Is Barack Obama a Fool or a Liar?

Mike L.

{Cross-Posted at Geoffff's Joint, Bar and Grill and Pro-Israel Bay Bloggers.}

I am going with fool and let me tell you why.

In a recent piece entitled "Israelis Prefer Romney" I claimed that Obama "praised the rise of the radical Jihad as something akin to the Spirit of '76 or the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and the 1960s."

Stuart took exception to this saying:

You know Michael, a lot of your rhetoric sounds exactly like the lies that Mitt Romney tells.

Obama never "praised the rise of the radical Jihad as something akin to the Spirit of '76 or the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and the 1960s." and you damn well know it.

Because Barack Obama did, in fact, praise the rise of radical Jihad as something akin to the Spirit of '76 or the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and the 1960s, I referred Stuart to the direct quote.

Upon the revolution in Tunisia, which was just one of the various Islamist revolutions taking place across the Muslim Middle East Barack Obama said this:

There are times in the course of history when the actions of ordinary citizens spark movements for change because they speak to a longing for freedom that has been building up for years. In America, think of the defiance of those patriots in Boston who refused to pay taxes to a King, or the dignity of Rosa Parks as she sat courageously in her seat.

To which Stuart claimed, "He was referring to the overthrow of the non-democratic government. Not the rise of islamic jihad."

The truth, of course, is that while it is probably true that Obama thought that he was praising the overthrow of a non-democratic government, he was also praising, wittingly or not, the rise of the radical Jihad throughout the Muslim Middle East.

The question then becomes, is Barack Obama a fool or a liar?

When all the riots and rapes and bloodshed rocked the Arab world last year, many on the progressive-left, including Barack Obama, praised the chaos and murder and mayhem as actually the rise of Arab-Muslim democracy. At the time, unlike president Obama, I was willing to take a wait-and-see approach. My suspicion was that we were going to see the rise of radical Islam and that is precisely what happened, which is why the Muslim Brotherhood has taken over the government of Egypt.

Thus when Obama told the world how wonderful this all was and how it was something akin to the American Revolution and the Civil Rights Movement, I knew immediately how irresponsible and foolish such claims were and are. He was, whatever his intention, praising the rise of Islamic fascism as the wondrous up-welling of democracy.

I do not believe that Barack Obama lied. What is obviously true is that he interpreted the Arab Spring within the ideological parameters set forth by the mainstream media. Throughout that period we were generally told that the "Arab Spring" was the glorious rise of democracy and the yearning of the Arab peoples for the blessings of liberty. In this way the west, in general, and Barack Obama, in particular, projected our hopes and aspirations onto people who do not necessarily share those hopes and aspirations.

The "Arab Spring" was not about democracy, nor about overthrowing tyrants or ridding the Middle East of non-democratic governments. It was (and is) about the rise of radical Islam, a movement that subjugates women, slaughters gay people, despises non-Muslims, holds a genocidal intention toward the tiny Jewish minority in the Middle East, and that has a historical provenance that goes in part to Nazi Germany. Thus when Obama said "think of the defiance of those patriots in Boston who refused to pay taxes to a King, or the dignity of Rosa Parks as she sat courageously in her seat" he was, despite his best intentions, praising "the rise of the radical Jihad as something akin to the Spirit of '76 or the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and the 1960s."

If that was not his intention then he is a fool, otherwise he is a liar.

I will go with fool.

This Isn't Real

Mike L.

In order to maintain our credentials as good "liberals" or good "progressives" we must learn to understand that reality is only meaningful to the extent that it reflects our political inclinations. In the clip above we have a Hamas official, Ahmad Bahr, screaming for Jewish blood.

He says this:

If the enemy sets foot on a single square inch of Islamic land, Jihad becomes an individual duty, incumbent on every Muslim, male or female. A woman may set out [on Jihad] without her husband's permission, and a servant without his master's permission. Why? In order to annihilate those Jews.
[...]
Oh Allah, destroy the Jews and their supporters. Oh Allah, destroy the Americans and their supporters. Oh Allah, count them one by one, and kill them all, without leaving a single one.

The truth, of course, is that he said no such thing. Bahr was merely giving some instruction on the importance of goat's milk to the nutritional needs of children and anyone who claims otherwise is a liar and, even worse, a conservative.

It is important to recognize that when leaders throughout the Muslim Middle East call for the genocide of the Jews that we should either ignore it entirely or interpret it in the correct fashion. For example, when he says "kill them all" what he really means is "give them a cookie and pat them on the head."

Just ask Juan Cole.

If you disagree with this assessment you are clearly a "racist" and an "Islamophobe."

Latest Media Tapper Piece

Mike L.

My latest piece for MT Weekly is published under the title "Why Not To Support Obama And Progressive Left Anti-Zionism."

Israelis Prefer Romney

Mike L.

