The White House's condemnation of Israel's East Jerusalem construction - something that was explicitly allowed under the temporary freeze Clinton hailed as "unprecedented" - triggered brutally harsh language from the Vice President and an extended tirade by the Secretary of State. So given Obama's claim that the Palestinians were "condemned in the same way" for inciting riots, just because they were pissed off about Jews being Jewish in Jerusalem...

Obama insisted that despite the highly-public criticism of Israel by various U.S. officials, including Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the U.S. is being fair to both sides. "Yesterday, when there were riots by the Palestinians against a synagogue that had been reopened we condemned them in the same way because what we need right now is both sides to recognize that it is in their interests to move this peace process forward," Obama told Fox.

... you'd think that the US's stance was an unequivocal and pointed criticism of Palestinian behavior. Not so much it turns out:

Speaking to reporters Monday, U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said there were American concerns "about the tensions regarding the rededication of a synagogue in the Jewish quarter of the Old City. And we are urging all parties to act responsibly and do whatever is necessary to remain calm."

Since I've been hammering away at them on Twitter, it's only fair that I direct you to the NJDC's much-delayed explanation of how their pro-Israel candidate turned out to be such an anti-Israel hack. Apparently it's your fault. Pointing out that the Democratic President is undermining US-Israel ties "abandon[s] the bipartisan history of strengthening U.S.-Israel ties."

It's the "partisans" who are using "unconstructive rhetoric" who are at fault. If you would refrain from pointing out that Obama's detonating the US-Israel alliance then that would be just like Obama not detonating the US-Israel alliance.

Because the NJDC's pretend world is the same thing as the real world.

References:
* WaPo: "Biden Flunked" On Israel Trip, Needlessly Alienated Netanyahu [MR]
* Compare And Contrast: Israeli And Syrian "Insults" To Clinton [MR]
* President Obama on Israel: Friends can disagree [Politico]
* Palestinians riot to protest synagogue reopening [CNN]
* NJDC Calls on American Jews, Partisans to "Move Away From Inflammatory, Unconstructive Rhetoric" [NJDC]

Related Mere Rhetoric Categories:
* Jewish Politics
* Israel
* Israeli-Arab Peace Process

We're a little over an hour away from this week's Omri Ceren Show, courtesy of One Jerusalem Radio. This week's episode - to which you can tune in live via either the main show page or the episode page - will revolve around Obama's ongoing diplomatic broadside against Israel. Since it's already paying dividends in the form of maximalist Palestinian demands backed by riotous Palestinian violence, we might as well discuss the overwhelming evidence that it was obviously premeditated and blisteringly hypocritical. That it will also set the peace process back by boxing in Abbas - again - is probably also worth mentioning. As always the decision-making process is as important as the decision, since apparently the people advising the President are either being ignored out of pique or being listened to out of ignorance.

On the TOCS technical/housekeeping side: I'm slowly getting caught up on remastering old episodes and working through old interviews. I've eliminated much of the choppiness from the first month of episodes, which you can now revisit here. The full 38 minute interview with Larry Greenfield, highlights of which aired last week, is now available on the One Jerusalem Audio page. Look out in the coming weeks for more reedited old episodes and more full versions of past interviews.

Anyway, today's official blurb:

Omri covers the Obama administration's diplomatic broadside against Israel. From Biden's initial "condemnation" over a minor mishap to Clinton's aggressive tirade against Netanyahu - to President Obama's personal orders to do both - the last week has brought the US-Israeli special relationship to the breaking point. Meanwhile anti-Israel partisans have unleashed a flurry of articles insisting that the US should scale back its support for Israel, some adopting almost classically antisemitic terms. Dan Diker calls in to provide an insider perspective on how the Israeli government is working to repair the crisis and minimize its damage.

All in all this hasn't been the best week the US-Israeli special relationship. But at least the crisis wasn't all totally predictable during the campaign!

References:
* Double Standards And Non-Standards [Omri Ceren Show]
* The Crisis [Halevi / TNR]
* Compare And Contrast: Israeli And Syrian "Insults" To Clinton [MR]
* Maybe Obama Deserved That Nobel Peace Prize After All [MR]
* Confirmed: US-Israeli Alliance Plummets Into "Historic Crisis," Obama Triggers Worst Relations Since Carter [MR]

Related Mere Rhetoric Categories:
* The Omri Ceren Show
* Jewish Politics
* Anti-Israel Diplomacy

David Gerstman sent me this IHT op-ed a few days ago, along with an acerbic comment about how photographs posted on MR the week before had pre-relegated it to the "utter anti-Israel bullshit" pile (my language, not David's). The author is Michael Martin, foreign minister of the multicultural paradise that is Ireland:

Last week I visited Gaza... to see for myself the impact of a blockade that has now been imposed on the people of Gaza for some two-and-a-half years and to meet with the courageous and dedicated staff of the U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), including its director of operations, Irishman John Ging... the deprivations and hardships resulting from the blockade were all too evident. Visiting an UNRWA food distribution center, I could see for myself the despair and suffering etched in the faces of those who queued for the most basic rations of rice, milk powder and sunflower oil... UNRWA is encountering increasing levels of abject poverty where people basically do not have enough food, even with their meager food allocations, to live.

