John V. Whitbeck
Global Research
Sunday, Nov 9, 2008

In the first major appointment of his administration, President-elect Barack Obama has named as his chief of staff Congressman Rahm Emanuel, an Israeli citizen and Israeli army veteran whose father, according to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, was a member of Menachem Begin’s Irgun forces during the Nakba and named his son after “a Lehi combatant who was killed” — i.e., a member of Yitzhak Shamir’s terrorist Stern Gang, responsible for, in addition to other atrocities against Palestinians, the more famous bombing of the King David Hotel and assassination of the UN peace envoy Count Folke Bernadotte.

In rapid response to this news, the editorial in the next day’s Arab News (Jeddah) was entitled “Don’t pin much hope on Obama — Emanuel is his chief of staff and that sends a message”. This editorial referred to the Irgun as a “terror organization” (a judgment call) and concluded: “Far from challenging Israel, the new team may turn out to be as pro-Israel as the one it is replacing.”

That was always likely. Obama repeatedly pledged unconditional allegiance to Israel during his campaign, most memorably in an address to the AIPAC national convention which Israeli peace activist Uri Avnery characterized as “a speech that broke all records for obsequiousness and fawning”, and America’s electing a black president has always been more easily imagined than any American president’s declaring his country’s independence from Israeli domination.

Still, one of the greatest advantages for the United States in electing Barack Hussein Obama was the prospect that the world’s billion-plus Muslims, who now view the United States with almost universal loathing and hatred, would be dazzled by the new president’s eloquence, life story, skin color and middle name, would think again with open minds and would give America a chance to redeem itself in their eyes and hearts — not incidently, drastically shortening the long lines of aspiring jihadis eager to sacrifice their lives while striking a blow against the evil empire.

The profound loathing and hatred of the Muslim world toward the United States, which has always had its roots for America’s unconditional support for the injustices inflicted and still being inflicted on the Palestinians, can fairly be considered the core of the primary foreign policy and “national security” problems confronting the United States in recent years. Why would Obama, a man of unquested brilliance, have chosen to send such a contemptuous message to the Muslim world with his first major appointment? Why would he wish to disabuse the Muslim world of its hopes (however modest) and slap it across the face at the ealiest opportunity?

A further contemptuous message is widely rumored to be forthcoming — the naming as “Special Envoy for Middle East Peace” of Dennis Ross, the notorious Israel-Firster who, throughout the 12 years of the Bush the First and Clinton administrations, ensured that American policy toward the Palestinians did not deviate one millimeter from Israeli policy and that no progress toward peace could be made and who has since headed the AIPAC spin-off “think tank”, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Neverthess, since it is almost always constructive to seek a silver lining in the darkest clouds, a silver lining can be found and cited. For decades, the Palestinian leadership has been “waiting for Godot” — waiting for the U.S. Government to finally do the right thing (if only in its own obvious self-interest) and to force Israel to comply with international law and UN Resolutions and permit them to have a decent mini-state on a tiny portion of the land that once was theirs.

This was never a realistic hope. It has not happened, and it will never happen. So it may well be salutary not to waste eight more days (let alone eight more years) playing along and playing the fool while more Palestinian lands are confiscated and more Jewish colonies and Jews-only bypass roads are built on them, clinging to the delusion that the charming Mr. Obama, admirable though he may be in so many other respects, will eventually (if only in a second term, when he no longer has to worry about reelection) see the light and do the right thing. It is long overdue for the Palestinians themselves to seize the initiative, to reset the agenda and to declare a new “only game in town”.

Furthermore, in February, Israel will elect a new Knesset. Bibi Netanyahu, who, most polls and coalition-building calculations suggest, is most likely to emerge as the next prime minister, has one (if only one) great virtue. He is absolutely honest in not professing any desire (however insincere) to see the creation of any Palestinian “state” (whether decent or less-than-a-Bantustan in nature) or to engage in any talks (even never-ending and fraudulent ones) ostensibly about that possibility. His return to power would definitively slam the door on the illusion of a “two-state solution” somewhere over an ever-receding horizon.

This would constitute a blessing and a liberation for Palestinian minds and Palestinian aspirations. Their leadership(s) could then return, after a long, costly and painful diversion, to fundamental principles, to pursuing the goal of a democratic, nonracist and nonsectarian state in all of Israel/Palestine with equal rights for all who live there.

