Arlene Kushner: Not All Muslims Are The Same

From Arlene Kushner
April 23, 2013

Muslims Not All the Same

I had expected to move today to issues other than the Boston terror attack.  Barry Rubin, however, has written an excellent piece on this subject -- "Who Will Keep More Muslim Teenagers from Becoming the Next Boston Terrorists?" I begin with this.

Since writing last, I've had correspondence with a couple of my readers regarding the concept of Islamists, jidhadists, radical Muslims vs. Muslims.  They both objected, each in his own way, to my making a differentiation between the radicals and moderate Muslims, whom they claim do not exist, as Islam is a violent religion.  Period. 

Two readers out of thousands is a very small percentage. But it occurs to me that there may be other readers who did not write but entertain similar thoughts.  And so I think it important to visit the issue here.

Mideast Media Sampler 4/23/13: Will Turkey Allow Israeli Planes Into Turkey To Bomb Iran?

by David Gerstman, contributing blogger at Legal Insurrection


1) The Mahnaimi problem Turkey denied a report that was made on Sunday by Uzi Mahnaimi that Turkey agree to allow Israel bases from which to attack Iran. The Times of Israel follows up on its earlier report:

A Turkish official told the Hurriyet Daily News that the Sunday Times report was “a hypothesis” about the “step by step” process of the normalization of Turkish-Israeli relations. “Talking about the prospects of a military cooperation at this stage would be irrelevant,” he added. “We are not there yet. We haven’t even yet appointed a new ambassador to Israel.”

Whatever Happened to the Old AIPAC?

The following by Daniel Pipes is reposted here with permission:

When AIPAC Went AWOL

by Daniel Pipes
The Washington Times
March 4, 2013

http://www.danielpipes.org/12608/aipac-hagel

Washington Times title: "Israel lobby tiptoes around Hagel nomination"

Chuck Hagel's notorious 2008 statement about the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the leading institution of the pro-Israel lobby, claimed that "the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here [in Congress]. I'm a United States senator. I'm not an Israeli senator."

AIPAC logo.

Then a strange thing happened: no sooner did Barack Obama nominate Hagel for secretary of defense on Jan. 7, when AIPAC announced it would not oppose the former Republican senator from Nebraska. Indeed, so neutral did it wish to be on this delicate topic that its spokesman even avoided mentioning Hagel's name, declaring only that "AIPAC does not take positions on presidential nominations." AIPAC then kept a complete silence through Hagel's confirmation on Feb. 26. More important, it did not lift a finger to influence the vote.

Chuck Hagel and John Kerry: Four Years of This?

First came the revelation that in 2011, Hagel accused India of aiding Afghanistan as a second front against Pakistan, requiring the Pentagon to release a statement that he will work to strengthen ties with India, while the White House distanced itself from Defense Secretary Hagel's position.

Now Secretary of State John Kerry tells Germans that Americans have a right to be stupid:

In America, you have a right to be stupid if you want to be. And we tolerate it. We somehow make it through that. Now, I think that’s a virtue. I think that’s something worth fighting for.

Barry Rubin writes that looking at that speech reveals What John Kerry Doesn’t Know About Democracy and Also About Islam:

To be fair, Kerry's statement was in the context of defending, albeit not very well, freedom of speech in America. (Kerry was obviously referencing President Barack Obama’s UN speech in his own talking points.) How Kerry defends it is what's scary and dysfunctional.

The Middle East Media Sampler 2/28/2013: Did AIPAC Blow It On Hagel Nomination?

From +David Gerstman:

1) Is AIPAC obsolete?
In Tablet Lee Smith explains How AIPAC is losing, as evidenced by its non-response to the Hagel nomination:

Yet AIPAC has remained totally mum. The group says it focuses its energies on matters of policy rather than personnel. If it campaigned against Hagel, where would it stop? The organization would potentially have to take a position on every Cabinet nominee. Meantime, in the absence of AIPAC, other pro-Israel organizations have come out publicly against Hagel, like the Emergency Committee for Israel. For taking the lead on this issue, they have been labeled partisans, while AIPAC has preserved its bipartisan status. 

