Obama’s Cairo II speech: Cheering democratization … in general; Update: No, Obama didn’t demand pre-1967 borders for Israel; Update: Netanyahu calls 1967 lines “indefensible”

posted at 1:08 pm on May 19, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Barack Obama showed up a half-hour late, and once again used the self-promoted White House occasion to say nothing specific, and nothing new.  Even in the most specific part of the speech, regarding the American position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Obama offered nothing new.  The entire speech could easily have been delivered by George W. Bush in its commendable but hardly inspirational cheering of democratization, which foundered on Obama’s decision to task Bashar Assad with leading democratic reform in Syria.

The first clue as to the wan nature of the speech was a lack of early, embargoed release of the speech.  Usually, major addresses get released to the media so that the transcripts go up at about the same time the speech starts.  In this case, whether deliberately or through lack of coordination, the first transcript at National Journal appeared more than halfway through the speech.  If that is a minor point, then the reaction of the audience at the State Department was not.  Obama paused for applause after defending the mission that killed Osama bin Laden, and got silence.  Apart from a few weak rounds of applause, the audience didn’t react at all, not even for Obama’s defense of Israel’s existence near the end.

Perhaps that springs from the routine statement of principles on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:

So while the core issues of the conflict must be negotiated, the basis of those negotiations is clear: a viable Palestine, and a secure Israel. The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.

As for security, every state has the right to self-defense, and Israel must be able to defend itself – by itself – against any threat.  Provisions must also be robust enough to prevent a resurgence of terrorism; to stop the infiltration of weapons; and to provide effective border security. The full and phased withdrawal of Israeli military forces should be coordinated with the assumption of Palestinian security responsibility in a sovereign, non-militarized state. The duration of this transition period must be agreed, and the effectiveness of security arrangements must be demonstrated.

These principles provide a foundation for negotiations.  Palestinians should know the territorial outlines of their state; Israelis should know that their basic security concerns will be met. I know that these steps alone will not resolve this conflict. Two wrenching and emotional issues remain: the future of Jerusalem, and the fate of Palestinian refugees. But moving forward now on the basis of territory and security provides a foundation to resolve those two issues in a way that is just and fair, and that respects the rights and aspirations of Israelis and Palestinians.

Recognizing that negotiations need to begin with the issues of territory and security does not mean that it will be easy to come back to the table. In particular, the recent announcement of an agreement between Fatah and Hamas raises profound and legitimate questions for Israel – how can one negotiate with a party that has shown itself unwilling to recognize your right to exist. In the weeks and months to come, Palestinian leaders will have to provide a credible answer to that question. Meanwhile, the United States, our Quartet partners, and the Arab states will need to continue every effort to get beyond the current impasse.

There’s nothing wrong with this statement; it’s a fairly clear description of the position of the US for decades, if less than specific.  It’s not new at all, and it barely touches on the biggest problems in the conflict, which is the right of return demanded by Palestinians and the status of Jerusalem.  Framing the solution along the 1967 line is one of the recurring themes from the US since at least the Clinton administration, and is hardly unique to the US, either.

Despite speaking in generalities on democratization, Obama’s position on its actual implementation seems rather confused.  In one passage, he demanded that Yemen’s Saleh step down from power immediately in the earlier proposed deal, but then gave Bashar Assad the mission to democratize Syria:

Our opposition to Iran’s intolerance – as well as its illicit nuclear program, and its sponsorship of terror – is well known. But if America is to be credible, we must acknowledge that our friends in the region have not all reacted to the demands for change consistent with the principles that I have outlined today. That is true in Yemen, where President Saleh needs to follow through on his commitment to transfer power.  …

The Syrian people have shown their courage in demanding a transition to democracy. President Assad now has a choice: he can lead that transition, or get out of the way. The Syrian government must stop shooting demonstrators and allow peaceful protests; release political prisoners and stop unjust arrests; allow human rights monitors to have access to cities like Dara’a; and start a serious dialogue to advance a democratic transition. Otherwise, President Assad and his regime will continue to be challenged from within and isolated abroad.

Saleh worked with the US, at least to some degree, to help fight al-Qaeda in Yemen, just as Hosni Mubarak worked with Israel at the behest of Washington.  Assad has plotted against Israel, sponsored terrorism with Hamas and Hezbollah, and has treated Syrians at least as brutally as Salah has treated Yemenis, and arguably worse.  And yet Obama wants Saleh out now, but with 850 protestors murdered in Syria, wants to continue engaging with Assad.  Why not ask Saleh to lead a democratization effort too?  Yemen may be an autocracy, but they’re farther along those lines than Syria.

Unfortunately, that’s nothing new, either.

The biggest problem for this speech isn’t Obama’s continuing confusion on working with antagonists and antagonizing allies, or the regurgitation of general principles for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  It’s that the White House once again inflated expectations for a major address just to deliver routine white-paper positions and lip service on democratization.  The speech was nothing special at all, one that a deputy secretary at the State Department could have just as easily covered.

