Archive for May 28th, 2011

The bottom line: Americans should be deeply ashamed of their Congress

The bottom line: Americans should be deeply ashamed of their Congress

Saturday, May 28, 2011 1:31 PM
From: “Sami Joseph”

M J Rosenberg’s 

Congress To Palestinians: Drop Dead!

If anyone had any doubts about whether the Palestinians would declare a state in September, they can’t have them now.
On Tuesday, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu delivered a speech to Congress that essentially was a series of insults to Palestinians and their national aspirations. Every insult was met by applause and standing ovations.
In fact, Netanyahu’s appearance itself was an insult.
In the entire history of the United States, only four foreign leaders have addressed a joint meeting of Congress more than once.
British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, America’s great ally, addressed Congress three times during and after World War II. South African President Nelson Mandela was honored for destroying apartheid and freeing South Africa. And Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was recognized for opening negotiations with the Palestinian people.
And now Netanyahu. But for what?
In his entire term in office he has done nothing but reject every request by the United States that he take some action (like freezing settlements) to promote Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. In the history of Israel, there has been no prime minister as hardline on Palestinian rights and as indifferent to the interests of the United States as Netanyahu.
So why was he invited to address a rare joint meeting?
He was invited because the new Republican leadership of the House of Representatives wanted to demonstrate, loudly and clearly, that Congress will not support President Barack Obama in the event that he tries to achieve an Israeli-Palestinian agreement.
And that is exactly what the Netanyahu appearance achieved. The prime minister unambiguously stated that he had no intention of making peace with the Palestinians.
He began by saying that, in point of fact, there is no occupation — that “in Judea and Samaria [the term Israeli right-wingers use for the West Bank], Israelis are not foreign occupiers” but the native inhabitants. (He cited Abraham and Isaiah from the Bible!)
He said he might consider giving up some of that land but not an inch of Jerusalem. Additionally, he said that Israel would retain most settlements and insist on a military presence in the Jordan Valley (thereby ensuring that any State of Palestine would be locked in on both sides by Israel).
He said that Israel would never negotiate with a Palestinian government that included Hamas, whether democratically elected or not. He declared that not a single Palestinian would be allowed to return to Israel; not even a symbolic return would be acceptable to him.
There is little reason to elaborate. Netanyahu essentially returned to the policies that Israel pursued before Yitzhak Rabin and Yasir Arafat agreed on mutual recognition and the joint pursuit of peace.
And the worst part is not the appalling things Netanyahu said, but how Congress received them. Even Netanyahu’s declaration that there is no Israeli occupation was met with thunderous applause, with the Democrats joining the Republicans in ecstatic support. Every Netanyahu statement, no matter how extreme, received cheers.
Netanyahu was also applauded wildly when he invoked Palestinian terrorism over and over again, even seeming to lump his former “partner,” President Mahmoud Abbas, in with people who “educate their children to hate, [who] continue to name public squares after terrorists, and worst of all, continue to perpetuate the fantasy that Israel will one day be flooded by the descendants of Palestinian refugees.”
His bottom line, which Congress fully bought, was that all Palestinians are terrorists who haven’t earned a state and probably never will.
Congress cheered and cheered and, when Netanyahu was finished, they climbed over each other to touch the hem of his garment.
It was as if Congress thought that no Palestinians or other Arabs (or Muslims) would be watching. It was as if it believes that it can shout its lungs out for Netanyahu (and secure those campaign contributions from AIPAC supporters), without any consequences to U.S. policy and national interests in the Arab world or, for that matter, in the diplomatic community.
But Congress is wrong. The message it sent to the Middle East, to the whole world, in fact, was that Palestinians cannot count on the United States to ever play the role of “honest broker” between Israel and the Palestinians. Even if President Obama was inclined to, Congress would stop him. And AIPAC, using its leverage, would hold Obama’s feet to the fire, too. As far as Congress is concerned, Palestinians do not exist. They have no rights — to a state least of all.
And that is why Palestinians have no choice but to unilaterally declare a state in the fall. They can no longer rely on the promise that, one day, America will do something about the occupation. As David Ben Gurion understood when he went to the General Assembly to achieve recognition of Israel, a small, powerless people must take its destiny into its own hands.
The good news is that, although Congress is in Netanyahu’s pocket, the Obama administration isn’t. Netanyahu insulted the president at the White House last Thursday and then again in the halls of Congress by eliciting support for policies Obama rejects. And the administration is furious.
That means that while Palestinians can and should ignore Congress, the White House and State Department are still in play. Yes, they will both go along with Netanyahu, but probably without much enthusiasm.
And they can send a signal to our allies that although the United States cannot openly oppose Bibi’s policies because of Congress — and AIPAC’s control of it — the allies can. The Palestinians should not give up on Obama or on Secretary of State Clinton, who cannot abide Netanyahu and made sure she was out of the country to escape being present for his speech.
And so we can look forward to a unilateral declaration of statehood in September. The Israelis who refuse to negotiate with stateless Palestinians will have no choice but to negotiate with the state whose land it is occupying. And those negotiations, state to state, may produce peace and the “two states for two peoples” that most Palestinians and Israelis aspire to. In any case, it’s the only hope. (According to a new report by the editor of the Jerusalem Post, David Horovitz, there is no way the United States can use a veto to block UN recognition of the Palestinian state, a point the Israelis have missed but is not lost on the Palestinians.)
Palestinians should thank Prime Minister Netanyahu and, even more, the United States Congress for making their choice so much easier. Together they helped create the Palestinian state and did irreparable damage to America’s image as a beacon of humans rights and self determination.
Americans should be deeply ashamed of their Congress.

