John Kerry "Swift-Boats" Israel: Another Holocaust? What Me Worry?

Desperate for a diplomatic achievement as America's Secretary of State, John Kerry travelled to Geneva last week to sign a deal with Iran, which would have eased sanctions and demanded minimal concessions involving Iran's nuclear weapons development program. However, Kerry was in for a surprise: Recognizing that the agreement did little or nothing to stop Tehran from pursuing its nuclear weapons goals, e.g., prevent operation of Iran's Arak IR-40 Heavy Water Reactor that is designed to produce sufficient plutonium for two atomic bombs each year (see: http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/09/bad-iran-deal-worse-than-no-deal/?hpt=hp_t2), France refused to go along.

Kerry is now having to face criticism from the US Congress for his rush to reach an empty pact with Iran, and he was in full damage control mode on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” As reported by The Washington Post in an article entitled "Kerry defends proposed Iran nuclear deal; Israel objects" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/kerry-defends-proposed-iran-nuclear-deal-israel-objects/2013/11/10/53025956-4a49-11e3-9890-a1e0997fb0c0_story.html?hpid=z3) by Karen De Young:

"If negotiators in the next several weeks can reach an agreement on the draft proposal — a result that eluded top world diplomats in intensive sessions with the Iranians that ended here Sunday — talks can move toward making 'absolutely certain . . . that Iran never has a nuclear weapon,' Kerry said in an interview on NBC’s 'Meet the Press.'

Far from being naive about Iran’s capabilities and intentions, as some opponents have suggested, Obama administration negotiators are 'some of the most serious and capable, expert people in our government, who have spent a lifetime dealing with both Iran' and nuclear proliferation issues, Kerry said.

'We are not blind, and I don’t think we’re stupid,' he added. 'I think we have a pretty strong sense of how to measure whether or not we are acting in the interests of our country and of the globe.'"

"We are not blind, and I don’t think we’re stupid"? This is coming from a man who labeled Assad, a mass murderer, "my dear friend."

Obama administration negotiators are "some of the most serious and capable, expert people in our government"? These are the same people who reached a deal with Syria's Assad and Russia's Putin for the destruction of Syria's chemical weapons, only to later learn that Assad was hiding much of his illicit stockpile (see: http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/05/first-on-cnn-us-intelligence-suggests-syria-may-hide-some-chemical-weapons/).

And let us not forget that the P5+1 negotiating team is being led by the EU's imbecilic (I'm being kind) Catherine Ashton.

More about Ashton? She is a former chairwoman of the Health Authority in Hertfordshire and has never held elected office. Ashton has a BSc degree in sociology and has a life-sized Dalek (a fictional race of extraterrestrial mutants from the British science fiction television series "Doctor Who") in her sitting room.

Quite apart from what decorates her sitting room, what might be hiding in Ashton's closet? Questions have arisen over her role as national treasurer in the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (no mention of this position in her EU profile), which was suspected of having received funding from the Soviet Union.

In short, Israel has every reason to be concerned by Kerry's attempt to declare "Peace in our time." Take the time to read Jackson Diehl's Washington Post opinion piece entitled "John Kerry’s Middle East dream world" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/jackson-diehl-john-kerrys-middle-east-dream-world/2013/11/10/5b17d2d2-47cf-11e3-b6f8-3782ff6cb769_story.html?hpid=z3). Diehl correctly observes:

"Imagine a world in which the Middle East is not descending into carnage and chaos but is on the brink of a monumental series of breakthroughs. By next spring,Iran’s nuclear program will be secured and Egypt will be a liberal democracy. Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad has stepped aside. And, not least, Israelis and Palestinians have settled on the terms for a Palestinian state.

This is the world that John Kerry inhabited as he shuttled across the world last week: a fantastical realm created by his billowing vision of what he can accomplish as secretary of state. Meanwhile, on this planet, aid agencies reported starvation and an outbreak of polio in Syria; Egypt’s last elected president was put on trial; Israeli and Palestinian leaders described their U.S.-brokered peace talks as broken; and France’s foreign minister suggested the would-be accord with Iran was 'a fool’s game.'

Call it Kerry’s Magical Mystery Tour."

I call it frightening, and more than that, it is Obama, who, with no one to answer to in his second term, is delighted to throw Israel under the bus ("Surprise, surprise, surprise!) and is fully responsible for Kerry's malfeasance.

Seth Anziska, "A Preventable Massacre": More Israel Bashing From The New York Times

The Middle East is indeed a savage region. In 1982, Syrian President Hafez al-Assad, father of Bashar al-Assad, killed some 25,000 Sunni civilians (there are higher and lower estimates) in the town of Hama. In 1988, Saddam Hussein killed some 5,000 civilians when he attacked the Kurdish town of Halabja with poison gas. Over 1,200 Israelis have been killed by Palestinian terrorists since September 2000. And more recently, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has killed some 30,000 civilians while attempting to quell the current uprising of his country's Sunni majority.

Further afield in Central Asia, some 1,300 Afghan civilians have accidentally been killed by US-led military forces since Obama became president in 2009.

But never mind any of the above. Today, The New York Times would only have us focus on the 1982 Sabra and Shatila massacre. Over the course of this abomination, Lebanese Christian militiamen murdered some 800 Palestinian civilians in Palestinian refugee camps in Beirut, after the Israeli Army allowed the Christians, hungry for revenge, access to the camps.

In his guest New York Times op-ed entitled "A Preventable Massacre" (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/opinion/a-preventable-massacre.html?pagewanted=all), Seth Anziska, a doctoral candidate in international history at Columbia University, informs us:

"Israel’s involvement in the Lebanese civil war began in June 1982, when it invaded its northern neighbor. Its goal was to root out the Palestine Liberation Organization, which had set up a state within a state, and to transform Lebanon into a Christian-ruled ally."

Oh really? The 1982 Israeli operation had nothing to do with rooting out terror?

Seth fails to mention the "Coastal Road Massacre" of 1978, when Palestinians from Lebanon landed on Israel's coast, hijacked a bus, and killed 38 Israeli civilians, including 13 children.

Seth also forgets to tell us about the massive 1981 rocketing of civilian targets in Northern Israel by the PLO.

And then there was also the June 1982 attack in London on Israel’s ambassador to the United Kingdom, Shlomo Argov, by the Iraqi-backed Abu Nidal terrorist organization. But why should Seth be troubled with such minor details?

Alleging deception and "browbeating" of US officials on the part of Ariel Sharon leading up to the Sabra and Shatila massacre, our darling doctoral candidate goes on to say:

"The Sabra and Shatila massacre severely undercut America’s influence in the Middle East, and its moral authority plummeted. In the aftermath of the massacre, the United States felt compelled by 'guilt' to redeploy the Marines, who ended up without a clear mission, in the midst of a brutal civil war.

On Oct. 23, 1983, the Marine barracks in Beirut were bombed and 241 Marines were killed. The attack led to open warfare with Syrian-backed forces and, soon after, the rapid withdrawal of the Marines to their ships. As Mr. Lewis told me, America left Lebanon 'with our tail between our legs.'"

Regrettably, Seth again forgets to inform us that the barracks bombing was perpetrated by Lebanese Shiites, who, like the Lebanese Christians, also hated their Palestinian overlords. In addition, the attack was almost certainly undertaken pursuant to instructions from Iran, possibly owing to US support for Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war. Or in other words, there was little connection between the barracks bombing and Israel, unless you also wish to blame Israel for US combat deaths in the 1993 Battle of Mogadishu in Somalia.

Seth concludes:

"The lesson of the Sabra and Shatila tragedy is clear. Sometimes close allies act contrary to American interests and values. Failing to exert American power to uphold those interests and values can have disastrous consequences: for our allies, for our moral standing and most important, for the innocent people who pay the highest price of all."

"Most important, for the innocent people"? Oh really. Why isn't Seth telling us of the price being paid by civilians in Afghanistan, owing to Obama's inane escalation of that meaningless war? And why doesn't Seth bother to mention the ongoing civil war in Syria, ignored by Obama, which has claimed thousands of civilians lives?

In fact, publication by the Times of this guest op-ed by a doctoral student is all about telling us that the US shouldn't allow Netanyahu to "browbeat" the US into setting "red lines" for the Iranian nuclear weapons development program. Not by coincidence, this guest op-ed was published immediately after Netanyahu informed "Meet the Press" that Iran will be on the brink of a nuclear bomb in six to seven months (see: http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=285287).

As observed in prior blog entries, the crux of the current crisis involving Iran and Israel involves lack of faith in Obama. After witnessing his foreign policy procrastination over the past three years, neither of these countries believes that Obama means what he says. In fact, this perception of Obama as irresolute and wishy-washy, i.e. "leading from behind," is what could well lead to a disastrous war, costing thousands of civilian lives.

If the US truly believes that nuclear weapons in the hands of Iran's maniacal mullahs do not pose a threat to American interests, taking into account hostility and proxy wars between Iran and Saudi Arabia and also Iran's patronage of international terror, perhaps the US should not promulgate red lines. On the other hand, if, as stated today by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Iran poses a threat not only to Israel but to the entire world (see: http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/09/17/238533.html), then it is indeed time for tough talk.

[Columbia University lists Anziska's "Advisor" as Rashid Khalidi (see: http://history.columbia.edu/graduate/Anziska.html), a Columbia professor once linked to the PLO (see: http://www.martinkramer.org/sandbox/2008/10/khalidi-of-the-plo/). A tape of Obama's 2003 tribute to Khalidi at a farewell party in Chicago is locked away in the offices of The Los Angeles Times (see: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/226104/i-l-times-i-suppresses-obamas-khalidi-bash-tape/andrew-c-mccarthy).]