ZOA critical of appointment of SAMANTHA POWER
The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has criticized and expressed concern at the news that Samantha Power, former adviser to President-elect Barack Obama who is deeply anti-Israel, has been reappointed to his foreign policy team. Power has argued that the US should stop financially supporting Israel’s military and instead invest in a Palestinian state, with US forces on the ground to protect it from genocide by Israel. She has also expressed annoyance that the New York Times had admitted there had been no 2002 massacre of Palestinians by Israel in Jenin and condemned Israel for allegedly committing human rights abuses. Power was later fired by the Obama campaign, not for making anti-Israel statements, but for calling Hillary Clinton a “monster.”
Sampling of disturbing, anti-Israel statements by Samantha Power:
-
· April 2002: In an interview with Harry Kreisler, Executive Director of the Institute of International Studies at the University of California at Berkeley, Power was asked the following: “Let me give you a thought experiment here, and it is the following: without addressing the Palestine – Israel problem, let’s say you were an advisor to the President of the United States, how would you respond to current events there? Would you advise him to put a structure in place to monitor that situation, at least if one party or another [starts] looking like they might be moving toward genocide?
Power replied: “I don’t think that in any of the cases, a shortage of information is the problem. I actually think in the Palestine – Israel situation, there’s an abundance of information. What we don’t need is some kind of early warning mechanism there, what we need is a willingness to put something on the line in helping the situation. Putting something on the line might mean alienating a domestic constituency of tremendous political and financial import; it may more crucially mean sacrificing — or investing, I think, more than sacrificing — billions of dollars, not in servicing Israel’s military, but actually investing in the new state of Palestine, in investing the billions of dollars it would probably take, also, to support what will have to be a mammoth protection force, not of the old Rwanda kind, but a meaningful military presence. Because it seems to me at this stage (and this is true of actual genocides as well, and not just major human rights abuses, which were seen there), you have to go in as if you’re serious, you have to put something on the line.
Unfortunately, imposition of a solution on unwilling parties is dreadful. It’s a terrible thing to do, it’s fundamentally undemocratic. But, sadly, we don’t just have a democracy here either, we have a liberal democracy. There are certain sets of principles that guide our policy, or that are meant to, anyway. It’s essential that some set of principles becomes the benchmark, rather than a deference to [leaders] who are fundamentally politically destined to destroy the lives of their own people. And by that I mean what Tom Freidman has called “Sharafat.” I do think in that sense, both political leaders have been dreadfully irresponsible. And, unfortunately, it does require external intervention, which, very much like the Rwanda scenario, that thought experiment, if we had intervened early… Any intervention is going to come under fierce criticism. But we have to think about lesser evils, especially when the human stakes are becoming ever more pronounced.” (‘Genocide and U.S. Foreign Policy: A Conversation with Samantha Power,’ April 29, 2002, Conversations with History: Institute of International Studies, UC Berkeley).
This led Commentary magazine blogger Noah Pollak to observe, “Just so we’re clear here: Power said that her advice to the President would be to
1) “Alienate” the American Jewish community, and indeed all Americans, such as evangelical Christians, who support the state of Israel, because
2) Israeli leaders are “destroying the lives of their own people.”
3) Pour billions of dollars of the taxpayers’ money into “the new state of Palestine”;
4) Stage an American ground invasion of Israel and the Palestinian territories — what else can she mean by a “mammoth protection force” and a “military presence” that will be “imposed” by “external intervention”? — in order to do the exact same thing that she considers the height of arrogance and foolishness in Iraq: an American campaign to remake an Arab society.
Note that this wasn’t her response to a question about her personal views of the conflict, or about what she envisions might be a utopian solution to the conflict; it was a response to a question about what she would tell the President of the United States if she was his adviser. (‘Obama and Israel – It Gets Worse,’ Contentions blog, Commentary, January 27, 2008).
· 2003: Power said, “I have a question for David [Rohde, a reporter who covered the intifada for the New York Times about working for the New York Times]. I was struck by a headline that accompanied a news story on the publication of the Human Rights Watch report. The headline was, I believe: ‘Human Rights Report Finds Massacre Did Not Occur in Jenin.’ The second paragraph said, ‘Oh, but lots of war crimes did.’ Why wouldn’t they make the war crimes the headline and the non-massacre the second paragraph?” (Power, Ethnic Violence and Justice (2003) (Quoted in Richard Baehr and Ed Lasky, ‘Samantha Power and Obama’s Foreign Policy Team,’ American Thinker, February 19, 2008).
· “Another longstanding foreign policy flaw is the degree to which special interests dictate the way in which the “national interest” as a whole is defined and pursued…. America’s important historic relationship with Israel has often led foreign policy decision-makers to defer reflexively to Israeli security assessments, and to replicate Israeli tactics, which, as the war in Lebanon last summer demonstrated, can turn out to be counter-productive.” (Quoted in Richard Baehr and Ed Lasky, ‘Samantha Power and Obama’s Foreign Policy Team,’ American Thinker, February 19, 2008).