This just goal could and should be pursued by strictly nonviolent means. If the goal is to convince a determined and powerful settler-colonial movement which wishes to seize your land, settle it and keep it (eventually cleansing it of you and your fellow natives) that it should cease, desist and leave, nonviolent forms of resistance are suicidal. If, however, the goal were to be to obtain the full rights of citizenship in a democratic, nonracist state (as was the case in the American civil rights movement and the South African anti-apartheid movement), then nonviolence would be the only viable approach. Violence would be totally inappropriate and counterproductive. The morally impeccable approach would also be the tactically effective approach. The high road would be the only road.

No American president — least of all Barack Obama — could easily support racism and apartheid and oppose democracy and equal rights, particularly if democracy and equal rights were being pursued by nonviolent means. No one anywhere could easily do so. The writing would be on the wall, and the clock would be running out on the tired game of using a perpetual “peace process” as an excuse to delay decisions (while building more “facts on the ground”) forever.

Democracy and equal rights would not come quickly or easily. Forty years passed between when, on the night before his assassination, Dr. Martin Luther King cried out that he had been to the mountain top and had seen the promised land and when Barack Obama was elected as president of the United States. (The Bible suggests a similar waiting period in the wilderness for Moses.) Forty-six years passed between the installation of a formal apartheid regime in South Africa and the election of Nelson Mandela as president of a fully democratic and nonracist “rainbow nation”.

While it may be be hoped that the transformation would be significantly quicker in Israel/Palestine, it is clear that many who already qualify as “senior citizens” will not live to see the promised land. However, if the promised land of a democratic state with equal rights for all is correctly and clearly perceived and persistently and peacefully pursued, there is ample reason for confidence that Israel/Palestine will one day experience the tearful exaltation of a “Mandela Moment” or an “Obama Moment”, restoring hope in the moral potential both of a nation and of mankind, and that the Jews, Muslims and Christians who live there will finally reach their promised land.

John V. Whitbeck, an international lawyer who has advised the Palestinian negotiating team in negotiations with Israel, is author of “The World According to Whitbeck”.

--------------------------------------------------
Who's changing what exactly? It's the SAME frigging people, NeoCons...

In fact, it begs for a little more of a look at Emanuel...

Hail to the Chief of Staff

ALEXANDER COCKBURN
Counterpunch
Friday, Nov 7, 2008

The first trumpet blast of change ushers in Rahm Emanuel as Obama’s chief of staff and gate keeper. This is the man who arranges his schedule, staffs out the agenda, includes, excludes. It’s certainly as sinister an appointment as, say, Carter’s installation of arch cold-warrior Zbigniev Brzezinski as his National Security Advisor at the dawn of his “change is here” administration in 1977.Emanuel, as Ralph Nader points out in my interview with him below, represents the worst of the Clinton years. His profile as regards Israel is explored well on this site by lawyer John Whitbeck. He’s a dual Israeli citizen, who volunteered to serve in Israel in 1991 and who made brisk millions in Wall Street. He is a super-Likudnik hawk, whose father was in the fascist Irgun in the late Forties, responsible for cold-blooded massacres of Palestinians. Dad’s unreconstructed ethnic outlook has been memorably embodied in his recent remark to the Ma’ariv newspaper that “Obviously he [Rahm] will influence the president to be pro-Israel… Why wouldn’t he be [influential]? What is he, an Arab? He’s not going to clean the floors of the White House.”
Working in the Clinton White House, Emanuel helped push through NAFTA, the crime bill, the balanced budget and welfare reform. He favored the war in Iraq, and when he was chairing the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2006 he made great efforts to knock out antiwar Democratic candidates. On this site in October and November, 2006, John Walsh documented both the efforts and Emanuel’s role in losing the Democrats seats they would otherwise have won.

In 2006 Emanuel had just published a book with Bruce Reed called The Plan: Big Ideas for America, with one section focused on “the war on terror”. Emanuel and Reed wrote, “We need to fortify the military’s ‘thin green line ‘around the world by adding to the U.S. Special Forces and the Marines, and by expanding the U.S. army by 100,000 more troops. …Finally we must protect our homeland and civil liberties by creating a new domestic counterterrorism force like Britain’s MI5.” Recall that Obama has been calling throughout his recent campaign for an addition of 92,000 to the US Army and US Marine Corps.