The tragedy of Gaza is that it is fast in danger of becoming a tolerated humanitarian crisis... One can imagine how hard it is not to give in to despair and hopelessness... what was most impressive and heartening during my visit was the resilience and incredible dignity of ordinary people. In particular, I want to mention two young girls whom I met during a visit to the UNRWA girls' preparatory school in Rafah... I was similarly struck by what I heard from a business group at the Karni industrial park. This group of predominantly young businessmen and women graphically described the devastation that has been wrought on the private sector in Gaza, an economy that is now only operating at some 10-15 percent of capacity.

In no particular order: Gaza's economy has been booming for years, the "no food" canard is especially dishonest, pretending that Hamas allows Gaza women to have business careers is risible, the Gaza private sector is financially overwhelmed by Hamas and Fatah public employers using Iranian and US funds, the UN has at times imposed its own blockade on Gaza, and whatever humanitarian crisis does exist is deliberately manufactured by Hamas. But that's not what we're here to discuss.

What we're here to discuss is how the Canadians - who as a nation have never met an anti-Israel NGO they didn't want to subsidize - have cut off UNRWA's funding because it's a cesspool of incitement and corruption. The Obama administration? Exactly the opposite:

Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration Eric P. Schwartz welcomed Filippo Grandi, recently appointed Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), to Washington DC on March 11, 2010, and announced that the U.S. will make an additional planned contribution of $55 million to UNRWA. The United States is UNRWA's largest donor. The announced contribution of $55 million includes $30 million to UNRWA's General Fund, which provides core services to Palestinian refugees across the region, and $25 million to UNRWA's Emergency Appeal for the West Bank and Gaza. This additional funding will bring total U.S contributions to UNRWA thus far in Fiscal Year 2010 to $95 million. In 2009, the United States provided more than $267 million to UNRWA.

UNRWA's 60th birthday party in 2009 - yes, they're now caring for 5th generation "refugees" - became a major fund raising event. Not enough! The UN says they need $100 million more for this year. And really, how can you not give them additional money? In between covering up Hamas's aid supply hijacking and fabricating Israeli attacks on schools - well, they get things done:

The inevitable followup to Clinton's own timeline walk down, which was the inevitable followup to her walk down on "crippling sanctions." Keep in mind that France is probably the most hard line P5+1 country on Iran, and feast your eyes on the "strong sticks" that Obama is bringing to bear on the mullahs:

A United Nations resolution on new sanctions against Iran may not be ready until June and if a vote on it fails, European states could take unilateral measures instead, French and Finnish ministers said on Sunday. French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said France remained determined to get UN backing for sanctions targeting Iran's nuclear program, but indicated that the support of Russia and China among the five permanent Security Council members was some way off... "Before June I hope, but who am I to hope or decide," he said, pointing out that France had originally hoped to get a UN sanctions package prepared in February, when it was chairing the Security Council

You know what's weird? A few weeks ago when it seemed like China was unmovable - and that military action was the only option - a rush of articles and statements came out saying the exact opposite. The AFP headlined with "Chances good for China to yield on Iran sanctions: experts," suggesting that Beijing wouldn't risk isolation over Iran. Reuters found their own experts to say the same thing. Then a month later British officials also said the exact same thing. But here we are and here China is still blocking any kind of robust restrictions regime, just like they've always done.

The WH is desperately trying to pretend that Obama's super-keen "strong sticks" profundity was something other than empty bluster. So maybe carve out a trade exemption for China so they'll symbolically affirm a broader hard line policy? Nope. How about unilateral action against Western companies that do business with Iran? Nope. It turns out that biting sanctions are politically impossible and roundabout sanctions are pragmatically unworkable. Even if Iran couldn't use states like Brazil to avoid restrictions - and they certainly can - the US can't even stop itself from funding sanctions-busting US firms. How are we going to enforce an international regime?

Meanwhile the Iranian nuclear program continues to roll ahead, soon to be protected by an upgraded air defense system. You can tell that we're nearing the point of no return. The Iran experts who used to insist that the mullahs had neither the political will nor the technical means for weaponization are now saying that Iran can be contained. Even Brzezinski agrees, and if anyone's good at reading the mullahs it's the guy who lost Iran to political Islam. Some experts have even explained - at length - why an Iranian bomb would be a great idea. Very sophisticated!

But not to worry, because their Iran expert friends think that China's about to get on board an effective sanctions regime. Any day now.

References and related after the jump...

Noah Pollak already wrote the measured and reasoned version of this post yesterday so pretty much all that's left for me is vitriol. It's worth emphasizing, then, the unblinking, unthinking hypocrisy that this administration hides behind when they get called out on their Allies Last Enemies First diplomacy. A verifiable mix-up...