Update: I’m not sure how the AP came up with this:

President Barack Obama is endorsing the Palestinians’ demand for their future state to be based on the borders that existed before the 1967 Middle East war, in a move that will likely infuriate Israel. Israel says the borders of a Palestinian state have to be determined through negotiations.

Er … no, he didn’t.  He said that the settlement should “be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps.”  That’s been the US position for quite a while.

Update II: Seriously, how the Associated Press could make this kind of a mistake is beyond me. Not only is this point clear in the text, Obama delivered it accurately as well. Here’s the video, via Greg Hengler:

He did not say “pre-1967.” Obama gave the standard US position.

Update III: Plenty of pushback on the 1967 comment hitting the news, the most significant of which is Netanyahu’s blast at Obama over getting specific:

Israel’s prime minister has rejected a key aspect of President Barack Obama’s policy speech, saying that a return to his country’s 1967 borders would spell disaster for the Jewish state.

In a statement released late Thursday, Benjamin Netanyahu called the 1967 lines “indefensible.”

The issue, according to the AP, is the major West Bank settlements — which have always been the issue.  Obama called for territory swaps, presumably to cover this issue, but it’s obviously not going down well in Jerusalem.  While US plans for peace settlements have long been based on the 1967 lines, the US has until now not been specifically committed to those lines — so this does represent a significant change, at least in public commitments.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

From Commentary Contentions blog

What Bush did was to put the Palestinians and the rest of the world on notice that the United States would back Israel’s desire to hold onto Jerusalem and the settlements in the context of real peace. This strengthened Israel’s negotiating position as it made it clear that any demands for a compete surrender of the West Bank and Jerusalem were off the table.

What Obama has done is something radically different.

Establishing the 1967 lines as the near-sacred starting point for negotiations means that rather than Israel’s presence in Jerusalem and in parts of the territories as a given, the Jewish state will have to fight for this land in the context of peace talks where its presence there has already been branded as illegitimate. Just like his previous demands for unilateral Israeli concessions such as the settlement freeze, Obama’s endorsement of the 1967 lines means no Palestinian negotiator will ever agree to Israel holding onto an inch of land in Jerusalem or the West Bank. Obama’s embrace of the 1967 borders will also make it easier, not harder, to win United Nations approval of a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state without peace talks or recognition of Israel. Even worse, his statement will buttress the efforts of those who will argue after such a resolution is passed that Israel’s presence in Jerusalem and the territories is illegal.

moonbatattack on May 19, 2011 at 3:49 PM

Bibi is supposed to speak to Congress on Tuesday.

INC on May 19, 2011 at 3:50 PM

just wait until Ron Paul comments on this

Excerpt from his new book, “Liberty Defined”

All jews do not endorse the violence used to displace the Arabs and Muslims and STEAL their land in the Middle East.

he also has a whole chapter on “Zionism” which is the Far-Left take/lies on the history there.

jp on May 19, 2011 at 3:51 PM

Aipac to boo dear leader?

cmsinaz on May 19, 2011 at 3:44 PM

Weasel Zippers:

AIPAC President to Members: Please Don’t Boo Obama During His Speech…

He had this from Politico yesterday.

A reader forwards over an email from AIPAC President Lee Rosenberg to delegates to the organization’s annual policy conference, which will feature President Obama’s and Prime Minister Netanyahu’s coming speeches to the organization.

It’s titled “Welcoming Guests Into our Home” and I don’t think anyone over there is worried the crowd will heckle Bibi:

INC on May 19, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Bibi is supposed to speak to Congress on Tuesday.

INC on May 19, 2011 at 3:50 PM

Perfect timing. He can point out that Obama’s “new chapter in U.S. diplomacy” means that the U.S. is now allied with the Eu on their anti-Irael take.

Schadenfreude on May 19, 2011 at 3:53 PM

And yet Jews in America will vote 80-90% for Obama. (shakes head in disblieef)

angryed on May 19, 2011 at 3:57 PM

Oh yeah, and hopefully the liberal American Jews will wake up now and smell the Borsht.

carbon_footprint on May 19, 2011 at 2:40 PM

I pray for this every day. Because Hitler didn’t stop with German Jews. He went after Italian Jews, Polish Jews, French Jews etc…

The growing anti semitism we’re seeing around the world gives me an unsettling feeling. Not just for Israel, and Israelis, but for all Jews all around the world. If one goal succeeds, what happens then?

Obama’s own reverend Wright taught this in his church. 20 years of this, and we’re to believe he embraces the Jews? My guess is…for now, they’re useful to him, as long as they prop him up. What happens when their usefulness has fufilled it’s purpose?

capejasmine on May 19, 2011 at 3:57 PM

Benjamin Netanyahu called the 1967 lines “indefensible.”

So did the US government not so long ago. Must be that peace-loving Hamas has changed minds????

ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2011 at 4:00 PM

is this just about throwing a bone to his progressive base?

rob verdi on May 19, 2011 at 4:00 PM

Thanks inc

Me thinks that could change after today, no?

cmsinaz on May 19, 2011 at 4:02 PM

And yet Jews in America will vote 80-90% for Obama. (shakes head in disblieef)
angryed on May 19, 2011 at 3:57 PM

No sheet, they vote like the blacks do

and as the blacks are diserviced, the Jews enemies live under the deocrat party

and Jewish politicians seem unilaterally socialist to say the least

Sonosam on May 19, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Denninger does a masterful job of Fisking the Hypocrite-in-Chief.

Rae on May 19, 2011 at 4:12 PM

In this case, indefensible may also describe the difficulty in defending the territory of Israel using those boundaries. Israel has some big technological advantages, though, and may be able to use those advantages to an extent where the Golan Heights are no longer critical.

Of course, another problem with giving up the high ground is that you extend the range of your opponents’ rockets and artillery. As Israel learned the last time they gave up ground.

Funny how everyone forgets about Israel’s previous concessions. If I was them, I’d say “Nuts!” to any requests for more.

hawksruleva on May 19, 2011 at 4:21 PM

All jews do not endorse the violence used to displace the Arabs and Muslims and STEAL their land in the Middle East.

Paul apparently thinks national self-defense is wrong. It’s one thing to argue that the U.S. should withdraw from foreign politics. It’s another to say Israel has sought to expand its territory by waging war. They’ve taken territory AFTER being attacked.

hawksruleva on May 19, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Walter Russell Mead blogs: Obama embraces his inner Bush

jp on May 19, 2011 at 4:26 PM

hawksruleva on May 19, 2011 at 4:25 PM

needless to say, Ron Paul is not “neutral” in his foreign policy beliefs. he is far to the left.

jp on May 19, 2011 at 4:29 PM

And now we know better why Obama has been picking and choosing which “Arab uprisings” to back.

albill on May 19, 2011 at 4:38 PM

Christ I am confused….

jake-the-goose on May 19, 2011 at 4:44 PM

needless to say, Ron Paul is not “neutral” in his foreign policy beliefs. he is far to the left.

jp on May 19, 2011 at 4:29 PM

Indeed, Code Pink has just endorsed his views on Israel.

mudskipper on May 19, 2011 at 4:45 PM

West lays in to Obama:

Congressman Allen West Response to President Barack Obama’s Call for a Two State Solution in Israel

While the winds of democracy may blow strong in the Middle East, history has demonstrated that gaps in leadership can lead to despotic regimes. I have questions for President Obama: ‘Who will now lead in Egypt?’ and ‘Why should American taxpayers provide foreign aid to a nation where the next chapter in their history may be the emergence of another radical Islamic state?’

President Obama has not stood for Israel or the Jewish people and has made it clear where the United States will stand when Palestine attempts to gain recognition of statehood by the United Nations. The President should focus on the real obstacle to security- the Palestinian leadership and its ultimate goal to eliminate Israel and the Jewish people.”

mudskipper on May 19, 2011 at 4:48 PM

I think what BHO has done this time is not only arrogant, but utterly disgraceful.

What I got out of just another run of the mill TOTUS reading session is that:

1. We will not only support the Moslem Brotherhood in Egypt, but we will forgive their debt and we will give them one billion dollars.

2. Obama believes in freedom in the ME but not in America (read his remarks on roadblocks to prosperity)

3. Assad is free to do as he chooses; aligned with Hamas.

4. Hamas and Fatah were the big winners.

5. Obama thinks he can pick and choose the leaders of Arab Nations; depending on his mood? Ghadafi has to go. Mubarak has to go. Assad gets to stay. Yemen’s leader has to go. Ridiculous that a community organizer should think he can weild power that does not belong to him.

6. The pronouncement of his defacto order to give Jerusalem to the Arabs.

It is going to take a lot of spinning and backtracking and if I were this administration, I’d buy stock in the egg-on-your-face industry. It’ll be wearing it all the way out of office in 2012. Why not make a few bucks on the way out, eh?

Key West Reader on May 19, 2011 at 4:49 PM

As for security, every state has the right to self-defense, and Israel must be able to defend itself – by itself – against any threat.

Well there goes the jew vote for obummer. Keep yappen there barry. your doing a great job.

ColdWarrior57 on May 19, 2011 at 4:51 PM

Running errands in the car a little while ago, heard an NPR reporter saying that Obama has now endorsed. . .

“the pre-1967 borders.”

Ed, I don’t think the Bush administration(s), nor the Reagan administration, nor even the Clinton administration advocated any such thing, not even at Oslo. I could be wrong about the last, but I’m sure someone here has the facts at his fingertips.

/Mr Lynn

MrLynn on May 19, 2011 at 4:52 PM

Spathi last seen headed to the basement with KY and a HOPE poster…

stefanite on May 19, 2011 at 4:54 PM

You’re all over the place here, Ed.