But it’s not clear how much that label matters when a very influential segment of the Democratic party has made it plain that supporting Israel isn’t a top priority. I’m not just referring to the delegates who booed pro-Israel changes to the party platform on the floor of the convention in Charlotte last summer. I’m talking about the White House.

The Middle East Media Sampler 2/22/13: New York Times Media Bias Knows No Bounds

From +David Gerstman:

1) Building his anti-Israel cred one blog post at a time

One of the most anti-Israel "journalists" currently working, is Robert Mackey the lead blogger the New York Times, The Lede. He didn't disappoint this week with Palestinian Blogger Chips Away at Israel’s Image, One Ill-Advised Instagram at a Time At issue was an Instagram picture taken by an Israel solider showing a Palestinian boy in the crosshairs of his weapon.:

Like the activist bloggers in Syria who are working to undermine their enemies, Mr. Abunimah and his colleagues at the Electronic Intifada scour the Web for material to counter the effort by Israelis who use social media platforms to cast their army’s activities in a positive light.

Chuck Schumer Teaches Chuck Hagel The Evil of Jewish Slurs -- And Then Uses One Himself

Now that Chuck Hagel has received the official blessing of Chuck Schumer -- who has revealed the secret of Hagel's behind-the-scenes metamorphosis -- it is expected that there will be no further hurdles to Senate approval of Hagel as Secretary of Defense.

After all, Schumer sat down with him for 90 minutes, during which time Hagel not only allayed all of Schumer's initial misgivings -- he  also "almost had tears in his eyes" when it was explained to him how hurtful the term "Jewish Lobby" actually is.

Apparently Hagel doesn't read the papers much.

But getting back to Schumer, there were other aspects of his defense of Hagel that were just a bit over the top.

Daniel Pipes' Open Letter To Former Classmate Chuck Schumer on Chuck Hagel Nomination

The following by Daniel Pipes is reposted here with permission:

The Hagel Nomination:
An Open Letter to Sen. Charles E. Schumer

by Daniel Pipes
February 19, 2013
Cross-posted from National Review Online, The Corner

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2013/02/the-hagel-nomination-an-open-letter-to-sen

Dear Chuck,

I write to encourage you to review and reconsider your endorsement of Chuck Hagel as secretary of defense. The new information that has appeared since your meeting with him on Jan. 14 suggests that his weak policies vis-à-vis Iran and his reprehensible views toward Israel run even deeper than we realized at that time.

The Middle East Media Sampler 2/19/13: Media Sidesteps Controversy of Brooklyn College BDS Lecture

From +David Gerstman:

The last refuge of anti-Israel activists

A few weeks ago, the New York Times reported Pro Palestinian speakers attract protests outside. The event at Brooklyn college was a Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) event focused on delegitimizing Israel. To read the New York Times account, one doesn't get a sense of what was controversial about the event:

Controversy had grown over the past week at the Midwood college, where nearly a fifth of the undergraduate population is Jewish, over the event organized by a student group, Students for Justice in Palestine. The college’s political science department agreed to co-sponsor the speakers along with more than two dozen other groups. 

Jewish leaders on and off campus had criticized the college and its president, Karen L. Gould, for sponsoring the talk, which they said helped legitimize the B.D.S. movement, which refers to Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions. Its goal is to pressure Israel to restore disputed territories and grant equal rights to Palestinians. 

Throughout the week, the right to academic freedom served as the backbone to arguments in favor of the college’s sponsorship of the event.

In support of the event there was a New York Times editorial, Litmus tests:

The Middle East Media Sampler 2/12/13: Hezbollah's Terrorist Social Program (Plus New York Times Index July - December 2012)

From +David Gerstman:

1) Syria, Hezbollah, Lebanon

The Washington Post reports Iran and Hezbollah build militia networks in Syria in the event that Assad falls, officials say:

A Treasury statement noted that Iran’s Revolutionary Guard commander has said that Jaysh was “modeled after Iran’s own Basij,” which it described as “a paramilitary force subordinate to the IRGC that has been heavily involved in the violent crackdowns and serious human rights abuses occurring in Iran since the June 2009 contested presidential election.” 