It was self-evident that Netanyahu's "stupidity not malice" explanation for Ramat Shlomo was accurate. Just days earlier, he had moved effectively to shut down Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat's incendiary plan to demolish dozens of Arab homes in Silwan. And yet, acting doubtless on the orders of her president, she resorted to what the ADL - no hysterical critic of the Obama administration - termed "gross overreaction."

... constitutes a mortal "insult" to Secretary Clinton. But Assad and Ahmadinejad standing side by side and actually literally insulting her by name?

Which part of the new "positive, constructive U.S.-Syrian relationship" involves having the US Secretary of State getting publicly mocked by grinning totalitarian thugs? "President Bashar al-Assad and his Iranian counterpart Mahmoud Ahmadinejad signed a bilateral deal to remove travel visas and attended a Muslim ceremony in the Syrian capital... "We must have understood Clinton wrong because of bad translation or our limited understanding, so we signed the agreement to cancel the visas," Assad said. "I find it strange that they (Americans) talk about Middle East stability and peace and the other beautiful principles and call for two countries to move away from each other," he added. Ahmadinejad told a joint news conference: "Clinton said we should maintain a distance. I say there is no distance between Iran and Syria." He added: "We have the same goals, same interests and same enemies.""

Suffice to say that our outreach to Syria continues apace.

Also apropos of this nonsense, you should check out the NY Sun editorial on Clinton's credibility as she heads into AIPAC. It turns out that the woman who smooched blood libeler Suha Arafat before becoming pro-Israel before becoming mildly anti-Israel before detonating the US-Israeli alliance - it turns out that she actually has a history of strong Arab financial connections. Strange, that.

For what its worth Shmuel Rosner thinks she'll get plenty of applause. Presumably he imagines that she'll mouth empty banalities - "Israel's security" etc etc - and that the crowd will pretend to believe her. I think he's wrong. I think she'll go in there talking about how Israel's future requires concessions - "difficult choices" etc etc - and that she'll be greeted by stony silence.

Then I think that anti-Israel journalists will muse sophisticatedly about how Obama had to rough up Israel because "Netanyahu's intransigence" was stymieing the President's vigorous appeasement of the Muslim world (my language, not theirs). In between they'll gloat about how the all-powerful Israel Lobby has been cut down, which after all is what Jesse Jackson promised Obama would do.

References and related after the jump...

Mere Rhetoric, April 10, 2008:

2010 will eventually roll around and newspapers will be publishing ledes like "some analysts suggest that the Obama White House is facing the most significant crisis in American-Israeli relations in decades." In a desperate attempt to absolve themselves of their own pretentious complicity in the international ostracism of the Jewish State, the 75 percent of American Jews who voted for Obama will join the rest of the left in scapegoating Israel.

Washington Post, March 13, 2010:

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton rebuked Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Friday about the state of the U.S.-Israeli relationship, demanding that Israel take immediate steps to show it is interested in renewing efforts to achieve a Middle East peace agreement. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley described the nearly 45-minute phone conversation in unusually undiplomatic terms, signaling that the close allies are facing their deepest crisis in two decades after the embarrassment suffered by Vice President Biden this week when Israel announced during his visit that it plans to build 1,600 housing units in a disputed area of Jerusalem.

As for the "pro-Israel" Jewish groups who are, along with gleeful anti-Israel partisans and thuggish former Arafat advisers, piling on the Jewish State - this propaganda from the Israel Policy Forum landed in my inbox as a press release last week. It gushes about how the US is becoming an "honest and credible mediator," which is strange since Clinton first acknowledged that East Jerusalem construction would continue under the freeze and then claimed to be "insulted" when East Jerusalem construction continued under the freeze. Not very honest or credible! The press release also declared "to the Israelis, we can communicate that moving forward with this East Jerusalem construction at this time would be considered an affront to the United States." Which means that in addition to being moronic, these idiots are also imperious pricks.

JStreet, of course, is exactly where you'd expect them to be. The group pioneered using manufactured media stunts to damage Israel, so it'd be churlish of them not to lend a hand here. They shamelessly lied about being snubbed by politicians on a trip to Israel, used the fabricated incident to whip up anti-Israel sentiment and then set up a dedicated webpage to gloat about the results. After the damage had been done they admitted that the whole thing was a huge mix-up on their part. How's that for "expanding the notion of pro-Israel"?

By the way, this post and the last one really aren't meant to be "I told you so" posts. Exactly the opposite. Everyone knew that this was how things would play out. Obama was obviously going to detonate the US-Israeli alliance because his advisers believe that it's in the US's interest to detonate the US-Israeli alliance. Anti-Israel Jewish groups like the IPF and JStreet were obviously going to side with Israel's opponents because they always side with Israel's opponents.

It was equally obvious that ostensibly pro-Israel Democratic voters would slide from "Obama will be pro-Israel" to "it's Israel's fault that Obama is anti-Israel." What else were they going to do? Admit that they desperately latched onto the National Jewish Democratic Council's smears and lies as pretexts for voting Democratic? Acknowledge that they willfully deceived themselves on the basis of the dumbest arguments because they wanted to guilelessly vote how they always vote? If they had that kind of intellectual honesty they wouldn't be in this position.