2 State solution was first proposed by Bush Jr., It has not been US policy for “decades.”

Aquateen Hungerforce on May 19, 2011 at 4:54 PM

Beck’s gonna be sumpin’, today .. Just starting.

pambi on May 19, 2011 at 5:01 PM

The pali monkeys don’t deserve anything

in fact it’s an insult to monkeys to compare them since monkeys are independent and don’t pose a threat to us where as, the palis only have a “gov” because we pay for it

build the walls to Israel higher and cut off the dough

then we can see what they can run

and let the rest of the muzzies give them mon,..

Oh they do but they go for bombs and rockets

Sonosam on May 19, 2011 at 5:02 PM

The Jews should have expelled all Arabs from the land of Israel when they won the 1967 War.

Allowing a permanent, militant, imperialistic, terroristic-leaning Fifth Column in your midst is lunacy.

Bargaining over territory you conquered is folly.

Israel is a tiny sliver in a gigantic sea of Islamic-Arabic states.

Their desire to extinguish this non-Islamic “insult” to the dominance of Mohammadism is the reality behind all of the Muslim pretenses for seeking “justice”, “equity”, ad absurdum.

No land for false peace.
Which is all that Islamic peoples proffer.

profitsbeard on May 19, 2011 at 5:08 PM

I think it’s more likely that within the next couple of years we’ll see Israel’s borders expand rather than contract.

zoyclem on May 19, 2011 at 5:08 PM

The Israelis asked Obama to remove this from the speech but his Muzzie side ‘prevailed’, with impeccable timing.

Netanyaho can nail him in his Congress speech, just in time for Obama’s coffers to be ‘filled’.

Schadenfreude on May 19, 2011 at 5:13 PM

One take away I have not seen mentioned is on sending more money to the ME. Imagine you are an unemployed schmuck, and the President interrupts The Price is Right. Unless unemployed schmuck follows the ins and outs of the ME, all he heard was BILLIONS of more dollars are going to the Middle East. Betcha they threw a shoe at the TV.

sybilll on May 19, 2011 at 5:20 PM

Thanks inc

Me thinks that could change after today, no?

cmsinaz on May 19, 2011 at 4:02 PM

True.

Even if no booing, I expect it to be an icy audience on the order of Antarctica.

INC on May 19, 2011 at 5:21 PM

Spathi last seen headed to the basement with KY and a HOPE poster…

stefanite on May 19, 2011 at 4:54 PM

*iced tea everywhere

HornetSting on May 19, 2011 at 5:21 PM

Obama. Shekel meister. Failure.

Key West Reader on May 19, 2011 at 5:23 PM

This should surprise no one. Little Bammie hates Jews as much as the rest of the radical black left from which he came. Jeremiah Wright is applauding. Watch for a reaction to Bammie’s speech from the CBC, if the liberal media dare print it.

slickwillie2001 on May 19, 2011 at 5:26 PM

For some reason he keeps giving the dictators that are hostile to the US a pass while coming down hard on those who get along with US.

Herb on May 19, 2011 at 5:43 PM

Congress voted in 2004 to specifically say NO to the 1967 borders now matter how it is parsed.

Here is what you should read

Oh and O-bomb-a has surrounded himself with anti-Semites like Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Susan Powers for decades. Surprise! He’s an anti-Semite.

DANEgerus on May 19, 2011 at 5:44 PM

Obama is standing true to his word…he said he would take the side of muslims…he proved that today..

tinkerthinker on May 19, 2011 at 5:46 PM

I’m confused.

Most stories and reactions seem to be a response to going to pre-1967 borders.

But here you seem to think that is not what he said.

I read it and he is unclear. He didn’t use the “pre” but he also sounds like he is giving something up. Like it is a change of policy.

The most consistent reading… I just read it again… is probably the lines drawn in 1967, not what they were before.

I expect there is going to be some embarrassed people.

Still, it speaks volumes that everyone believed he would do that without telling BiBi.

petunia on May 19, 2011 at 5:53 PM

It is time to purge the federal government of all Muslim Brotherhood front men. Let’s hope Republicans familiarize themselves with who they are so they can be prepared to oust them in 2012.

Connie on May 19, 2011 at 5:54 PM

This is all empty, appeasement posturing by President Obama Chamblerlain. If Obama truly gave a rat’s ass about democracy in the Middle East he would have:

1. NOT forced Mubarak out of power. US pressure on him to reform would have been a better path then ousting him and then *hoping* that the Muslim Brotherhood doesn’t take over.

2. Provide REAL support to the actual pro-democracy forces in Iran instead of standing quietly by while they are butchered by Ahmedinijad’s own local SS/Gestapo.

3. Pressure Assad from power — move as swiftly to denounce Assad WHO IS BUTCHERING HUNDREDS OF CIVILIANS as he did Mubarak, who did not. Sanction, sieze, pressure and pound if the Libya tripwire policy meant anything.

