Wexler: Settlement freeze would call Arab world’s ‘bluff’ http://blogs.jta.org/ENTRY_PERMALINK_HERE/wexler-settlement-freeze-would-call-arab-worlds-bluff/ Rep. Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) thinks Israel will agree to a short-term settlement freeze, and that it would be a wise move. en-us efingerhut@jta.org Copyright 2009 2009-07-02T;14:14:01-05:00 Comment by Terry Rowe mrterry00@yahoo.com Mr Cone: Are you going to label Rep Wexler an antisemite? Mr Cone: Are you going to label Rep Wexler an antisemite?

]]> 2009-11-20T;15:25:00-05:00 Comment by Steve B abash40@verizon.net The settlements are not as big an issue as this Administration is making them to be.  What is a big issue is the very public way in which the Obama Administration and its minions are stick ing it to Israel over the settlements - is this the diplomatic style of engaging the world that Obama promised?  Against the background of Obama’s widely heralded world-wide apology tour, the Obama Administration’s tone against Israel is blood curding. Lenin’s nickname for dupable bourgeois comes to mind.  King Abdullah (the Saudi one) must be pleased. The Honorable Congressman was a strong supporter of Bill Clinton - he seems to have forgotten how successful Clinton was in getting Israel to call the Palestinians’ bluff, Israel withdrawing its troops from Judea and Samaria during the Oslo process - in exchange the Palestinians delivered Intifada II which proportionally for Israel was the equivalent of 6+ 911s. The Honorable Congressman was a strident critic of George W. Bush - maybe he just didn’t notice that Bush was also able to get Israel to call the Palestinians’ bluff - Israel didn’t just freeze settlements, Israel unilaterally pulled out of Gaza, settlements and all - and in exchange, Israel’s citizens have had to endure daily bombing ever since from Hamas, a political party voted into power by the Palestinians. The settlements are not as big an issue as this Administration is making them to be.  What is a big issue is the very public way in which the Obama Administration and its minions are stick ing it to Israel over the settlements - is this the diplomatic style of engaging the world that Obama promised?  Against the background of Obama’s widely heralded world-wide apology tour, the Obama Administration’s tone against Israel is blood curding.

Lenin’s nickname for dupable bourgeois comes to mind.  King Abdullah (the Saudi one) must be pleased.

The Honorable Congressman was a strong supporter of Bill Clinton - he seems to have forgotten how successful Clinton was in getting Israel to call the Palestinians’ bluff, Israel withdrawing its troops from Judea and Samaria during the Oslo process - in exchange the Palestinians delivered Intifada II which proportionally for Israel was the equivalent of 6+ 911s.

The Honorable Congressman was a strident critic of George W. Bush - maybe he just didn’t notice that Bush was also able to get Israel to call the Palestinians’ bluff - Israel didn’t just freeze settlements, Israel unilaterally pulled out of Gaza, settlements and all - and in exchange, Israel’s citizens have had to endure daily bombing ever since from Hamas, a political party voted into power by the Palestinians.

]]> 2009-11-20T;15:25:00-05:00 Comment by Norman Cone conenorm@gmail.com If Rep.Wexler doesn’t agree with the following characterization of Obama’s policy in Ari Shavit’s Haaretz-article, then please give me a better one : “Seven months after Barack Obama’s victory in the presidential election, it is still not clear what the United States’ new strategic goal is: halting Iran’s nuclear program, or learning to live with a nuclear Iran? It is also not clear what the new U.S. vision for the Middle East is: a partial but realistic peace, or a full but fictitious peace? It is not clear whether Obama’s United States plans to isolate Middle Eastern extremists or encourage them. It is not clear what its attitude toward Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria and Iran will be. Nor is it clear whether it will leave Iraq victorious or defeated. But, on one issue, there is no doubt. In everything related to Israel, Obama’s United States has adopted a tough-love strategy.” If Rep.Wexler doesn’t agree with the following characterization of Obama’s
policy in Ari Shavit’s Haaretz-article, then please give me a better one :

“Seven months after Barack Obama’s victory in the presidential election, it is still not clear what the United States’ new strategic goal is: halting Iran’s nuclear program, or learning to live with a nuclear Iran? It is also not clear what the new U.S. vision for the Middle East is: a partial but realistic peace, or a full but fictitious peace? It is not clear whether Obama’s United States plans to isolate Middle Eastern extremists or encourage them. It is not clear what its attitude toward Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria and Iran will be. Nor is it clear whether it will leave Iraq victorious or defeated. But, on one issue, there is no doubt. In everything related to Israel, Obama’s United States has adopted a tough-love strategy.”

]]> 2009-11-20T;15:25:00-05:00 Comment by david schimel nhrds@earthlink.net First, Israel called the Arabs’ bluff by entering into the Oslo Accords. Voila the 2000 Intifada Terror War. Next, Israel called the Arab bluff by withdrawing from Lebanon. Voila 2006 war with Hezbolla. Next, Israel called the Arab bluff by vacating Gaza including 8,000 Israeli residents. Voila, Hamas fires 5,000 rocket attacks on Sderot and nearby Israeli communities leading to the Cast Lead war in 2008. What is wrong with this picture? First, Israel called the Arabs’ bluff by entering into the Oslo Accords. Voila the 2000 Intifada Terror War.

Next, Israel called the Arab bluff by withdrawing from Lebanon. Voila 2006 war with Hezbolla.

Next, Israel called the Arab bluff by vacating Gaza including 8,000 Israeli residents. Voila, Hamas fires 5,000 rocket attacks on Sderot and nearby Israeli communities leading to the Cast Lead war in 2008.

What is wrong with this picture?

]]> 2009-11-20T;15:25:00-05:00 Comment by Norman Cone conenorm@gmail.com I’m reading the papers, I’m following the news and what I read and hear is always about Israeli settlements. If the Obama administration is making “equal if not greater demands on the Arab world”, it remains a deep secret, because nobody speaks or writes about it but Rep. Wexler and - with all due respect - he has lost all credibility in regard of President Obama. I’m reading the papers, I’m following the news and what I read and hear is always
about Israeli settlements. If the Obama administration is making “equal if not
greater demands on the Arab world”, it remains a deep secret, because nobody
speaks or writes about it but Rep. Wexler and - with all due respect - he has
lost all credibility in regard of President Obama.

]]> 2009-11-20T;15:25:00-05:00