References and related after the jump...

Mere Rhetoric, October 18, 2008:

Memo to ostensibly pro-Israel Obama supporters: circa 2010 there are going to be headlines about the "severe crisis in US-Israel relations." You're not going to be able to say that you didn't know.

Reuters, March 15, 2010:

Israeli envoy sees "historic crisis" with U.S.:report - Israel and the United States are in a "crisis of historic proportions" over a settlement dispute that has brought relations to a 35-year low, Israel's ambassador to Washington was quoted on Monday as saying.

The Washington Post writeup about Clinton's over the top condemnation also included the line "the close allies are facing their deepest crisis in two decades." But the headline wasn't as on point and elegant as with the Reuters story, so that's what you got.

The idea is nonetheless the same throughout. Netanyahu had announced a temporary construction freeze that excluded East Jerusalem. Clinton had described the freeze as an "unprecedented" concession. Then Israel announced new construction within that framework.

But sensing the opportunity to pick a public fight with Israel, Obama personally ordered Biden to "condemn" the Jewish State. Clinton followed up by insisting that the US had been "insulted." For their part the Palestinians tweaked their ever-expanding construction halt demands, setting up Israel to take the blame for failed proximity talks. All over a neighborhood that borders two other Jewish neighborhoods and that had never, ever been controversial before.

Coincidentally - and just in time - there are a flurry of articles being published with different reasons why the US-Israeli relationship should be abandoned. This morning's is from Mark Perry, who "reports" how Israelis are getting American boys and girls killed. His FP article fails to note his previous job as an Arafat adviser, though that detail did seem salient to Laura Rozen. Also seemingly salient: "There seems to be more in the ether in recent days suggesting a diverging of perceived U.S. and Israeli interests in the region." Yes, there do seem to be that.

The really obnoxious thing? We're supposed to pretend that this policy is a reluctant recourse by an otherwise pro-Israel administration. Or that journalists are slowly discovering and objectively describing the situation. Come on now.

References and related after the jump...

We're a couple hours away from today's episode of One Jerusalem Radio's Omri Ceren Show. With Mitchell and Biden on the ground the show is going to be extremely diplomacy-heavy, making allowances for the time needed to cover this-week-in-Iranian-warmongering. You can tune in live via the show page or the episode page starting at 6:30pm PST, and as always I'll have the chatroom and the phone lines open for questions and comments.

There are functionally two full interviews this week. Larry Greenfield, Claremont Institute Fellow and Executive Director of The Reagan Legacy Foundation, comes on as a special guest to talk about "Israel's Increasingly Dangerous Neighborhood," the enormous writeup he just completed on the recent Jerusalem Conference. Given his role in conservative and Jewish politics - the Obama campaign banned surrogates from debating him when he was head of the California RJC and then NJDC moron Aaron Kayek targeted him in one of the dumbest attacks I've ever read - that comes up too.

Today's Diker segment goes for almost 20 minutes, which is what you'd expect given that the show topic is diplomacy and he's among Israel's top diplomacy analysts. One of the money lines from the beginning of the conversation: "we haven't seen this type of sympathy by an American administration... really since Carter, and even the Carter administration was somewhat more measured in its approach." Cf. the rest of the Israeli political world, where that exact conclusion is on its way to becoming conventional wisdom. You'll want to stay till the end where he evaluates whether Obama will actually succeed in detonating the US-Israel alliance. Tough to say, tough to say.

Official show blurb:

Omri interviews Larry Greenfield, Claremont Institute Fellow and Executive Director of The Reagan Legacy Foundation. They discuss Greenfield's recent missile defense talk at the 7th Annual Jerusalem Conference, the political climate in Israel and within American Jewry, and the future of the US conservative movement. Dan Diker also joins the show, talking about Israel's recent public and state-to-state diplomacy in the context of the Iranian threat. In between Omri runs down the week's news on global terrorism, Middle East geopolitics, and the left's Big Government push in the United States.

I'm also in the process of going over all the old shows and reediting them to make them listenable (or at least to remove cracks and pops - any unlistenable content will, alas, stay the way it is). More on that in the next week or so. In the meantime, see you in a bit.

References:
* Jerusalem's Misgivings with Larry Greenfield [TOCS]
* Israel's Increasingly Dangerous Neighborhood [Larry Greenfield]
* Obama Campaign Demands Ban On Republican Jewish Group, Escalates Thuggish Intimidation [MR]
* NJDC Tool Aaron Keyak Helpfully Illustrates How Liberal Activists Sneeringly Cocoon Themselves In Asinine Arguments And Dishonest Smears [MR]
* Politics: Not afraid to speak her mind [JPost]
* Israeli Officials: Hey, Do You Think That Maybe Obama's Going To Detonate The US-Israel Relationship? [MR]

Related Mere Rhetoric Categories:
* The Omri Ceren Show
* Anti-Israel Diplomacy
* Jewish Politics

The concrete and significant Israeli moves on settlements have all been in the direction of unreciprocated concessions. When Netanyahu announced his temporary freeze it was hailed by Clinton as an "unprecedented." Since that praise naturally sent the Palestinians into fits the Obama administration promptly backtracked. It also totally failed to deliver on its promise of international support for the freeze, a nice additional bait-and-switch. Instead the UN condemned Israel for not going far enough.

