Israel

The Arab’s in the Middle East prefer Barack Obama become the next president. Commenting on the senator’s recent visit to Amman, Jordan-based political analyst, Radna Habib, said,

“The Arab Street definitely prefers the Democrat to become the next American president.”

Why?

Because they see Obama as more sympathetic to their causes, the primary being the elimination of Israel. After his visit, Obama commented that with him as the next president…

“people were more optimistic about our ability to solve [the Arab-Israeli] problem and how important it is to addressing broader problems in the region.”

That’s because the Arabs see Obama pressing Israel to make concessions to force peace. Concessions that if beneficial to the Arab nations, certainly won’t be in the Jews best interest.

And I think that’s exactly what Obama would do!

(Remember that)

It can be said that the friend of my enemy is also my enemy. So, once again, let’s review the short-list of Obama endorsers:

• Middle East Arabs
• Kim Jong-Il
• Castro
• Hamas
• Hugo Chavez
• Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
• The New Black Panthers
• Louis Farrakhan

If Barack Obama is the right candidate for our enemies, he can’t be the right candidate for America!

Mealy-mouthed ex-president Jimmy Carter claims that no one in the U.S. government told him not to travel to the Middle East. However, he did acknowledge that Assistant Secretary of State, David Welch, told him the trip was not advisable. That sounds to me like the U.S. government urging him not to go, doncha think? After all, how does one “tell” a former POTUS not to do something? I would think the ex-president would respect and heed the advice of the current administration.

(not so…obviously!)

Anyway, Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, left no doubt as to the administration’s actions and intent in this matter:

“I just don’t want there to be any confusion”…”The United States is not going to deal with Hamas, and we certainly told President Carter that meeting with Hamas was not going to help.”

In fact, WaPo reports that Secretary Rice went out of her way to issue an on-the-record statement saying,

“we counseled President Carter against” the trip. “We wanted to make sure there would be no confusion and that there would be no sense that he was somehow a party to peace negotiations” between Israel and the Palestinian government.

So, nobody told you not to go, Mr. ex-president? Gimmieabreak!

Why should anyone have to tell you? Hasn’t it always been U.S. policy that we do not negotiate with terrorists, and hasn’t the U.S. made it quite clear that until Hamas recognizes Israel’s right to exist and calls an end to violence, there will be no negotiations? How hard is that for an ex-president to understand?

Maybe you’re just trying to relive those old glory days of Begin-Sadat. Maybe you’re trying to legitimize the politicized peace prize you won in 2002.

Maybe you’re just a meddler!

Former President Jimmy Carter on a one-man crusade to achieve peace in the Middle East has brokered a one-sided, one-piece agreement. Speaking at a press conference in Jerusalem, Carter explained,

“Hamas leaders said they would accept a Palestinian state on the 1967 border and the right of Israel to live as a neighbor, provided the agreement was submitted to the Palestinian people for overall approval.”

Of course, Hamas later said it might not accept the results of a peace referendum.

(Big surprise!)

Still, it probably wasn’t necessary for Hamas to hedge their bet since the number of Palestinian people who support attacks against the Israelis is on the rise. In fact, more than half of them support suicide bombings and consider them a form of “resistance”!

So, nice work, Mr. ex-president! Hamas is sworn to the destruction of Israel and regularly fires rockets into the country, killing and maiming innocents. Thanks for giving these terrorists a seat at the bargaining table. Thanks for giving their unrecognized terrorist government an undeserved legitimacy. Finally, thanks for alienating our ally in the region, Israel.

In other words, Mr. ex-president, thanks for nothing!

MORE:

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air explains how Carter was twice punked by Hamas on his dream trip of peace in the Middle East!

After several months of haggling, more than 40 nations have finally arrived in Maryland to talk Mideast peace. Judging from the behavior of the players in attendance, I’m afraid that’s all it’s going to be is “talk.”

Saudi Arabia is one of the nations in attendance, but when asked if he would shake hands with Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Saudi Foreign Minister gave a curt, “no.” His explanation was

“We are here for the serious business of making peace,” … “It is not a sporting contest where you shake hands and let the best man win.”

Isn’t a handshake symbolic of making peace?

Oh, and the Syrians are there, too, but only to discuss regaining the Golan Heights which Israel has occupied since 1967.

And if that’s not bad enough, the focal point for the talks, the forging of an agreement between Israel and Palestine, appears untenable. Presently the two sides can’t even agree on the content of a negotiating document, a starting point for negotiations. Issues in dispute are the location of final borders, sovereignty over Jerusalem and the fate of Palestinian refugees who lost homes in the war that followed Israel’s establishment in 1948. Essentially, the same old song and dance.

Actually, any agreement between Israel and Palestine is moot because Hamas leaders have labeled Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas a traitor for simply attending the meeting. They’ve also vowed to reject any decisions that come from the meeting.

The Israelis see the futility of this effort as several thousand Jews, led by Benjamin Netanyahu, met at the Western Wall to protest the meeting.

So, it’s no big surprise that Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said the meeting “has already failed,” and when considering the resistance from the Islamic states, he’s absolutely right. As always, the failure to achieve peace in the Middle East is a foregone conclusion. Not because the Israelis don’t want peace, but because Muslims will never choose to live in peace with the Jews.

Israel has acknowledged that it carried out an air strike against a “military target” deep inside the Syrian border, but has not provided any specifics. Syria has acknowledged the air strike, stating the target was “under construction.”

Now, the Syrians are rapidly dismantling a building at the supposed site of the bombing. According to the Institute for Science and International Security, a suspected reactor building visible in aerial photos prior to the Israeli attack had disappeared and the ground underneath had been sanitized. Reporting on the incident, the International Atomic Energy Agency surmised that

“Dismantling and removing the building at such a rapid pace dramatically complicates any (IAEA) inspection of the facilities and suggests Syria may be trying to hide what was there,”

Yah think?

I find it very interesting that the supposed Syrian nuclear facility looked an awful lot like the nuclear facilities in North Korea. But this can’t be, can it? After all, this would mean nK was sharing nuclear technology with a state sponsor of terrorism. This of course, would implicate nK as a terrorism enabler.

Of course, if nK was doing this, we wouldn’t be removing them from the state sponsor list. So, it must just be a coincidence. Right?

If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck…

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad continues to be the king of contradictions. The peace-loving Ahmadinejad says that Iran wants “friendship to all,” because as we all know, Iran “love[s] all nations and all human beings.”

Except, of course, if you’re Jewish! According to Ahmadinejad, Isreal “cannot continue its life.”

What else? The Iranian president also says his countrymen don’t believe in war, considering it a “last resort.” Yet, he’s made it abundantly clear that Tehran would fill any power vacuum left by a withdrawal of coalition forces in Iraq.

And what of Iran’s nuclear weapons program? After all, according to Ahmadinejad, “Our bombs are dangerous…” but that isn’t important because Ahmadinejad also says, “[w]e do not need a bomb. We are against bombs, actually. There are many reasons we are against it. From a political point of view, it’s not useful, we think.”

(That’s why the UN has imposed sanctions on Iran’s “peaceful” uranium enrichment program)

It’s hard to believe there are actually people in our government who take this guy seriously! That’s a much more dangerous situation than Iran!