- This topic has 20 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 4 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
I heard on the radio (it is a conservative station, just saying for full disclosure) that Anthony blinken is supposed to be the keynote speaker for j street
Can someone verify this and if it’s true are the democrats on this site happy with that?
The J Street organization and the Biden Administration (of which Anthony Blinken is a member) are both 500% committed to the so-called “Two State Solution”, even if the “Two State Solution” is rejected by most Jews and most who live in Israel.
The J Street organization and the Biden Administration (including Anthony Blinken) are hell-bent on forcing the so-called “Two State Solution” down the throats of Jews and Arabs, because J Street organization and the Biden Administration both believe that they know better than Jews and Arabs who live in Israel.
Last-but-not-least, the so-called “Two State Solution” is clever way for the Democratic Party and Far-Leftists and Socialists to cause the complete destruction of Israel, while falsely pretending to be “pro-Israel and pro-peace”.
The so-called “Two State Solution” is designed to inflict indefensible borders on Israel, followed by the complete and permanent destruction of the only Jewish State.
This may seem crazy, until you understand that the Far-Leftists and Socialists and the Europeans ALWAYS HATE ISRAEL, and will do ANYTHING to appease-and-pacify Muslims, even if it means inflicting another HOLOCAUST on Jews.
So far as the Europeans are concerned, inflicting another HOLOCAUST on Jews is a small price to pay for appeasing-and-pacifying Muslims, which is always one of their highest priorities.
CONCLUSION: The “Two State Solution” is the “Final Solution” in disguise.
Are you surprised? J Street are big supporters of Democrats. If you vote Democrat you are with them.
>>>Anthony blinken is supposed to be the keynote speaker for j street
Firstly he already was and secondly he was the least hostile to Israel of the speakers. There were also seven Democrat congressmen who spewed straight anti-Israel vitriol. Blinken for his part said that the US would judge Isreal based on it’s policies not based on who is in it’s next government . But his speaking at a venue as anti Isreal as J Street was widely understood to be saying what Rabbi Zweibel said by l’havidil the Aguda convention about dealing with the American government as a frum organization: It brings to mind the posuk in that weeks parsha
וַיַּ֥רְא יַֽעֲקֹ֖ב אֶת־פְּנֵ֣י לָבָ֑ן וְהִנֵּ֥ה אֵינֶ֛נּוּ עִמּ֖וֹ כִּתְמ֥וֹל
שִׁלְשֽׁוֹם
Blinken spoke at J Street to make the Israelis get the same hint. As a diplomat he was careful not to actually say it but left it to the other Democrat congressmen speaking there to do soWith Trump on the right reminding American yidden to ‘be loyal [or else] and J Street lefties threatening to withhold arms funding in Congress if EY takes further steps to annex “occupied territories”, Bibi will have to call on his political skills to thread the needle between these polar extremes.
The J street conference and Blinken being the keynote speaker already took place last week.
His speech can be found online. (The applause in my quotes are from the summary by the US State Department. The bold is my addition.)
Maybe it is worth a few minutes to read what he said.
My summary is that there were no chiddushim and it was simply a repeat of the long standing policy of the US vis a vis Israel, the Palestinians , Peace , Security and improving the lives of everyone in the region.
A few short clips.
He repeated the US view on Iran.
The regime’s actions have only deepened our conviction that Iran must never be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon. (Applause.) We continue to believe that the best way to ensure this is through diplomacy. (Applause.) The benefits of this approach are borne out by the facts.
Here is what he said about Jerusalem and the 2 state solution.
The United States continues to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. As the President also said in his visit, Jerusalem is central to the national visions of both Palestinians and Israelis, and must be a city for all of its people. (Applause.)
Anything that takes us away from two states is detrimental to Israel’s long-term security and its long-term identity.
We know that, at this moment, the prospects of a two-state solution feel remote, and that may be an understatement to some. But we are committed to preserving a horizon of hope. That means holding firm to the values that have anchored the friendship between the United States and Israel across countless transitions in government in both of our countries.
“
Blinken for his part said that the US would judge Isreal based on it’s policies not based on who is in it’s next government
”
I actually find this language offensive. Are we “judging” Spain? Are we “judging” England, or France? What is he, Israel’s parole officer?
I heard a joke where a visitor to the US in order not to get lost, wrote down the name of the street
‘ONE WAY’.HaLeivi,
That is why it is good to read the original and not a bias review of his words.
He never said the word judge.
I assume that the website that used the word judge was davka in order to offend you. Some Jews think that it is great idea that there should be a constant conflict and opposition between Israel and the American Government when it is run by a Democratic President.Here is the quote.
Israel recently held free and fair elections with robust participation and a new government is expected to take office in the coming days. We fully respect the democratic choice of the Israeli people; we again congratulate Bibi Netanyahu. We welcome his commitment to make this a government that, in his words, “will work for the benefit of all residents of the State of Israel, without exception.”
As President Biden told Mr. Netanyahu when he called to congratulate him, we expect the new Israeli Government to continue to work with us to advance our shared values, just as we have previous governments. We’ll continue to express our support for core democratic principles, including respect for the rights of the LGBT community and the equal administration of justice for all citizens of Israel. (Applause.) We will gauge the government by the policies it pursues rather than individual personalities. We will hold it to the mutual standards we have established in our relationship over the past seven decades. And we will speak honestly and respectfully with our Israeli friends, as partners always should.
Indefensible borders from who? Lebanon, Syria, Jordan & Egypt have neither the will nor capability to go to war with Israel. The Gulf States have no interest in war with Israel. The Palestinians with some automatic rifles & crude rockets are a non threat. The only threat is Iran 1,100 miles away giving Israel plenty of time to react before they get near Israel (& truth be told Iran really has no interest in a war with Israel.)
This is what bothers people about Israel (& Jews). Israel is the undeniable Superpower in the region where this time instead of a 6 day war it’d be max a 3 day war with a total victory for Israel. Yet we’re crying to the world like Israel is on the verge of being destroyed & people resent that.>>>The Palestinians with some automatic rifles & crude rockets are a non threat.
>>>This is what bothers people about Israel (& Jews)
>>>Yet we’re crying to the world like Israel is on the verge of being destroyed & people resent that.
This is from the most anti-Semitic posts I’ve seen on YWN for a while (and I’ve seen plenty of antisemitic posts here)
The prospect of Palestinians having a Gaza like border across much of Israel with the easy ability to shoot missiles and for terrorists to get across? How dare those filthy Jews cry over a thing like that. That is we resent them….
Dear Smerel,
You completely proved Kuvult’s point.
Dear N0mesorah,
I’m clueless about what you are trying to say. Can you explain in terms that even I can understand?
For now forget the exact words Kuvult used. This is about the point. [It’s somewhat true that Kuvult’s post was a reaction to the words of Square’s post. Still Kuvult was making a worthy point.]
The point is, that one can be totally pro-Israel and still acknowledge the truth. And the idea that Israel might be in a weak position to defend itself, is not really true. Israel has a real right to it’s land beyond just the right to defend itself. Just saw that Israel has full right to all it’s land.
When you say that Israel has a right to defend itself, a proponent of a two-state solution can respond that Israel can defend itself enough from any invasion. It comes across as making the attacker into the victim. [I’m not saying anyone is trying to make Israel into the victim. But a pro-Palestinian advocate would take it that way.]
>>>For now forget the exact words Kuvult used.
No. Doing that I may as well ignore his entire post . Which reminds of some of the vitriolic bloodthirsty antisemitism I’ve seen anywhere .
>>>The point is, that one can be totally pro-Israel and still acknowledge the truth.
By “truth” you actually mean the opinion widely held by the anti-Israel crowd.
>>>And the idea that Israel might be in a weak position to defend itself, is not really true.