4. Support generally, with pressure for reform ALL US-leaning MiddleEast states instead of pressuring them out of power.

5. Abandon the fantasy that the Palestinians are interested in democracy.

Obama is doing appeasement soundbite politics, nothing more.

EasyEight on May 19, 2011 at 5:57 PM

Tags: arab spring, Barack Obama, Middle East, war on terrorism

Seems like there ought to be a tag for Israel.

Missy on May 19, 2011 at 6:01 PM

Obama is a threat to any and everything except his radical, Marxist fellow travelers and all they hold dear.

txmomof6 on May 19, 2011 at 6:05 PM

petunia on May 19, 2011 at 5:53 PM

Of course

it quite possible that Obama, while mentioning 67 borders, wouldn’t side with the prewar condition

sure

Sonosam on May 19, 2011 at 6:09 PM

Whoever the republican president is in 2012, they are going to have to go on another apology tour. This time, instead of apologizing to terrorists and enemies of our country, he/she is going to have to apologize to our allies and hope he/she can rebuild those severely damaged relations.

Obama has done more damage to our country in two years than al qaida could ever have hoped to do after 9/11.

BruthaMan on May 19, 2011 at 6:12 PM

While US plans for peace settlements have long been based on the 1967 lines, the US has until now not been specifically committed to those lines — so this does represent a significant change, at least in public commitments.

Seeing how everyone is blasting Obambi, it would appear all are of the opinion that he meant pre-1967. In that case, Ed, you’re letting BHO off with weasle words.

The real question now is what does ’1967 lines’ mean to BHO? Apparently, to everyone else (GOP/Dems/Israel), but you, BHO is talking pre-1967.

If BHO thinks pre 6 day war, then yes he is greenlighting a roll back to include giving the Golan Heights back to Syria – even in its moment of unrest.

Nevertheless, this speech is a stupid effort to pre-empt whatever Bibi wishes to speak to Congress about come next Monday. That’s smart-power — lock our FP down before we listen to Israel.

I fear we might not be able to wait till ’12 to get rid of BHO. If we find he really betrayed us, and by extension Israel, the Congress had better grow a spine, find a pair of brass ballz and impeach the idiot-in-chief.

AH_C on May 19, 2011 at 6:12 PM

Muslim sympathizer in White House abandons Israel who knew, right?

Obama to resign in disgrace in 5…..4……3…..

PappyD61 on May 19, 2011 at 6:14 PM

Muslim sympathizer in White House abandons Israel who knew, right?

Accuracy in reporting.

chickasaw42 on May 19, 2011 at 6:17 PM

We’ll see if Bibi leaves by the back door where the trash cans are………… odumbo just spit on the Jewish voters.

ultracon on May 19, 2011 at 6:25 PM

Arab Muslim dream come true…….all Jews dead.

American Presidential policy?……..maintain $$$$$ flowing into Presidential Libraries and Foundations by killing off American Energy independence, regardless of party in charge.

Bush 43 lost me when he sucked up to Islam after 9/11 and held the hand of the Saudi king/dictator.

Gag!!!

PappyD61 on May 19, 2011 at 6:37 PM

The Jews of America will have themselves to blame for the future diminishment, if not irradication of Israel

Sonosam on May 19, 2011 at 6:37 PM

You should change your headline – you were wrong about the border comment – Quit trying to be so “nice” and “fair” to Obama… He still won’t like you…

djl130 on May 19, 2011 at 6:37 PM

For all those lamenting why American Jews do not vote based on a candidate’s policy on Israel:

For many (possibly most) American Jews, Judaism is their ethnicity or their heritage or their culture. They are not practicing the religion. (You could say almost the exact same thing about American Christians, minus the ethnicity.) I am of Welsh ancestry. I don’t vote based on a candidate’s defense of Wales. You don’t expect black people to always vote based on a candidate’s support of Africa, and you don’t expect all Catholics to vote based on how somebody talks about the Vatican.

I’ve known many people who are Jewish, but none who ever talked about God or Israel. Honestly I think in America Israel means more to Christians than it does to those who are Jewish (mostly because of the prophecy that is in the New Testament, which Jews reject.)

Now of course these people should care, I won’t argue with that. But it’s silly to pretend like all Jewish people see Israel as their far away homeland, and all Israelis as their brethren or something.

Obama’s a total cretin with regard to Israel. Whether you are Jewish or not, THEY ARE OUR ALLY and they are civilized, moral people. That’s all you need to know. Don’t have to be a Jew to care about Israel. Don’t even have to be religious, just somebody with an ounce of functioning brainpower.

Polynath on May 19, 2011 at 6:41 PM

F@#$ this POS president.

Midas on May 19, 2011 at 6:45 PM

Bibi should simply get an early flight home and snub Congress and Obama. Stupid jackasses.

Midas on May 19, 2011 at 6:46 PM

Polynath on May 19, 2011 at 6:41 PM

Amen, brother. Somebody in our government needs to step up and defend Israel, let the Jewish people in Israel know that not all of us over here are brain-dead, like Dear Leader is. Anyone with an ounce of foreign policy experience knows Israel is our ONLY friend in the Middle East, and we’ve been just about their only friend in the world.

And, yes, they did help to fulfill the prophecy that guarantees me a place in heaven. For that, I am eternally grateful.

odat on May 19, 2011 at 6:48 PM

If I said what I wanted to say I would probably be banned.

American Jews are the stupidest people on the face of the Earth.

Crux Australis on May 19, 2011 at 6:48 PM

A message to Jewish donors: In the end, you always get what you pay for. In this case, what you pay for may be your end.

volsense on May 19, 2011 at 6:48 PM

I can’t stand watching this clown anymore.
Is there anything in his speech that would convince me that he is not a dupicitous turd who sells out our allies and appeases our enemies?

justltl on May 19, 2011 at 6:58 PM

Sarah tweets :
Dear Mr. President, Please allow our ally, Mr. Netanyahu,
to respectfully arrive throught the front door.
Thanks, Concerned Americans

pambi on May 19, 2011 at 6:58 PM

The majority of the world lives under the heavy yoke of dictatorial oppression, what’s the President’s solution?

His harshly worded admonition of our best longest democratic ally in the middle east, basically, in a blind siding move, he threw Israel under the bus.

Where’s Congress?

Speakup on May 19, 2011 at 7:11 PM

It’s heartening to see that Hot Air readers are finally starting to realize that Ed Morissey is a gutless hack.

sartana on May 19, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Let our prospective GOP candidates speak now,
in defense of Israel & Bush’s 2004 declaration,
or kiss their chances goodbye !!!!!

pambi on May 19, 2011 at 7:25 PM

Sarah tweets :
Dear Mr. President, Please allow our ally, Mr. Netanyahu,
to respectfully arrive throught the front door.
Thanks, Concerned Americans

pambi on May 19, 2011 at 6:58 PM

She’s always the first, and usually the only one, that says what needs to be said. The rest of the GOP is warming the bench while Sarah throws touch-down after touch-down.

Leadership.

BruthaMan on May 19, 2011 at 7:51 PM

Hopeys Middle East Speech is a Social Justice Crusade!
=======================================================

Obama to lay out Arab world economic plan, initially targeting Egypt, Tunisia
Thursday, 19 May 2011
**********************

Washington would also loan or guarantee loans up to a total of $1 billion through the Overseas Private Investment Corp (OPIC) for Egypt to finance infrastructure development and boost jobs, the officials told reporters on a conference call.

http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/05/19/149656.html
————————————————-

(OPIC)
=======

Elizabeth Littlefield Meets with President
*******************************************

OPIC President and CEO Elizabeth Littlefield recently met one-on-one with President Obama in the Oval Office to talk about OPIC’s role as a market catalyst in the developing word. Ms. Littlefield updated the President on two OPIC initiatives: the agency’s commitment to provide up to $2 billion in financing to catalyze private sector investment in the Middle East and North Africa; and OPIC efforts to advance the Administration’s commitment to assist developing nations in combating climate change.

http://www.opic.gov/
=======================

Elizabeth Littlefield
**********************

President and CEO
Overseas Private Investment Corporation

Elizabeth Littlefield was appointed by President Obama as OPIC’s tenth President and CEO.

From 2000 until 2010 Ms. Littlefield was Director of Private and Finance Sector at World Bank and Chief Executive Officer of the Consultative Group to Assist the Poor (CGAP), a multi-donor organization housed at the World Bank and created to help build a professional, global microfinance industry providing flexible, high-quality financial services to the poor.

http://www.opic.gov/about/board-of-directors/Littlefield
=============================
=============================

Mobile Money – Elizabeth Littlefield of CGAP, Barcelona, Spain – part 1
****************

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBzrq-9WInI&feature=related
======================================

MFP 067. Financial Crisis and the Microfinance Industry . Part 1
**********

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_skXLH9iGL4&feature=related

canopfor on May 19, 2011 at 6:36 AM

canopfor on May 19, 2011 at 7:56 PM

Obama invites Israel to commit suicide. Obama may be a lot of unknown things, but an apostate is not one of them.

Basilsbest on May 19, 2011 at 8:02 PM

sartana on May 19, 2011 at 7:21 PM

I don’t appreciate that post, the staff at HotAir is what’s made this site a great success.

If my posts don’t jibe with theirs they don’t go missing like they do most other sites, appreciate the quality of the writers and the environment, they’re some of the best.

Speakup on May 19, 2011 at 8:06 PM

Obama’s desire that Israel leave itself defenseless is, well, defenseless!

Israel and America have NEVER faced a greater threat than that presented by this wicked man in the White House.