All that left Netanyahu feeling that there's nothing he can do to avoid US and international disapprobation, which is not where you want someone when you're asking them to take "risks for peace." An Israeli Prime Minister contemplating territorial concessions needs to know that he can count on international security assurances should things go wrong. So one of Biden's two goals for his trip was to give Netanyahu some much-delayed recognition and support.

Then a couple of Israeli officials from the government's most junior coalition partner made a symbolic announcement about East Jerusalem construction. Netanyahu didn't know about it. Biden's response - nonetheless - was to humiliate the Israeli Prime Minister, keeping Netanyahu and his wife waiting 90 minutes into dinner and then issuing an unprecedented condemnation. Netanyahu found out about the statement during dinner.

That treatment precisely mirrors what happened on Netanyahu's November trip to DC, when Obama dragged him around the carpet before approving a Monday meeting. The White House kept the Israelis in limbo until the night before, continuously creating new and changing prerequisites. The next day Obama arrived late, highlighting the priority he places on the US-Israeli alliance. Netanyahu offered to make additional concessions to the Palestinians anyway. Obama's response was to emphasize that East Jerusalem is not Israeli and to link Palestinian terrorism to Israeli construction in Jerusalem's Gilo neighborhood. That last part was so stupid that lefty Jeffrey Goldberg accused the President of inventing issues and excusing Palestinian violence.

So say what you will about Biden's ham-fisted diplomacy. In this rare instance he's merely following the party line. First the insult - language, per the WaPo, that is "rarely used in diplomatic terms when criticizing the behavior of close allies" - and now the fallout:

At one point he actually called the cops, begging for water. I'll have to remember that strategy the next time I'm at the downtown Los Angeles post office, where one of the women posts a sign every Christmas that reads "your lack of planning is not my problem." Job security is a wonderful thing:

A man of 22 died in agony of dehydration after three days in a leading teaching hospital. Kane Gorny was so desperate for a drink that he rang police to beg for their help. They arrived on the ward only to be told by doctors that everything was under control. The next day his mother Rita Cronin found him delirious and he died within hours. She said nurses had failed to give him vital drugs which controlled fluid levels in his body. 'He was totally dependent on the nurses to help him and they totally betrayed him.'... 'They were lazy, careless and hadn't bothered to check his charts and see his medication was essential.'

Well-meaning liberals especially love government agencies because they get to use them for social experimentation. Think Michael Moore fantasizing about converting GM facilities into green tech factories. Or think British multiculturalism mixed with medicine, which is going roughly how you'd expect:

The third victim of the foreign doctor who left two patients dead in one day spoke last night of her 'horrific' treatment at his hands. Sandra Banks, 59, was left in agony two hours after Daniel Ubani treated her for an inflammatory problem normally dealt with by a painkiller. But the Nigerian-born weekend locum - who had flown in from Germany and started work after only three hours' sleep - gave her a weak dose of a diuretic instead, which lowers blood pressure... There was a language problem and he didn't seem to understand what my condition was. 'When my partner passed him a note with details of my condition and the drugs I was usually given, he just glanced at it and put it aside.'

I guess there's also an argument to be made that the need to import foreign doctors in the first place - probably more of a factor here than multiculturalism - also weighs against socialized medicine. Socialized medicine being where this thing is going, as Obama has recently taken to subtly reminding House liberals.

What I'm most looking forward to are the inevitable cycles of scapegoating. "Your health care costs are so high because of the overweight and/or smoking and/or soda-drinking guy next door." First will come the taxes - and yes, of course soda taxes are moronic - and then will come the "well you brought this on yourself" rationing. It's going to be delightful. (h/t: Jerry L)

References:
* Neglected by 'lazy' nurses, man, 22, dying of thirst rang the police to beg for water [Daily Mail]
* My horrific ordeal at the hands of the awayday GP who left two patients dead [Daily Mail]
* Obama comforts House liberals: Don't worry, this bill is just the beginning of what we'll do with health care [Hot Air]
* Shh... Massachusetts Proves Mandate-Based Health Reform Will Be A Disaster [Mere Rhetoric]
* Have a Coke and a Tax [Reason]

Related Mere Rhetoric Categories:
* Health Care
* American Politics
* Britain

Make sure you watch at least until they start sliding around the ice on their bellies. The clips at 0:20, 0:30, and 0:50 - where the baby intentionally bumps and bites mom for the fun of it - are also not without their charm:

Unrelatedly, let this be your official reminder to check out MR sponsor Purchase Green, purveyor of such fine goods as artificial grass and the dog potty patch. That doesn't have anything to do with polar bears per se. But the alternative was doing a separate "check out our advertisers" post like Gawker-style blogs do, which would have been a sad reminder that we don't really have more than one advertiser. And who wants to end the weekend being sad?