· 2008: In a new book, Chasing the Flame: Sergio Vieira De Mello and the Fight to Save the World, Power recently wrote, “Israeli forces refused to comply with the spirit of international demands to withdraw [from Lebanon in 2006] and the major powers on the Security Council were not prepared to deal with the gnarly issues that had sparked the Israelis invasion in the first place: dispossessed Palestinians and Israeli insecurity … Israel had thumbed its nose at the Security Council resolutions that demanded that Israel stay out of Lebanon, and in the course of invading a neighbor, its forces had trampled on the UN peacekeepers in its way … [the Israeli authorities] threatened the peacekeepers and regularly denigrated them.” (Quoted in Richard Baehr and Ed Lasky, ‘Samantha Power and Obama’s Foreign Policy Team,’ American Thinker, February 19, 2008).
The ZOA has also expressed concern at the presence on the Obama team of Susan E. Rice, who has now been nominated by President-elect Obama for the post of U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, a Cabinet-rank position (Peter Baker, ‘Appointments begin new phase for Obama,’ New York Times, December 2, 2008). Susan Rice served as John Kerry’s senior foreign policy advisor in his 2004 presidential campaign, during which she persuaded him to promise to appoint former Secretary of State James Baker and former president Jimmy Carter, both hostile as envoys on the Arab-Israeli conflict. Senator Kerry later rejected this advice as “unbalanced” (Marc Zell, ‘Obama and the Jews,’ Jerusalem Post, February 21, 2008). Rice was also an Assistant Secretary of State working for Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who considered Yasser Arafat to be a genuine peace partner and transformed him into the most frequent foreign visitor to the White House during the Clinton years.
ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said, “We look with deep misgivings on the nomination of two profoundly anti-Israel advisers to senior foreign policy positions in the incoming Administration. We are very concerned that the appointment of either or both Power and Rice will have a deleterious effect on the U.S.-Israel relationship, to the detriment of both countries. Someone who believes that Israel carries out genocide, or that a Palestinian state should be founded by force of U.S. arms against Israel, or that the most hostile anti-Israel American public officials should be placed in key positions regarding Middle East policy, should not be appointed to high office. We believe these nominations will be detrimental to President-elect Obama’s campaign commitment to uphold and strengthen the American-Israeli relationship. We also believe that the policies these two nominees have promoted can only lead to greater Arab hostility towards Israel and make the attainment of peace even less likely.”
The Quartet tightens the noose on Israel:
America under Bush and Rice became lukewarm to cold versus Israel. Under Obama it will be cold.
The EU, Russia, and the UN are downright hostile to Israel (and to Jews, although liberal Israeli and American Reform “Jews” are too deluded to realize it).
The Quartet under Obama will be dedicated to Israel’s destruction. Since we live in an Orwellian world, they will destroy Israel in phases (same as Arafat). The phased plan to Israel’s destruction is called the “Roadmap to Peace” (Orwell would be proud.)
The basics of the plan are:
1. Shrink Israel to non-defensible 1967 borders.
2. Place Quartet troops in Palestine to kill Jews if they try to defend themselves against the Palestinians.
3. Encourage Palestinian “refugees” to infiltrate Israel and increase the fifth column of “Israeli” muslim arabs already operating to destroy Israel from within.
4. Cut Israel in half (to allow “free passage”) between Gaza and the West Bank.
5. Allow Palestinians to accumulate missiles aimed at Israel for a coordinated final attack.
This seems like a good plan that should work. The Israeli leftists have already signed off on it, since they fanatically believe that Jews who still believe in the Jewish state of Israel are the real enemy, and not the poor muslims (who are still too backward to be enlightened like the Israeli leftists).
And the “hope” of Israel? Wait, wait, don’t tell me! The “ultra-hawk” Bibi Netanyahu, who caved in to Bill Clinton, and is clearly positioning himself for the ultimate cave in to Hillary Clinton and Obama.
So where is Menachem Begin when we need him? Unfortunately, he’s gone. His son, on the other hand, has joined Netanyahu. That may be a hopeful sign.
Obama is pro-Israel. He said he was. The majority of American Jews took Obama at his word.
It should not be concerning that Obama has appointed to high office or takes advice from Power, Jones, Kurtzer, Malley, Zebrinski and the like. All of them have said they are pro-Israel or at least they vigorously deny they are anti-Israel as regards their past statements about Israel.
Gee, I could have sworn, I thought their advice was anti-Israel, but they say no. They all seem like such decent honest people, don’t they? What do I know?