Why, do they do such a great job defending themselves against Gaza missiles that you want more and larger borders of that nature (I happen to still support the Gaza disengagement but the West bank is a very different situation)
>>>When you say that Israel has a right to defend itself, a proponent of a two-state solution can respond that Israel can defend itself enough from any invasion.
Missiles from Gaza aren’t an invasion. The pro two state solution crowds protests when Israel responds even to that. Just imagine if that were the case with all of the West Bank.
None of this however has anything to do with Kuvults post which was saying that people hate Jews because they have the nerve of not wanting to do something that they think can get them killed. Such antisemitic is usually something you only see on the most blood thirsty antisemitic sites
Kuvult,
“Indefensible borders from who? Lebanon, Syria, Jordan & Egypt have neither the will nor capability to go to war with Israel. The Gulf States have no interest in war with Israel.”
Do you think it’s wise to extrapolate that the future will always be like the present? Could none of these countries opt to build their military strength, form alliances, etc? Also, I find it interesting that you didn’t mention Hezbollah in this list. In the 2006 war, they didn’t even need to invade to cause the evacuation of a million Israeli civilians from their homes. And now their capabilities may be greater, and they have years of combat experience garnered from the Syrian civil war.
“The Palestinians with some automatic rifles & crude rockets are a non threat.”
Only if you dehumanize Israel. The Palestinians are well aware of the military power differential. They have not bombed the Knesset building, or the Dimona power plant, or conducted serious raids on Israeli military assets, or tried to seize territory. Instead they bomb pizza parlors and stab Yeshiva students bent over their gemaras, or men davening shacharis. They’ve crushed commuters with bulldozers, intentionally caused crashes, and commit random stabbings. They launch crude rockets, but at civilian population centers. None of these acts are designed to damage Israel’s military or its state infrastructure, or to conquer territory. They’re designed to try and make Israel unlivable for Jews.
“The only threat is Iran 1,100 miles away giving Israel plenty of time to react before they get near Israel (& truth be told Iran really has no interest in a war with Israel.)”
You mean the only “existential” threat. Suppose Iran develops nuclear weapons, and then begins a military buildup in Syria and Lebanon, threatening retaliation for any attack on its assets. How exactly would it help for Israel to have “plenty of time” to react?
“This is what bothers people about Israel (& Jews). Israel is the undeniable Superpower in the region where this time instead of a 6 day war it’d be max a 3 day war with a total victory for Israel.”
That’s not how things played out in 2006 when Israel finally invaded Lebanon to stop the Hezbollah missile attacks. Israel’s military may have the capability to achieve a rapid victory against its present neighbors, but to do so would require scorched earth tactics that would result in considerable civilian fatalities and damage to civilian infrastructure.
“Yet we’re crying to the world like Israel is on the verge of being destroyed & people resent that.”
That’s the anti-Israel parody of Israel’s position, not what Israel is saying itself. By the Palestinians, Israel is demanding safety and security for its citizens. When Israel mentions existential threats, it’s usually referring to Iran.
Dear Smerel,
Your making a good argument. But there are even better arguments. Kuvult’s point is that your argument does not get anywhere with the people you are arguing with. It gives them more of a counter argument.
>>>Your making a good argument. But there are even better arguments.
Without articulating what they are you aren’t really saying anything other than expressing a belief.
I’ve read many, many anti-Israel articles and pretty familiar with the anti- Israel view. Even so I’ve yet to see anyone even TRY to make an intelligent argument that Israel has the ability to achieve peace by giving in to Palestinians without in – best case scenario – taking serious risks to the lives of Israelis for a questionable commitment of peace.
I’m not arguing anything. I’m explaining a point about your’s Kuvult’s posts. Claiming as a different poster did, that ‘the two state solution is the final solution’ does not help convince anyone against the two state solution. It makes sense to those that are pro a unified Israel. But it does not explain anything to an outsider.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.