Ergo: ice skating polar bear baby.

References:
* HD: 'Ice Skating' Polar Bears - Nature's Great Events: The Great Melt - BBC One [BBC / YouTube]

Related Mere Rhetoric Categories:
* Brain-Melting Animal Cuteness
* Lighter Side
* Animals Are Taking Over

No word on whether those contracts included replacements for the thousand or so computers they lost last year. Or the 235 night vision scopes they misplaced. Or the $116,349 international harvester truck they can't find. Maybe this is why they can't seem to muster the necessary resources to put even one percent of "known or suspected terrorists" on the no-fly list.

Your tax dollars at work:

Even when awarding contracts to companies without competitive bidding, federal agencies are supposed to follow certain rules and guidelines. But that has not been the case at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which gave out $3.4 billion in non-competitive contracts last year. The inspector general for DHS found that officials often failed to do sufficient research and document decisions when awarding these types of contracts. Consequently, DHS is at risk of wasting taxpayer dollars if work is given to businesses that aren't the most suitable.

Here's an article about how Napolitano ditched a hearing by the House Committee on Homeland Security, where she was scheduled to answer tough questions about the Christmas Day terrorist attack. PA Democrat Rep Chris Carney on the incident: "I am very dismayed that the secretary herself isn't here. I mean, it's probably fair to ask, 'Where the hell is Secretary Napolitano?'"

And here's a post about how she doesn't think that illegal immigration is "a crime per se." Both of which fit the tone she took during her confirmation hearings, when the words "terror" nor "vulnerability" were both excluded. Because we needed to get away from the "politics of fear."

And to think, some people doubt the Obama administration's seriousness when it comes to protecting our borders from terrorists.

References and related after the jump...

Almost difficult to understand why Malmo's Jews are getting a Nazi vibe from their political establishment. Europe 2010: where sneering anti-Jewish bigotry is fun again:

Representatives for the Jewish Community in Malmö have slammed the city's mayor, Ilmar Reepalu, for his use of the term "Israeli lobby" in a Danish television interview. "I encounter a great many people from what one could call the Israeli lobby, who are not interested in what I say and what I think, but who do want to attribute lots of opinions to me," Reepalu said in an interview with Danish TV2... He has also denied that there had been any attacks on Jews in the city despite police figures showing that violent incidents against Jews have doubled over the last year.

Last month Reepalu also equated Zionism with antisemitism, telling Malmo's Jews that they'd better "distance" themselves from Israel if they know what's good for them. You'd think the money quote from that little would have been "Malmo does not accept anti-Semitism and does not accept Zionism." But in fact the highlight was when he blamed local Jews for violent anti-Jewish hatred. The venomous little bigot is a veritable fount of wisdom.

Punishing and blaming the Jewish victim is actually kind of a thing in Sweden. The Swedish taekwondo federation barred the Israeli national team from playing in the country because "10,000 Muslims" would attack them. Swedish journalist Andrew Bostrom and his editors whined about persecution after publishing their execrable organ theft blood libel. And when Israel pointed out how Sweden's pro-ethnic cleansing resolution on East Jerusalem violated the EU's own diplomatic position, the Swedish government pushed back by - no joke - attacking the the Jewish State for sowing dissent and division in the EU. It's Israel's fault.

Swedish NGOs were also behind one of the major awards Goldstone got for his libelous pamphlet. On account of his brave willingness to scrutinize and attack Israel. Because that's what's lacking in Europe.

References and related after the jump...

We're just a few hours from this week's episode of One Jerusalem Radio's Omri Ceren Show, both the most technologically solid and the most cheerfully optimistic radio on the Internet. Tonight's show will focus on one of the more popular anti-Israel taglines, the apartheid smear that's become a leftist mainstay and a Spanish schoolyard blood libel. It's Israel Apartheid Week around the world - they've even got a Wiki entry - so we might as well talk about it. As always you can head over to the episode page or the show page, and from there you'll be able to hear the show, participate in the chat room, or call in live. Today's official blurb:

Omri discusses the global anti-Jewish bigotry and anti-Israel media bias that plays on the "apartheid" smear. From campuses like the University of California Irvine, where Muslim students stand in the center of campus and militantly chant anti-Zionist slogans, to Spanish schoolhouses where children are instructed to send antisemitic postcards to Israelis - the most venomous and explicitly genocidal blood libel is quite simply mainstream in Western educational institutions. Dan Diker calls in to provide the broader week-in-geopolitics, focusing as always on Middle East dynamics and their international consequences.

As always the top of the show will include a rundown of what's going on with Iran, including this Obama walkback on the content of sanctions and this Obama walkback on the timing of sanctions. It seems like there are only three options: this administration really thought Iran would respond positively to engagement, this administration really expected China and Russia to hop on board a workable sanctions regime, or this administration really wants Iran to get nukes. So either they're idiots or they're idiots or they're trying to detonate US hegemony in the oil-soaked Middle East. Not to ruin the ending, but they're idiots.

Since the world doesn't stop turning for anti-Jewish Western academics and teachers - no matter how much they'd prefer otherwise - Dan Diker will indeed join the show to discuss diplomacy and geopolitics. Hopefully this week we can get through the updates without the Blog Talk Radio soundboard dying. Fingers crossed.

References:
* Israel angry over anti-Semitic postcards sent by Spanish schoolchildren [Telegraph]
* The Apartheid Libel [One Jerusalem Radio's Omri Ceren Show]
* Is Iran's Fist Still Clenched? [Official Site]
* Obama Giving Up On "Crippling" Iran Sanctions [MR]
* Clinton appears to extend timeline for Iran sanctions [YNet]

Related Mere Rhetoric Categories:
* The Omri Ceren Show
* European Antisemitism
* Academia

Each week, in a contest for the week's best post, the members of the Watchers Council nominate one of their own posts and a second from outside the Council for consideration by other council members. This week's submissions span foreign policy, domestic policy, and have a healthy dose of media criticism. There are also a couple posts on antisemitism and Judaism, an appropriate theme given how the world's favorite aid recipients have taken to destroying certain Arab products for being just too Jewy.

To better help you cope with the onslaught of lefty weasel pseudo-sophistication - from "engagement will work" to "giving terrorists civil liberties will make them like us" - here is a slow loris getting tickled. Watch the video, read the posts, watch the video again to cheer up, and then head over to the Mere Rhetoric Facebook page and sound off about the posts you liked best:

Have at it...

This is the second time in as many weeks that the State Department has, for reasons that are largely unfathomable, unilaterally taken an anti-Iran option off the table. Two Wednesdays ago Clinton told Al-Arabiya that military action wasn't even a consideration, which had the predictable effect of emboldening the mullahs. Now comes this announcement, which basically tells Tehran they don't have anything to fear from sanctions. Wonderful.

Remember during the election, when Obama's surrogates wouldn't shut up about "strong sticks and strong carrots"? The original liberal tagline was actually "real sticks and real carrots" but apparently "strong" focused better than "real" so that's what we got. Dennis Ross was even dispatched to reassure Jewish voters that the era of "weak sticks and weak carrots" was over. Then after the election Clinton went to the Hill and - trying to reassure Congresspeople who were nervous about Obama's appeasement - she explicitly promised to mobilize "crippling" international sanctions if outreach failed.

Nope:

The United States said on Thursday it does not aim to impose crippling sanctions on Iran but rather to pressure the Iranian government to change course on its nuclear program while protecting ordinary people. "It is not our intent to have crippling sanctions that have... a significant impact on the Iranian people," State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley told reporters. "Our actual intent is... to find ways to pressure the government while protecting the people."

On the plus side, this is more honest than the last few months' of spin. Obama doesn't have the means to establish a robust international sanctions regime, even if he wanted to. The Iranians knew that and bragged about it. The pretense of credible sticks was meant for American audiences, the better to buy Obama breathing room for ever more engagement. Just because previous efforts had drawn humiliating responses didn't mean the approach was misguided. It was just that Iran's "unsettled political situation" was getting in the way!

But that only takes you so far. Eventually you need new excuses for why a crippling sanctions regime has failed to materialize. Giving up on the whole idea - that's certainly one excuse.

The other option was to continue unblinkingly asserting that Iran was still open for talks, no matter how many previous deadlines they had brazenly ignored. Again - remember "Obama says he wants progress with Iran by year's end?" If 2009 ended without a deal - the President intoned - then sanctions would be used "to ensure that Iran understands we are serious." Believable!

References and related after the jump...

Which part of the new "positive, constructive U.S.-Syrian relationship" involves having the US Secretary of State getting publicly mocked by grinning totalitarian thugs?

President Bashar al-Assad and his Iranian counterpart Mahmoud Ahmadinejad signed a bilateral deal to remove travel visas and attended a Muslim ceremony in the Syrian capital... "We must have understood Clinton wrong because of bad translation or our limited understanding, so we signed the agreement to cancel the visas," Assad said. "I find it strange that they (Americans) talk about Middle East stability and peace and the other beautiful principles and call for two countries to move away from each other," he added. Ahmadinejad told a joint news conference: "Clinton said we should maintain a distance. I say there is no distance between Iran and Syria." He added: "We have the same goals, same interests and same enemies."

Interesting bit about enemies at the end. If Khamenei had recently and officially emphasized that the US was an enemy of Iran, that would be even more troubling than Assad's sneering jokes about bad translations.

In any case - very disappointing. Sure Assad rebuffed Obama's craven obsequiousness - six high-level delegations to Syria, promises to restore relations, waivers for aircraft parts, deals worth billions in cash, and so on. And sure he's exporting jihadism across the Middle East, financing among others the AQI cretins trying to reignite the insurgency. And sure his interference in Iraq got so severe that the Iraqis appealed directly to the UN. And sure he just threatened to saturation bomb Israeli civilians. And sure he's reestablishing Syria's stranglehold on Lebanon, having forced Hariri to capitulate.. And sure he's extending his strategy of building multiple, redundant nuclear sites.

But I really thought he'd come around this time.

Guess not.

References and related after the jump...

Compare...

Washington refused to endorse British claims to over the Falkland Islands yesterday... Despite Britain's close alliance with the US, the Obama Administration is determined not to be drawn into the issue. It has also declined to back Britain's claim that oil exploration near the islands is sanctioned by international law, saying that the dispute is strictly a bilateral issue... a State Department spokesman told The Times. "The US recognises de facto UK administration of the islands but takes no position on the sovereignty claims of either party."

... and contrast...

The Obama administration criticized Israel Wednesday for designating two shrines on Palestinian territory as national heritage sites... Underscoring those difficulties, the State Department on Wednesday sharply criticized Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government for adding two shrines in the West Bank to Israel's list of national heritage sites... State Department spokesman Mark Toner said the administration viewed the move as "provocative" and unhelpful to the goal of getting the two sides back to the table.

The Palestinians have sovereignty over Jewish holy sites in the West Bank - which they've historically desecrated and destroyed - but the UK has no sovereignty over the Falklands. Nice to see the White House responding to increasingly public UK concerns that "Obama has it in for Britain." Overflowing with nuance and agility, is this government.

Add this to Obama's early snub of Brazil, which included misspelling Silva's name and was later repaid in the form of Brazilian backing for Ahmadinejad. But presumably Argentina now owes us a favor, so we've got that in our pocket in case they ever magically become the largest country in South America or a nuclear-armed European NATO ally.

Just out of curiosity, if Obama was trying to detonate all of the US's traditional alliances - what would he be doing differently?

References and related after the jump...

We're mere minutes away from tonight's episode of One Jerusalem Radio's Omri Ceren Show, which will focus mostly on the Al-Mabhouh liquidation and its consequences. Media reports have been filled with "analysis" of Israel is coping with an operation that was disastrous on multiple levels. Nobody's really sure exactly what those levels were - and as of today Israel has yet to be officially condemned by anybody that anybody else cares about - but they're obviously there. Because why would international media outlets be writing about them if they didn't actually exist?

So we'll be discussing that for most of the evening, and you can tune in live to ask questions via phone and chatroom, or just pick up the podcast afterward.

Contrary to the preferences of anti-Israel partisans, though, the world doesn't actually stop while they manufacture their petty little anti-Israel tempests in their teacups. Dan Diker will be on for an update on the peace process, kicking off with France's recent stunt and getting into its effects on everything from internal Palestinian politiking to EU/Sunni relations. The second segment gets into the prospects for renewed Israeli/Syrian talks, how they have the potential to threaten Israel, and which are apparently again a thing. And since this still exists there will be the usual overview of Iran at the top of the show.

Other than that, it'll be the usual optimistic mix of great news and sanguine predictions.

References:
* Diplomatic own goals by Israel have set alarm bells ringing [FT]
* Syria urges EU to back Turkish role in peace process [Press TV]
* France wants Middle East peace talks kick-start: PM [Reuters]

Related Mere Rhetoric Categories:
* The Omri Ceren Show
* Israeli-Arab Peace Process
* Anti-Israel Journalism

The picture was too small to copy over, but if you click through you can see a mosque in the background while she's on her knees getting beaten. Picturesque:

As a result of Shariah law being imposed in Malaysia, Muslim women were caned on Tuesday for engaging in illicit sex... The three women are reportedly the first to receive such a brutal punishment under Shariah law. According to the Home Minister, Datuk Hishmmudin Hussein, two of the women were struck six times while the third was hit four times with a "cane" or "rotan."... Malaysians have witnessed an increase in canings as a result of the nation moving from a secular legal system to one based on the Koran and the teachings of radical imams. Many were shocked to learn that last Summer a 32-year old woman... was sentenced to be caned for the crime of consuming an alcoholic beverage.

And the punchline:

Hishammuddin claimed that he decided to bring to public attention the punishment given to the three women because there had been "too much hype" over Kartika's sentence. "People are saying that no woman has been caned before and that Kartika should not be caned. Today I am announcing that we have already done it...." he stated during a press conference yesterday. The staunchly Islamic minister declared that the three women did not suffer any cuts or abrasions from their beatings but assured the media that the punishment had a rehabilitative effect.

Malaysia is also where there's been that recent rash of church bombings. Apparently "Allah" is the local non-sectarian word for "God." God being of central concern to Christians, it comes up now and again in services. But political Islam being a pathological ideology mixed equal parts of seething resentment and unremitting expansionism, they've decreed that Allah is theirs, dammit. Christians have been formally banned from using the word by Malaysian courts. And just to make sure the message gets through - firebombings.

Man, this stuff's going to go over like gangbusters when it finally hits Britain.

References:
* Women beaten in Malaysia under Shariah law [The Examiner]
* Fourth Church Hit by Firebombs Over 'Allah' Ban [Fox News]
* Shariamania Sweeps Across Syria, Britain, and... US Treasury Dept [MR]

Related Mere Rhetoric Categories:
* Malaysia
* Women In Islam
* Sharia