Justrand on May 19, 2011 at 8:16 PM

Meanwhile…………………………………
=========

Released: May 17, 2011

Obama’s Challenge in the Muslim World
Arab Spring Fails to Improve U.S. Image
****************************************

Overview
———

As President Obama prepares to make a major address on the tumultuous changes spreading throughout the Middle East, a new survey finds that the rise of pro-democracy movements has not led to an improvement in America’s image in the region. Instead, in key Arab nations and in other predominantly Muslim countries, views of the U.S. remain negative, as they have been for nearly a decade. Indeed, in Jordan, Turkey and Pakidstan, views are even more negative than they were one year ago.

(More…with Poll Numbers)

http://pewglobal.org/2011/05/17/arab-spring-fails-to-improve-us-image/

canopfor on May 19, 2011 at 8:29 PM

For many (possibly most) American Jews, Judaism is their ethnicity or their heritage or their culture. They are not practicing the religion. (You could say almost the exact same thing about American Christians, minus the ethnicity.) I am of Welsh ancestry. I don’t vote based on a candidate’s defense of Wales. You don’t expect black people to always vote based on a candidate’s support of Africa, and you don’t expect all Catholics to vote based on how somebody talks about the Vatican.

OK, I understand what you are saying – parents from Scotland, but the difference is my ancester’s home is not threatened with destruction and all the people destroyed. I know the Jews are very, very liberal almost to communists, and they certainly didn’t learn from WW11, since they still lean that way. The best thing they have going for them is the view of the Christians. And yet they berate us all the time because they are offended by the Christmas tree or the nativity. I’m not offended by the minora (?)and do not wish to have them taken down.
They don’t seem to get it, that it doesn’t make any difference how liberal they are, or how they support the muslim cause (as in the lib’s cause, as in many, many lib lawyers) they are Jewish and they will be killed just like the practicing Jews.

Bambi on May 19, 2011 at 8:57 PM

Conductor obama: ALL ABOARD! This is the slow train to Aushwitz

Sonosam on May 19, 2011 at 9:14 PM

Conductor obama: ALL ABOARD! This is the slow train to Aushwitz

Sonosam on May 19, 2011 at 9:14 PM

I ain’t getting on that. Are you?

Key West Reader on May 19, 2011 at 9:20 PM

He’ll no,

ammos dry, bore is clean

Sonosam on May 19, 2011 at 9:26 PM

Conductor obama: ALL ABOARD! This is the slow train to Aushwitz

Sonosam on May 19, 2011 at 9:14 PM

Thread Winner!

President Obama: Hey, let’s give Texas and southern California back to the Mexico.

This is the idiot that reaches back to 1967 and tells Israel that they have no right to their sovereign country.

Why the U.S. liberal Jews still continue to support this man just confounds me.

Rovin on May 19, 2011 at 9:28 PM

It seems every single news outlet is reporting this as a radical departure from previous policy, including The New York Times, and of course Israel sees it that way.

Sorry, Ed, I think you are way off on this one, and Susan Rice and Samantha Power are calling the shots on ME policy now, emboldened by Obama’s single-handed take-down of Osama bin Laden.

Adjoran on May 19, 2011 at 10:11 PM

Speakup on May 19, 2011 at 8:06 PM

I happen to agree with Sartana. I have been with this site since Brian and Ian were here. Ed is completely wrong on this one. It’s not the first time, and it won’t be the last, as long as he’s here. I am still reading this site spite of him and AP, not because of them.

JannyMae on May 19, 2011 at 10:14 PM

Speakup on May 19, 2011 at 8:06 PM

I happen to agree with Sartana. I have been with this site since Brian and Ian were here. Ed is completely wrong on this one. It’s not the first time, and it won’t be the last, as long as he’s here. I am still reading this site spite of him and AP, not because of them.

JannyMae on May 19, 2011 at 10:14 PM

And I just happen to go back to the days of Captain’s Quarters and followed Ed here at HA. And I agree with you on this point, but your “it won’t be the last, as long as he’s here” is pure garbage. The man has advocated for conservative principles better than this site’s predecessors imo, and yes Ed may make poor judgments at times, as we all do, that are worthy of discourse and objection. Cast the first stone if you must……..it won’t be the last.

Rovin on May 19, 2011 at 10:31 PM

The man has advocated for conservative principles better than this site’s predecessors

Like Gay Marriage? Repeal of DADT?

Just a few days ago, he reported on an attempted terror plot by two muslims. Problem is, he never once in his write-up referred to them as muslims- simply listing their home-towns and then giving their names. This is exactly how State Media reports on these events- attempting to obscure the truth and plant within the subconscious of the reader that he must not consciously note certain facts or even express them publicly. Many might not have noticed it, but if you look out for it you’ll see it all over the place. Now it’s come to Hot Air- the “preeminent conservative blog on internet.”

He’s a hack. But, to be fair…

sartana on May 19, 2011 at 11:06 PM

Is Barry still an automatic with the American Jewish voters?

bayview on May 19, 2011 at 11:37 PM

And I just happen to go back to the days of Captain’s Quarters and followed Ed here at HA. And I agree with you on this point, but your “it won’t be the last, as long as he’s here” is pure garbage. The man has advocated for conservative principles better than this site’s predecessors imo, and yes Ed may make poor judgments at times, as we all do, that are worthy of discourse and objection. Cast the first stone if you must……..it won’t be the last.