Israel wants to fast-track F-35 training (to attack Iran)


Israel wants to fast-track F-35 training

Published: May 27, 2011 at 1:28 PM

TEL AVIV, Israel, May 27 (UPI) — The Israeli air force wants to send its top pilots to the United States to start training on Lockheed Martin’s stealthy F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to speed up deployment of the 20 planes the Israeli Defense Ministry ordered in October 2010.

The Pentagon has already given the green light for Israel to purchase another 55 of the advanced, fifth-generation fighter.

All told, that’s enough to equip three squadrons with the F-35, forming a new strategic spearhead for Israel’s air power, which is largely equipped with Lockheed Martin F-16Is and Boeing F-15Is.

“The plane will provide the air force with new capabilities,” air force commander Maj. Gen. Ido Nechushtan declared Wednesday at a conference at the Fischer Institute for Air and Space Strategic Studies near Tel Aviv.

“The F-35 is vital to our existence and will provide a dramatic leap in capabilities.”

But the JSF program has been plagued with problems, delaying the project by two years and massive cost overruns that have pushed the cost per aircraft up from the original figure of $69 million to more than $120 million.

Despite the Israeli air force’s enthusiasm for the aircraft, which commanders say will allow Israel to maintain its air supremacy over the countries regional adversaries, the acquisition has run into fierce opposition from legislators aghast at the ever-rising price-tag.

Meantime, the program continues to suffer setbacks that could delay its operational deployment in the Middle East.

Under the 2010 deal, in which payment for the aircraft will come from U.S. military aid to the Jewish state, Israel was to start taking delivery of the single-engine jets in 2015.

But that’s not likely to happen until 2017 because of the constant development problems Lockheed Martin has experienced with the F-35, powered by the F135 engine built by Pratt and Whitney, a division of United Technologies Corp.

The JSF program took another blow recently when the U.S. Department of Defense disclosed that the aircraft, packed with advanced systems, may have less range than originally projected.

The F-35A model is currently estimated to have a combat radius, without in-flight refueling, of 584 nautical miles instead of the anticipated 690 nautical miles.

That could be a problem for the Israelis, who want the F-35 available for threatened pre-emptive, long-range strikes against Iran’s nuclear installations.

These would involve in-air refueling operations to get the Israeli strike jets to their targets and back to their bases.

So having the F-35’s range reduced from the original specifications could complicate what would be an already complex mission.

The JSF program is expected to cost the United States as much as $1 trillion over the coming two decades, the most expensive military project ever.

The plan is for 2,443 JSFs to be built, with different variants for the U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps.

U.S. allies such as Britain, Italy, Singapore, Japan, the Netherlands, Turkey and Australia have committed to buy the F-35, although some, like Japan, have said they may drop it because of the development problems.

That’s likely to open the market for new strike aircraft that include the Eurofighter Typhoon built by a four-nation European aerospace consortium, Sweden’s Saab Gripen and France’s Dassault Rafale as well as Boeing’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.

At one point recently, the Israelis were reported to be considering going for advanced models of the F-15I instead of F-35s because the Boeing fighters could be delivered sooner.

That option appears to have been dropped and the air force wants to start the one-year F-35 pilot training program in 2016, so that the flyers will be ready for operations when the jets are delivered in 2017.

“In terms of cost, we selected the best plane,” Nechushtan told an audience of defense industry executives and senior defense officials Wednesday.

“The forecasted delays in the delivery of the F-35 to the (Israeli air force) is less dramatic than what’s being said …

“We don’t want to contemplate a situation in which the (Israeli air force) has jets that are inferior to what others have,” Nechushtan commented.

But more trouble looms. U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, last week called the F-35 program a “train wreck” and suggested the Pentagon find an alternative to the JSF because of its astronomical costs.


Ya’alon: Military strike may be needed to stop Iran nukes

 Israel firsters trying to link Iran to 9/11 to attack Iran next!