Emanuel and Reed had fond words for the mad-dog Peter Beinart, neocon warrior theoretician for the Democrats, roosting Marty Peretz’s The New Republic, and author of The Good Fight where Beinart explained why a tough new national security policy is as essential to the future of of progressive politics as a united front against totalitarianism and communism was to the New Deal and the Great Society. Emanuel and Reed also commended Anne-Marie Slaughter’s proposal for “a new division of labor in which the United Nations takes on economic and social assistance and an expanded NATO takes over the burden of collective security.” In other words, let NATO shoot the natives and the UN clean the floors.

Walsh took a hard look at the 2006 Democratic primary race between Christine Cegelis and Tammy Duckworth in Illinois’s 6th CD, a Republican District, which had elected the disgusting Henry Hyde from time immemorial. In 2004 Cegelis, who was only mildly antiwar, ran as the Democrat with a grass roots campaign and polled a remarkable 44 per cent in her first run. It was not too long before Hyde decided to retire, and the field seemed to be open for Cegelis in the November poll, in 2006.

Enter Rahm Emanuel, who promptly dug up a pro-war candidate, Tammy Duckworth. Although she had both her legs blown off in Iraq, she remained committed to “staying the course” in Iraq. Duckworth had no political experience and did not live in the 6th District. Emanuel raised a million dollars for her and brought in Joe Lieberman, Barak Obama, John Kerry, John Edwards and Hillary Clinton to support her. Despite all this help and with the Cegelis campaign virtually penniless, Duckworth barely managed to eke out a primary victory by a measly four percentage points.

To win the House, the Dems had to win 15 seats from the Republicans. Walsh identified 22 candidates hand picked by Emanuel to run in open districts or districts with Republican incumbents. Of these, nine adopted a US “must win” in Iraq position and only one of Rahm’s candidates was for prompt withdrawal from Iraq.

Then, after the election, Walsh assessed Rahm’s supposed brilliance in winning back the House. “Looking at all 22 candidates hand-picked by Rahm, “ Walsh wrote, “we find that 13 were defeated [including Duckworth], and only 8 won! And remember that this was the year of the Democratic tsunami and that Rahm’s favorites were handsomely financed by the DCCC. The Dems have picked up 28 seats so far, maybe more. So out of that 28, Rahm’s choices accounted for 8! Since the Dems only needed 15 seats to win the House, Rahm’s efforts were completely unnecessary. Had the campaign rested on Rahm’s choices, there would have been only 8 or 9 new seats, and the Dems would have lost. In fact, Rahm’s efforts were probably counterproductive for the Dems since the great majority of voters were antiwar and they were voting primarily on the issue of the war (60 per cent according to CNN). But Rahm’s candidates were not antiwar.

Can we even give Obama a chance or what.

When he's bringing in Leftist versions of the Neocons? You want me to just sit back and bleat with the rest of the sheeple? Nope, not me,not gonna do it.
I will not give Obama any special treatment, if he's going to hire the same kind of people as Bush, then he's gonna get Bush treatment.

too bad Arafat is dead, he could be secretary of state

you're not gonna gather much enmity towards Obama by declaring him not friendly enough to the Palestinian terrorists

I'm not very friendly to the terrorists either

amen.any terrorist whether Palestinian,Irish etc is and should not be tolerated.

So, it's okay to wall a people in on all sides and then lob missles and blow crap up with helicopters, all the while blocking basic necessities, like food and medicine?

When Government makes peaceful revolution impossible, they make violent revolution inevitable.

Neither side in the Palestine/Israel issue is doing the right things, but we're giving the weapons to Israel that they are using against the palestinians. Also note that I've seen video of Palestinians going up against Israeli tanks with nothing more than a handful of rocks, can you say you've seen the same thing with an Israeli against Palestinian weapons?

You wonder why they strap bombs on and blow themselves to allah?

I think extremists on both sides are causing most of the conflicts but terriosm is met by the Israelis with twice the brute force so why do the Palestinians think that is going to solve anything?

Sarah pledged her support of Israel too.

The whole thing makes me sort of ill.

I know I will be called a hater but the fact is Israel engages in terrorist and illegal acts regularly.

The state of Israel it seems can do pretty much whatever it wishes and we back them from both sides of the isle. It is disgusting.

Having been married to an Israeli, half a half-Israeli daughter and having traveled to the State itself, I can tell you one thing.

Not all Israelis are close-minded to the separation and the creation of the two states.

Now, while my ex-husband has threatened to kill me and never let my daughter see me again if I even DARED to let a Muslim not only in my house, but in my bed, his brothers wish for a peaceful existence between the two religions.

And where I am very pro-Israel, I think what Israel did back in the beginnings of it's existence was disgusting.

They were given a lot of land by the UN. All it took was one Israeli to screw it up. See, the Jews used to stick to their borders and vacation in Gaza. Then one day, one Jew decided to build up a home and shop there. Because of special circumstances (he had his home over his shop) he was allowed to stay. More and more Jews heard this and followed quickly in pursuit, pushing the Israeli borders out more and more until they had very quickly gained control of Gaza and Jerusalem.

Now they won't leave.

Though I am Jewish, I dine at the same table with my closest friends, a Muslim and a Taoist. We all three frequent a Baptist church on Sundays. Now while the church is okay with me being Jewish because "I am one of G-d's chosen people" and they feel like they are closer to G-d, my dearest friends are not allowed to mention their religion. For fear of being kicked out.

This is how it is in Israel.

Did you know that Israel is doing what Hitler did when he marked the Jews?

If you are an Arab in Israel, you have to have a special ID card. It is considered a 'work permit' and only if you have this ID card, may you be allowed to exist in Israel peacefully.

When I heard about the recent attacks on Gaza, the first question in my mind, "What did the Arabs do this time?"

Apparently nothing.

Israel is supposed to set the example in this world. She is supposed to turn the other cheek. She is the Holy Land, Mecca, to so many. How can she sit there and attack other people?

What would Golda Meir say today?

If G-d could talk, would He approve of what "His People" are doing?

When this election first started, I was warned by many Israelis, don't vote for Obama, he is bad for Israel.

Maybe he should be. Maybe he could show Israel that what it is doing is wrong.

Israel, of all places, should know what it is like to be a nation without a home.

Why torture and kill people who are just like you were a mere 60 years ago?

Israel, wake UP!

Trust me when I, as a Jew and a mother and former wife of an Israeli, say, KNOCK IT OFF!

You are going the ways of Bush-era America. The whole world will hate you and once that happens, who will step up to the plate and defend your honor? You should be smarter than this, oh my Israel. You are SURROUNDED by countries that HATE you with a venomous passion.

You need to talk with Obama. You need to let him know that, though you thank him for his compassion and his support, you are ready for peace NOW. That he can be pro-Israel all he wants, as long as he is pro-Equality and freedom for Palestinians too.

What harm could giving just a little bit of land back do?

Think about it. If you oil the squeaky wheel, doesn't it stop squeaking?

Thank you for sharing that, Hasidic Enforcer.

I agree

You are welcome, Winx!

We Jews have a secret weapon in our struggle with the Arabs; we have no place to go.
Golda Meir

We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours. ~Golda Meir

* To Anwar Sadat just before peace talks.


Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us.

thanx for an insider view.

The Irish terrorists arose as a result of invasion. Perhaps the trick here then is to not go invading countries? Stop meddling in other peoples affairs? Just a thought.

Tiocfaidh ar la!!

cutelildevilsmom:


If my ex-husband hears about my rant that Israel is being selfish, he would probably do one of 2 things, forever deny me access to my daughter, or just kill me.

Some Israelis are crazy like that.

But then again, so are some Americans, Chinese, Africans, Mexicans, Australians, Swedes, etc etc etc....

The world is what we make it. And we are making it bad.

I love Israel just as much as I love America. They are both my home. One is the country I was born in. One is the country of my people. One is a country given to me by birth, the other a country given to me by G-d.

But I can see the flaws in both countries.

America spreads herself too thin. She tries to save the world, only to lose focus on her children.

Israel tries to save herself, only to destroy any hopes FOR her children.

Obama needs to understand that you can not express favoritism in this situation. You need to go in with NO love or favor for either party. I don't care how many Jews live in America. They are not presidents. They do not CONTROL America. They only control Wall Street and Hollywood. The President of the United States control America. He does NOT control the Middle East. I honestly think he should back out of ANY negotiations between the Palestinians and the Israelis. And trust me when I say this that I have put a lot of thought into the fact that there might be a HUGE war there, as my daughter is there and could possibly be hurt or killed should war break out, but she could get hurt or killed now if they don't find a solution that fits THEM, not fits what America wants FOR them.

I believe that Israel should make the same agreement with the Palestinians that they made with Syria and Egypt.

They gave back Golan Heights. They evacuated Lebanon. (Even though the minute they did, war broke out.)

The Israelis need to refocus, regroup and come up with a peace offering. I am sure that the Palestinians are just as tired of burying their sons as the Israelis are.

There is a way for peace, but BOTH parties need to want it not for themselves, but for their children and their children's children.

Beautifully said.