{Cross-posted at Geoffff's Joint, Bar and Grill and Pro-Israel Bay Bloggers.}

When it comes to the well-being of the Jewish people of the Middle East I, unlike "progressive Zionists" or faux "pro-Israel" organizations like J-Street, tend to defer to the Israelis. It should seem fairly obvious that the Jews of the Middle East know what is in their best interest more than American Jewish dhimmis, like Jeremy Ben Ami. A recent poll of Israelis demonstrates clearly that they have much more faith in a potential Romney presidency than they do in the hostile Obama administration.

The Jerusalem Post reports:

Poll: Romney cares more than Obama about Israel

Peace Index poll shows Israeli Jews – by 2:1 ratio – believe Romney assigns high importance to defending Israel's interests.

I find it difficult to understand how progressive-left diaspora Jews can support an American president that praised the rise of the radical Jihad as something akin to the Spirit of '76 or the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and the 1960s. The Israelis, however, are under no such delusions concerning Barack Obama. They, better than anyone, know what they are dealing with in their hostile neighbors and in an American president that promotes the interests of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The United States, of course, is in a much worse geo-political situation since Barack Obama promoted the rise of the Jihad throughout the Middle East and sought to prevent Israel from dealing with an impending nuclear-armed Iran. As Turkey turned away from the west and looks toward Iran and as radical Islam took over country after country under the falsely named "Arab Spring," the Obama administration lied to the American people by suggesting that such developments were a good thing.

It should be obvious to any but the most ideologically blinkered that the rise of radical Islam is not in anyone's best interest other than the Jihadis themselves. It is certainly not in the best interest of moderate Arabs who have no particular interest in conquering Jerusalem and it is obviously not in the best interest of women, gay people, Jews, or non Muslims in that part of the world.

It is one of my contentions that the western left, including the Obama administration, has abandoned women, gay people, and Jews throughout the Middle East. Leftists claim to stand for universal human rights, but it could hardly be more obvious that they stand for no such thing. The Israelis know this better than anyone which is why the Israeli left got decimated after the second terror war (intifada) directly after the failure of Oslo.

On the question of Jewish well-being in that part of the world, perhaps American Jews should listen to their fellows in Israel, rather than to an American president who has proven himself hostile to the Jewish state. And for those of you who deny that Obama is hostile to Israel, how can anyone who supports the Muslim Brotherhood not be considered hostile to the Jewish nation or the Jewish state?

The Brotherhood called for the conquest of Jerusalem during a Morsi campaign rally.

Much of the Jewish left is simply in denial.

My hope is with progressive-left Jews like JayinPhiladelphia who are willing to acknowledge the obvious, and confront it, without demonizing those of us who point it out.

Walking Through Jewish History in Philadelphia

JayinPhiladelphia

Two cups of coffee were just what I needed to get me going this morning, right before I hopped the El downtown to join a walking tour put on by the Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia.  Though Jewish history in Philadelphia goes back to colonial times (a topic I'll cover in depth in the future), today's focus was on the late 19th century immigrant experience.

JEWISH IMMIGRANT PHILADELPHIA

Relive the Philadelphia experience of Eastern European Jews who settled along South Street in the late 19th century. Explore their humble synagogues and homes and learn about their thriving marketplaces that became prominent businesses.

This community's boundaries generally corresponded to a good chunk of the southeastern portion of the original borders of the City of Philadelphia (the district which is today known as Center City) prior to the 1854 consolidation of all boroughs, townships, districts and unincorporated communities within Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania which formed today's city; along with most of what is today's Bella Vista neighborhood.  From 2nd Street in the east over to 6th Street on the west; from Spruce Street on the north on down to Christian Street to the south.

Now as expected, my hearing impairment prevented me from hearing much of what was being said by our guide, but that's okay.  I ended up with more pictures than one would ever even think of shaking a stick at (don't even think about doing that, I am quite serious!), and also with a determination to learn much more on my own.  This, I will do in the coming years.  And decades.  :)

The full, long-winded and very photo-heavy (heh) version of this photo diary will be posted on my own blog in the coming days, once I finally get around to setting it up.   I'll notify youze when.  For now, some brief words, and a few pics of Old Jewish Philadelphia.  Continued below the jump...

To a valley in Wales

geoffff

The Joint occasionally comments at connexions the blog of Richard Hall, a Methodist minister in Wales, to do my bit to help lift the tone of the place a little and to knock off some of the rough edges especially when the language gets a bit choice. 

You will be surprised how foul mouthed these British Methodists can get when the subject turns to Israel, Jews, Palestine and the poor suffering permanently oppressed Palestinians ...

Then the air can get pretty blue in the green valleys of Wales and on that subject the Joint knows what it's talking about. The Joint has had to throw out people for language not much worse and that was years before the internet was even invented.

This has been going on for years and has now reached a crisis point for European Protestantism . Curse and hate words and phrases thrown about with gay abandon  like supersessionism, one state solution, Jewish exceptionalism, thrice promised land, colonial enterprise, Antony Loewenstein  .... it gets even dirtier.    

The feeling is mutual. Richard has a pal, Kim, also a Methodist minister, who  mistook me for an orc and wanted me banned on sight from the start. I'm not sure he's still unconvinced. Maybe he's right.