Given the trust most American Jews have in Obama that he is and will always be pro-Israel, it only follows that they would trust him to choose people who reflected his strong views of support for Israel to advise him on Israel and Israel’s ongoing war with the Palestinians, Arabs and the fundamentalist Islamists and Jihadists, though the latter incorporate many of the former.
It looks like Obama has made the choices that reflect his pro-Israel views, positions and the kinds of policies he intends to implement as regards Israel.
So what is all the fuss about? Surely the majority of American Jews know what is good for Jews and good for Israel. Don’t they?
Let me ask you this, readers of Israpundit, when has America been in Israel’s favour, let alone fair? The US has always demanded of us, so they could get their oil fix. But even before that, they demanded. Is the Us an ally, in response, with friends like that… Maybe the citizens are , however during WWII, they did not bomb the train lines, WHY????? Trust me, readers of Israpundit, America is NO fRIEND! Only less worse than anyone else! We are alone, unless we accept Hashem!
Bill:
Lets start here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bJSwKZ8PmM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx6oczHss24&eurl=http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/newspeak.html
Once you are able to control language; you control the whole society top to bottom.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGXif8ObYJ8&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hkwm1FVHEIE&feature=related
Bill: Here’s prediction for you all. The president elect of the United States of America will be… a Republicrat.
What is this stupid bitch talking about? Israel went into Lebanon AFTER a cross border attack against it by hezbollah, an act which was made possible precisely because Israel did withdraw and did stay out of Lebanon since 2000. She inverts cause and effect.
Laura, it is not so much that Samantha Power inverts cause and effect in her statement you cited.
Rather, it is what moves Ms. Power to do so that, as well as her other statements that disclose a significant anti-Israel bias which should be most troubling to the majority of American Jews.
The question I have been raising is why were the views of Samantha Power, Zbigniew Zebrinski, Robert Malley, Daniel Kurtzer, James Jones and others of like mind who Obama was conferring with, not troubling most American Jews?
Now that Obama has drawn these people even closer to him which is a darn good indication as to what Obama thinks, why are most American Jews not expressing shocked concern with Obama as regards where he obviously is headed regarding America’s relationship with Israel?
It also appears that Obama is bringing the known Republican anti-Semite and pro-Saudi shill, James Baker III onboard as a Middle Eastern foreign policy adviser.
All the signs point to Obama intending on continuing the American Middle East foreign policy of the Republicans under Bush, but will likely be turning the screws even tighter on Israel, as if the Republicans hadn’t turned those screws painfully tight already.
Pingback: Samantha Power Is a Friend of Israel - The Spine
Pingback: Arthur v Carter Watch The Carters just keep pouring in « DaTechguy’s Blog
Pingback: Israpundit » Blog Archive » Obama’s anti-American, anti-Israeli foreign policy
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/world/10899044.asp?gid=244
Samantha Power appears to be headed to appointment NOT requiring Senate confirmation, reporting to NSC Jones. Power will not have real authority to do anything to influence Congress. And, it would seem that Turkey is already hysterical over Power, et al.
As to Susan Rice, well, wait and see how her kissing up at the UN works out.
The real threat is coming from the US left, determined to stop all US military aid to Israel and channel that money into ‘humanitarian’ aid for Gaza (as if the French sending truckloads of Evian water is not enough). The American left is still deluded they represent the majority of American opinion on everything.
Bill Narvey: do not be misled by that exit poll that says 77% of American Jews voted for Obama. That was 77% of those who 1)answered the exit poll, and 2) actually voted. Members of Congress looking at voter returns by precinct know the truth.
U.S. foreign policy can be quite interesting. Richard Holbrooke’s job description as Special Envoy for South Asia was just changed to EXCLUDE Kashmir when India’s government complained.
But Tov is correct – time for Israel to realize that too many assimilated American Jews under the age of 40 have been brainwashed by the left into believing the palestinian narrative, and the myth that AIPAC ‘controls’ U.S. foreign policy.
http://hatikva.arba4.net/israel-update/audio/2009-01-15-Israel-Update-Dr-Eugene-Narrett-1.mp3
http://israelendtimes.com/blog/
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Radio/Player.htm#0#541#1
Peace Process or War Process, Politics by Attrition.
The real truth behind operation “Cast Lead”.
Please join Dr. Eugene Narrett on Israel Update with Joe Good as they discuss the current situation in Israel.
Professor Narrett’s insights go far beyond simply reporting the news, and help to explain the larger picture of which the current “Cast Lead” operation in Gaza is simply a symptom. The show is available on-line to listen directly or via podcast. Find out what is really going on in Israel, and the world. You will be roused and unsettled by the truths exposed in this interview.
Here is part two link to interview#12
http://hatikva.arba4.net/israel-update/audio/2009-01-15-Israel-Update-Dr-Eugene-Narrett-2.mp3
Charles, Laura and even Peskin should be interested in the subject matter of course Ted as well.