In a divided Syria, Iran’s natural allies would include Shiites and Alawites concentrated in provinces near Syria’s border with Lebanon and in the key port city of Latakia. Under the most likely scenarios, analysts say, remnants of Assad’s government — with or without Assad — would seek to establish a coastal enclave closely tied to Tehran, dependent on the Iranians for survival while helping Iran to retain its link to Hezbollah and thereby its leverage against Israel.
Experts said that Iran is less interested in preserving Assad in power than in maintaining levers of power, including transport hubs inside Syria. As long as Tehran could maintain control of an airport or seaport, it could also maintain a Hezbollah-controlled supply route into Lebanon and continue to manipulate Lebanese politics.

But Hezbollah isn't just building its infrastructure in Syria, it's doing it Lebanon too. Ron Ben Yishai noted an interesting aspect of Hezbollah's tactics:

The Middle East Media Sampler 2/11/13: Obama Doesn't Want Chuck Hagel For His Mind

From +David Gerstman:

The last refuge of Hagel supporters 

In a criticism of the President's nomination of Sen. Chuck Hagel to be Secretary of Defense, the Wall Street Journal observes (h/t Ed Lasky):

 It's clear that Mr. Obama chose Mr. Hagel not because he wants a strong and knowledgeable adviser but because he wants a cipher who will take orders from the White House. Mr. Hagel all but admitted this at last month's hearing when West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin noted that "you're going to be basically following policy, not making policy." Mr. Hagel replied, "I won't be in a policy-making position." 

 This would fit well with recent revelations about President Obama's decision making regarding Syria. A Washington Post editorial observed:

Chuck Hagel Learns The Wrong Lessons From Eisenhower's Treatment Of Israel in 1956

The following by Alex Joffe is reposted here with permission of Middle East Forum:

Learning the Wrong Lessons from Ike

by Alexander H. Joffe
The National Interest
February 1, 2013

http://www.meforum.org/3441/eisenhower-obama

What is the proper balance between firmness and flexibility for U.S. policymakers when dealing with Middle Eastern politics? To what extent does history offer guidelines? The Washington Post's David Ignatius has reported that Chuck Hagel, nominated to be the next secretary of defense, has given President Obama and others copies of Eisenhower 1956, a book by David A. Nichols about the Suez Crisis of that year, and has endorsed the thirty-fourth president's hard line against Israel.

It appears that Hagel sees Eisenhower's demand that Israel leave the Sinai Peninsula, which it captured in a one-hundred-hour campaign in late October and November of 1956, as an explicit model for future relations, where American demands for Israeli withdrawals will be acceded to, if Israel knows what's good for it. But 1956 was about more than Israel in the Sinai. These offer more useful lessons for policymakers.

Video: Confusion: Hagel's Confirmation Testimony Last Thursday

Today the Emergency Committee for Israel released "Confusion," a web ad highlighting Defense Secretary nominee Chuck Hagel's confused response at last week's hearing to questions about the Obama administration's Iran policy.

During his confirmation hearing on Thursday, Hagel could not explain -- despite repeated attempts -- the administration's policy of preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Instead, Hagel first said he supported the president's policy of "containment," i.e. containing Iran after it acquires nuclear weapons. Then, attempting to correct himself, he said the administration "takes no position" on containment. Finally, Senator Levin was forced to explain to Hagel that "we do not favor containment."

ECI's executive director, Noah Pollak, said: "Is it too much to ask that the nominee for Secretary of Defense understands the policy of the Obama administration on the single most important national security challenge facing the United States?"

Here is the video:

US Military Leaders Oppose Hagel Nomination by Obama

Military Leaders Oppose Hagel Nomination

Center for Security Policy | Jan 29, 2013 

For Immediate Release

For more information, contact Ben Lerner
at (202) 835-9077 or lerner@securefreedom.org

January 29, 2013 (Washington, D.C.): A distinguished group of fourteen retired generals and admirals, representing all branches of the United States Armed Forces, has signed a letter opposing the nomination of Sen. Chuck Hagel for Secretary of Defense.