Richard nearly complied but so far has allowed me to stay on as a commenter on account of my outstanding singing voice and world class double dummy switch and swivel to fifteen.

This conversation was in play when it abruptly stopped.


Richard 08.03.12 at 7:31 am

 ...   It’s not like I support violence or holocaust denial. But, to my mind at least, the wrongs done by Hamas don’t justify the wrongs which are done by Israel. There’s an old cliche which continues to be true: two wrongs don’t make a right. Someone needs to break the cycle, and since Israel is the more powerful actor in the Holy Land, it should be Israel which takes the initiative.

Daphne - in response to your specific question - Don’t assume that because I link something it necessarily reflects my view. It does mean that it represents a view I think should be heard. In an ideal world, if we were starting from scratch, I would argue for a one state solution with equal rights for all. Israel’s claim to be the only democracy in the region is fatally undermined by what is happening in the West Bank. Unfortunately, we’re not in an ideal world and I don’t believe such a solution would be acceptable to either side. So, reluctantly, I’m left with some version of a two state solution, but in order for that to work Israel is going to have to give up the West Bank and find some way in which sharing Jerusalem can be shared. It’s a long way from ideal, but it’s probably the best that can be hoped for.

I don’t believe that the current situation is beyond hope, with the only long term solution being one side grinding the other into grovelling surrender. Reconciliation is possible, but it takes time, patience and determination. South Africa and Northern Ireland may not be there yet, but they’re on the road. What has been possible there must be possible for Israel too.

To which I budded in

I cannot believe there is still a tiny remote corner of the world in some foreign land where Antony Loewenstein is taken seriously. How quaint.

Let me ask you a question, Richard. Would you take Antony Loewenstein so seriously if he was just another British Methodist?

“Don’t assume that because I link something it necessarily reflects my view. It does mean that it represents a view I think should be heard.”

OK Richard. I’ll match your Jew and up you one. In fact I’ll do better than that. I’ll match your Australian as well.

I feel exactly the same about Pamela Geller.

and also

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

I realise now that I could have worded that more gracefully but I guess that shows how much I know about card games.

The thing is Richard, your idea of an ideal world and starting from scratch is entirely different from mine. In my ideal world, starting from scratch, there is also a one state solution. That is because the British would have kept their promise of 1917 made at a time of terrible war and pledged again in peace before the whole world under the only lawful authority the British had any right to be in occupation at all.

A war ... that included substantial Australian operations that took from the Ottoman Empire big chunks of the region including the Sinai, Palestine/Jordan, Syria and Lebanon and includes even the spectacular charge of the Light Horse at Beersheba in October 1917 which is just as much a part of Australian mythology as the charge of the Light Brigade is for the British except for diametrically opposing reasons.

In this ideal world the British have kept their promise on the blood of all those brave men and allowed a part of a part of a part of what they called Palestine to become the Jewish homeland. In this world there would have been an independent sovereign and strong Jewish state by 1925. Why the wait?

At the very least the British would not have slammed the door shut on the homeland they promised on the very eve of another war and every Jewish person who was able to get there would have been safe at least for the time being. But the British did that as well.

Even after the war in my now far from ideal world the British would have realised that this was still a golden opportunity to finally honour the promise the need for which had just been shown in a way that should have chilled them to their souls.

They would not have kept the door still shut tight on the people we now call the survivors and they would not have forced the Jews in Palestine to fight a civil war for their homeland and their lives. But the British did that too.

That’s the problem with starting points and ideal worlds. Everyone has their own starting point.

Here is a starting point for the twenty first century. The promise of 1917 is  honoured not just in truth and the law as it finally and irrevocably is but in heart and spirit as well. Israel is the Jewish homeland and Israel is thriving and strong. Western liberals and especially the British accept this as not only good and proper but to be celebrated. Palestinians can have another state if they want it and they can call it what they like but they must accept the Jewish state.

I call this the one state solution. The one that is already there and flourishing. Is recognition by the British too much to ask in an ideal world? Say by 2017?

If the enemies of Israel do not accept that then there is nothing to discuss. If they choose violence and grievance instead then while I can understand your sympathy for the Palestinian people I can not understand your hostility to Israel for doing what it must do to protect herself.

What would you have Israel do Richard? Unilaterally withdraw to borders drawn up by the British? Sorry been there. Done that. Border drawing will never be remembered as part of the British genius.

This is pre emptive but please do not lay that land promised too many times stuff on me that Brits sometimes do. No sale. There was nothing in any “promises” to the various Arab chieftains, kings and princes that clashed with the legally binding commitment of a Jewish homeland in part or even all of Palestine. Besides ending up with enough wealth in the ground to splash on every luxury imaginable while influencing the geo politics of the world in a real and very malign way must have met any promise by now.

...

My comment is still awaiting moderation.

That's cool. Richard hasn't up dated his blog for a while. I hope all is well with him and his.

cross posted Geoffff's Joint