Publisher's Note: Jim Bispo's weekly column appears in the Beaufort Observer.
The White House (whoever that is) is quoted as telling all the world that restraint needs to be exercised by "all parties" to the unpleasantness between Israel and the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. The Anointed One calls Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to tell him that. Why Palestinian President Abbas is not called and given the same message is a mystery. (Not!!) It's interesting that virtually everything we read or hear, it is clear that it is Israel to whom "restraint" is being preached. The UN chimes in with the same rhetoric as though the Anointed One - or one of his spear carriers - wrote their Talking Points for them.
And then when Egypt proposes a cease fire, it is honored by Israel while the Palestinians continue to fire their rockets at Israel. Guess what. No cease fire... Surely the fault of Israel.
Clearly it is the Israelis who are the "bad guys" in this scenario. After all, it is they who are killing and maiming Palestinians - including children (we are told one in five of the 299 victims killed so far is a child). The MSM (including the AP) as well as the White House apparently are not interested in the fact that the Israelis are being indiscriminately fired on (with barrages of rockets) by the Palestinians. The Israelis manning (or is it "womaning"??) the Iron Dome defense system seem to have so far kept the rockets from raining down on population centers. The system seems to be working. The Israelis who are not tending to the Iron dome defense system are spending a lot of their time running for air raid shelters, lest the Palestinians get lucky with their rockets.
And now, we are seeing armed drones headed for Israel. A new, heretofore unnoticed manufacturing capability in Gaza?? Not likely. Instead, it would seem that Iran isn't totally occupied with building nuclear weapons and long range rockets with which to deliver them. They apparently have the time and resources to provide the drones to Hamas for use against the Israelis. It isn't clear if the U.S. finds the use of Iranian provided drones against Israel unacceptable or not. We have been greeted by only silence from the Anointed One. Of course actually doing something (besides talking) about things we find "unacceptable" would be a first for the Anointed One. So what difference does it make?? (Did'ja ever hear that one before??)
There is a great deal of talk about the disproportionate numbers of casualties between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Do you suppose it has anything to do with the Israelis having in place the so called "Iron Dome" designed to protect their people from indiscriminate rocket attacks by intercepting Palestinian rockets and destroying them before they reach their target?? At the same time the Palestinians set up their rocket launch equipment in civilian neighborhoods, and in between firing rockets at Israel, the Palestinian "rocketeers" secrete themselves among the general populace (including schools - where one might expect to find children). And then they then scream to high heaven when the Israeli response results in collateral damage (i.e. civilian casualties including some children). This is not a new tactic. One would think that any sensible person seeing this happen yet again would already know that it is a tried and true terrorist tactic. It is clear that the Palestinians are the real cause of the civilian casualties. But no. The Palestinians fall back on this subterfuge with no compunctions. And, sure enough, here comes the MSM and our State Department complaining about civilian casualties. Worse yet, we hear the same complaint coming from a lot of other places - including the U.N. It seems that the bias against the Israelis is a lot more widespread than just the Palestinians.
The Anointed One calls Prime Minister Netanyahu and tells him that he needs to quit bombing civilians in the Gaza Strip. If that's the way we treat our friends, we can only wonder how we might treat our international enemies. Oh wait. Maybe we don't have any international enemies other than the Israelis. Hamas and the Palestenians don't seem to be on our "enemy" list. If they were, why would we be helping bankroll them with our foreign aid??
According to a Congressional Research Service publication,U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestenians prepared by JimZanotti and dated Sept. 30, 2013,
"Since the establishment of limited Palestinian self rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the
mid 1990s, the U.S. government has committed approximately $5 billion in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians, who are among the world's largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid. Successive Administrations have requested aid for the Palestinians in apparent support of at least three major U.S. policy priorities of interest to Congress:
• Preventing terrorism against Israel from Hamas and other militant organizations.
• Fostering stability, prosperity, and self governance in the West Bank that inclines
Palestinians toward peaceful coexistence with Israel and a "two state solution."
• Meeting humanitarian needs."
To review the report, click here.
In the meantime, I have a "flash" for the Anointed One and his State Department: The money doesn't seem to be having its desired effect.
If only the long green wasn't fungible, we wouldn't have to concern ourselves wondering how much American money (of Chinese extraction) is being used to bankroll the Palestinian aggression against Israel... Hmmm...
Initially when I heard what sounded like the Anointed One negotiating for the Palestinians, I was offended. This wouldn't be the first time they seemed to be doing that. John Kerry was pulled the same trick not so long ago.
But then I remembered what a great negotiators Kerry and the Anointed One are - as they showed us in the negotiations over Syria and with the negotiations with the Taliban over Sgt. Bergdahl. "We can't leave any of our troops behind." It isn't clear what ever happened to "We do not negotiate with terrorists". Well, maybe it is clear. We apparently do!! (Too bad they don't seem to feel that we shouldn't leave any of our troopers behind in Mexico.) How the on-going negotiations with Iran will end up, no one knows.. When the initial deadline isn't met, do you suppose we will impose further, more stringent sanctions (like we said we would do)?? Or, based on past experience, does it seem more likely that we will extend the "deadline". Guess what, we didn't and we have. No deal and a new deadline. That seems to have been SOP for the Anointed One and his deadlines. Set strict deadlines then pay them no attention. Hmmm.. So what else is new??
Just to show you that I can from time to time be a little pragmatic, I have to tell you that the administration's unparalleled successes in the Syrian, Taliban, and now the Iranian negotiations made me change my mind about the Anointed One and John Kerry negotiating with the Israelis on behalf of the Palestinians. The more I think about it, the better it sounds.
If only we could be assured that the Palestinians would abide by any deal the Anointed One and his sycophant John Kerry make with Israel.