yifrach, Gilad Shaar, and Naftali Frankel – who held Israeli and American citizenship. As a father, I cannot imagine the indescribable pain that the parents of these teenage boys are experiencing. The United States condemns in the strongest possible terms this senseless act of terror against innocent youth. From the outset, I have offered our full support to Israel and the Palestinian Authority to find the perpetrators of this crime and bring them to justice, and I encourage Israel and the Palestinian Authority to continue working together in that effort. I also urge all parties to refrain from steps that could further destabilize the situation. As the Israeli people deal with this tragedy, they have the full support and friendship of the United States.”

Cameron:  "This was an appalling and inexcusable act of terror perpetrated against young teenagers. Britain will stand with Israel as it seeks to bring to justice those responsible. Tonight my thoughts and prayers are with the families of Gilad, Naftali and Eyal. No parent should have ever to suffer such heartache or grief."

Not much to say.  While Obama parses his words, uses the passive voice, and refrains from calling this heinous act terror; Cameron is clear and unequivocal.  Obama urges restraint and obliquely makes clear that an Israeli response could "destabilize the situation."  (Does he really think it's stable now?) Cameron stands with Israel in seeking to bring to justice "those responsible," who might include the actual murderers as well as those who sent glorified them.  Cameron also humanizes the three boys by calling them by their first names.

Did I fall asleep in one country and wake up in another?

Don't Believe Talking Points: Obama Foreign Policy a Disaster

In an article in Andrew Breitbart's foreign policy blog, Big Peace, I make the argument that the recent talking points about Obama's foreign policy miss the point. Specifically, they congratulate the President for the deaths of Bin Laden, Gadaffi, and Al Alawki--all bad guys, and allege they indicate his overall foreign policy success. While their deaths are blows to the other side, they have not stopped the progression of real dangers that remain strong thanks in large part due to Obama's policies. The article is the first of two, this one concentrating on the Middle East, the next on South Asia.

The focus is the Democrats' contention that Obama has "won back" US friends and influence around the world. In articles and speeches several years ago, I took issue with the notion that we really lost anything--except in the minds of racist and Euro-centric pundits. Now, however, we seen really to have lost true influence by policies that emphasize weakness, abdicate leadership, and equivocate on values.

The Palestinians, who Obama has gone out of his way to smooch, recently rejected his demands that they abandon their effort to secure statehood via the UN--a fool's errand in the first place. And who could blame them? In February, Obama made similar threats about repercussions if they went ahead with their anti-Israel building resolution; they did, and he didn't. The Israelis aren't listening to him, either; certainly not when he and his parroting Secretary of State "demand" they stop building; and very recently perhaps in planning a strike against Iran.

Iran is another example, by the way. First, they rejected his craven and embarrassing outreach; they went ahead and slaughtered their own citizens; and they have increased their sphere of influence at our expense. Obama's influence with Turkey has all but evaporated for this once-reliable ally, now a reliable flotilla-sponsoring antagonist.

Obama's love for the actions behind the Arab Spring has not prevented it from becoming an Arab Winter. We cannot even get our "new friends" to extradite the Lockerbie Bomber, responsible for the mass murder of 189 Americans.

And if you think that's bad, wait for the article on South Asia.

Bangladesh Awami League Bares Anti-Hindu Teeth

Last month, Bangladesh’s Supreme Court ruled against some constitutional amendments instituted during two military dictatorships in the 1970s and 1980s. It was hailed as a great step forward for freedom in Bangladesh and was roundly condemned by Jamaat and other Islamists. The court then asked the government to submit replacements for ratification in the Awami-dominated parliament. So what did this oh-so-progressive and freedom-loving Awami League do? It submitted new laws that outlawed military governments and religiously-based parties; but it left intact one of the most significant and hateful amendments that came under the Court’s scrutiny: the Eighth. Bangladesh’s Eighth Amendment made Islam the official state religion and essential to the character of all that flows from Bangladeshi law. It is an amendment that Hindus and others say makes them second-class citizens in their own country. Every law they have to follow begins with “in the name of Allah the beneficent.” Madrassas (Islamic schools) are given a favored position by their government and often receive public support, even those preaching radical Islam. Yet, this “pro-minority” government does nothing—NOTHING—even when its own Supreme Court sets the table for them.

While the Awami League has shown its preference for radical jihadists over true partnership in the world, that same world has assiduously ignored it. Just before its election, the Supreme Court and military-backed government arranged things so it could repeal the anti-Hindu Vested Property Act by mere fiat. It did not; but no one said a word. Nor has the destruction of Bangladesh's Hindu community slowed under this duplicitous government. Will this be the straw that breaks the appeasing camel's back?

Judging by the non-reaction to it, likely not. There has not been even one phone call from President Obama or Secretary of State Clinton to Bangladesh, challenging the government on this or other anti-minority actions. No one has reminded Sheikh Hasina of her still unfulfilled promises to end official minority discrimination in Bangladesh—and how she has an opportunity with this constitutional change to prove that she and her party are not shams

The Awami League's action is also yet another clear sign that the policies of weakness implemented by the Obama Administration are leading the Muslim world to take actions that distance themselves further from the rest of the world and move them closer to the likes of Ahmadinejad and the Taliban. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are, at best, oblivious; at worst, complicit. Will the American people end this madness in 2012?