Rovin on May 19, 2011 at 10:31 PM

I go back to CQ too, and would seldom vist HA if Ed hadn’t moved. My bookmark was still CQ for well over a year . . . BUT you don’t understand the New Reality.

It no longer matters how long you’ve been a conservative or how conservative you’ve been. One digression, irrespective of how minor, and you are RINO, and RINO is forever and ever, Amen.

Adjoran on May 20, 2011 at 12:25 AM

Gay Marriage- one digression

DADT Repeal- two digressions

See no Islam- three strikes and you’re out

sartana on May 20, 2011 at 1:25 AM

If Obama meant 1967 lines based on the post-6 day war, does that mean he wants Gaza and Sinai to be returned to Israel?

Barrack on May 20, 2011 at 6:48 AM

What is important is how the Arab world receives the President’s ’67 border statement. It won’t be the same interpretation as picked up by the editors here. Obama’s remarks almost guarantee that war will come again to the Middle East–sooner rather than later.

zoyclem on May 20, 2011 at 6:57 AM

moonbatattack on May 19, 2011 at 3:49 PM

So true.
Ed, you blew it this time.
If this is no big deal, why is Bibi Netanyahu furious?
Our President has a habit of infuriating the USA’s closest allies. Is any doubt that Obama favors the enemies of Israel, rather than the only stable, free representative republic in the Middle East?
This is worse than when Obama’s Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Argentina that they have a legitimate claim to the Faulkland Islands, when the majority of the world rightly sees the islands as British property. Even the inhabitants of the islands want to be British.
“Yes We Can” continually commit one foreign policy blunder after another.
Arabs & Muslims have more rights in Israel than Arabs & Muslims have in all other Arab & Muslim nations. There are Arabs & Muslims in Israel’s Parliament! What Arab or Muslim nation has Jews in its government? Rather, what Arab or Muslim nation protects Jews from severe persecution? I know of none. Yet Leftists in the USA & Europe continue to portray Israel as a monster, & the Arab/Muslim world as the poor victim.

itsnotaboutme on May 20, 2011 at 7:36 AM

FINALLY !!! He finally did it !!!
Obama has FINALLY shown America that he is the number one terrorist in the world (that’s why he had Bin Laden killed – you must kill the #1 guy to BE the #1 guy)- aside from losing the Jewish vote I would think any sane person would vote for whoever runs against him next year, especially after THIS !!!

LODGE4 on May 20, 2011 at 7:44 AM

Ilana Mercer:

The Israeli Prime Minister, however, still used dhimi-like tones, which can only be ditched once Israel cuts the Gordian Knot that ties it to the US (foreign aid).

HE WHO PAYS THE PIPER CALLS THE TUNE. For foreign aid, Israeli leaders have been forced to subordinate their country’s national interests to Washington’s whims.

[...]
GANGSTA DIPLOMACY. George Will: “Obama’s dilation on the 1967 borders makes matters worse: Borders are what negotiations are supposed to be about, not what is to be stipulated before negotiations.”

Rae on May 20, 2011 at 10:09 AM

LA Times: Release the Rashid Khalidi tapes of Obama dining with the radical Hamas-supporting Leftist intellectual in which it is alleged they raised drinks to the end of Israel.

rrpjr on May 20, 2011 at 10:58 AM

At least someone in Washington recognizes Israel’s sovereignty:

Unlike this President, I do not believe it is our place to dictate how Israel runs her affairs. There can only be peace in the region if those sides work out their differences among one another. We should respect Israel’s sovereignty and not try to dictate her policy from Washington.
[...]
I am not the only one who can see the absurdities of our foreign policy. We give $3 billion to Israel and $12 billion to her enemies. Most Americans know that makes no sense.

If conservatives really cared about Israel, they’d end the insanity of showering her enemies with taxpayer dollars, and stop treating her like a child who needs to come begging to Washington for permission over every move she makes.

Rae on May 20, 2011 at 12:41 PM

Those pali sub monkeys just tried to kill 30 Israeli children with an advanced antitank missile

if I were Israel I would start with after 67 borders and add whatever the range of their tanks and helicopters can reach

then keep adding as the monkeys dither

Sonosam on May 20, 2011 at 12:50 PM

FINALLY !!! He finally did it !!!
Obama has FINALLY shown America that he is the number one terrorist in the world (that’s why he had Bin Laden killed – you must kill the #1 guy to BE the #1 guy)- aside from losing the Jewish vote I would think any sane person would vote for whoever runs against him next year, especially after THIS !!!

LODGE4 on May 20, 2011 at 7:44 AM

Sorry Lodge4, but no matter what the O’Bamster does, I still view him as #2.

Sweet_Thang on May 20, 2011 at 4:01 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4