The letter – addressed to Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) and Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), respectively, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee – raises several concerns about the nomination of Sen. Hagel, including:

The Middle East Media Sampler 1/30/13: Abbas Wants To Take Israel To Court

From +David Gerstman:
1) Defining terror down; defining occupation up

In a New York Times op-ed nearly two years ago, Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas wrote:

Palestine’s admission to the United Nations would pave the way for the internationalization of the conflict as a legal matter, not only a political one. It would also pave the way for us to pursue claims against Israel at the United Nations, human rights treaty bodies and the International Court of Justice.

Now a pro-Palestinian activist, George Bisharat has filled in details as to how this process will work. In Why Palestine should take Israel to court in the Hague he writes:

Arlene Kushner on Latest on the Explosion At Iran's Nuclear Enrichment Facility in Fordow

From Arlene Kushner:
January 29, 2013:

On the Brink of Chaos

Last I posted, I thought it was time for some upbeat news.  We all need that to sustain us.  But there is precious little that is "upbeat" regarding what I'm about to write here.  We are facing some very critical situations. 

In due course I will write further about the election results and the development of the coalition, with its closed-door negotiations and inter-faction tensions. But right now, that seems "small potatoes." 

~~~~~~~~~~

You may have heard: "Something" has happened at Fordow, Iran's nuclear enrichment facility, some 300 feet beneath a mountain, near the holy Shi'ite city of Qom. 

Credit: actforaustralia

What occurred was an explosion of some sort, either this past Monday or some days before.

I was reluctant to write about this sooner, as information that had come out was conflicting and incomplete.  But the time has come.

Daniel Pipes On Obama's Appointment Of Chuck Hagel For Secretary of Defense

The following by Daniel Pipes is reposted here with permission:

Chuck Hagel at Defense?

by Daniel Pipes
January 28, 2013

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2013/01/chuck-hagel-at-defense

Three thoughts as the U.S. Senate gears up to consider on Jan 31 the nomination of Chuck Hagel for the position of secretary of defense:

The Middle East Media Sampler 1/9/2013: Hagel and Kerry and Brennan -- Oh My!

From +David Gerstman

1) Cabinet making

In 2008, on the campaign trail, candidate Barack Obama flattered himself by evoking Abraham Lincoln and promising a cabinet composed of a "team of rivals."

Now headed into his second term he has proposed three new officials for his government. The Washington Post sees this as an opportunity for A Senate Debate on Mr. Obama's foreign policy. The editorial works from the assumption that John Brennan and Senators John Kerry and Chuck Hagel are qualified and should confirmed as Director of Central Intelligence, Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense, respectively.

Arlene Kushner On Chuck Hagel And Buyers Remorse Over Obama

From Arlene Kushner:
January 8, 2013

Over the Top

This is one of those times when it all seems a bit much.  Bad enought that Obama has now nominated Hagel for the position of Secretary of Defense.  But then we have a Democratic lobbying group, the National Jewish Democratic Council, which has released a statement saying that it is confident that Hagel:

"will follow the president’s lead of providing unrivaled support for Israel.

"President Barack Obama's unprecedented pro-Israel credentials are unquestionable, and setting policy starts and stops with the president.”

HUH??

~~~~~~~~~~

Have You Written Your Senator About Chuck Hagel? Here's A Sample Letter

With the fight over Obama's appointment of Chuck Hagel for Secretary of Defense beginning in earnest, it is important for people to contact their Senators.

One blogger posted a sample letter you can use --
here it is:

Letter to U.S. Senator opposing Hagel nomination for defense secretary

Name
Address, line 1
Address, line 2
January 7, 2013
Phone number

The Honorable Senator “your senator name”
(your U.S. Senator address – easy to find on the internet)

Dear Senator [John Doe]: