There’s just no limit to how common sense can be twisted with a few syrupy sentences.
Take for example Jibril Rajoub’s letter of thanks to International Olympics Committee president Jacques Rogge for nixing a minute’s silence to commemorate the Israeli athletes slain by Fatah terrorists 40 years ago at the Munich Olympics.
Thus wrote Fatah honcho Rajoub, chairman of the Palestinian Olympic Committee and the Palestinian Football Association: “Sport is a bridge for love, unification and for spreading peace among the nations, and it must not be a cause for divisiveness and for the spreading of racism.”
Rajoub cloyingly ticked all the de rigueur boxes of the sentimental claptrap that has become the hallmark of progressive prattle. He after all came out for “love” and “unification” and against “divisiveness” and “racism.”
Of course, if we take Rajoub’s reaffirmation of goodwill to all men to its logical conclusion, we’re bound to infer that the brutal massacre smack dab during the Olympics was praiseworthy. For those who forget, German neo-Nazis provided logistical support, while the bloodbath was bankrolled by Mahmoud Abbas, today’s supposedly moderate president of the Palestinian Authority.
Obviously the murder of the 11 Israelis (replete with the torture and mutilation so frequently practiced by Arab “freedom-fighters” under assorted monikers for the past century and half) underpinned the “bridge for love,” underscored “unification” and “spread peace among the nations.”
However, as per Rajoub’s lofty broadmindedness, remembering the victims of Arab atrocities is tantamount to “a cause for divisiveness and for the spreading of racism.”
Bottom line: Murder is good. Remembrance is bad.
The above assault on common sense is by no stretch of the imagination uncommon. Indeed some outrages against plain level-headedness can beggar even the most prolific of imaginations. For instance, presumptive Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s reference to Jerusalem as Israel’s capital sent shockwaves of horror reverberating around the world.
It sufficed for Rahm Emmanuel (Chicago mayor, President Barack Obama’s former White House chief of staff and an avid Peace Now propagandist) to announce that Romney “is not ready for the Oval Office.”
But that was mild compared to China’s warning that Romney’s statement could “reignite a war between Palestinians and Israelis.” No less. “Romney’s remarks totally neglect historical facts,” contended Xinhua, the official news agency of the dictatorship that backs both Syria and Iran.
Israel’s own leftist media hotshots fell over themselves in their alacrity to outdo one another’s disdain for Romney and, inter alia, also heap scorn on their bête noir, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. No opportunity to knock Bibi may be missed, and so Ha’aretz’s Barak Ravid took issue with Romney’s comments on Jerusalem because his speech “sounded as if it could have been written by Netanyahu’s bureau.” That in itself constitutes an unpardonable sin.
In no time, Romney’s visit became a mere vehicle with which to sideswipe Netanyahu. Our newspapers and airwaves bristled with indignation at Netanyahu’s “interference in the American elections.” Compelling proof was supplied by the fact that Netanyahu referred to Romney as a friend, warmly shook his hand and had him over for dinner. Israel, warned the usual omniscients, will pay dearly for this.
Mind you, our ever-objective omniscients positively cheered each American interference in Israel’s own domestic politics. The most impudent and egregious was Bill Clinton’s.
In splendid sync with Israel’s own Left, America’s then-president couldn’t abide then-first term PM Netanyahu. Hence Clinton actively helped his then-darling, Laborite Ehud Barak, defeat Netanyahu. Clinton did for Barak what few American presidents ever dared openly do even for their most promising foreign protégés.
He pulled out all stops in his unabashed intervention in Israel’s domestic politics, boosting Barak in a fashion unseen since the CIA’s blatant interference in Italy’s post-World War II election. Brashly, Clinton didn’t even bother to cover up his tracks but dispatched his own spin doctors, private pollsters and campaign strategists to get Barak elected. Israel’s Left-dominated media cheered devotedly.
It did the same when two years later Barak waged an uphill reelection campaign. Again, Clinton pulled out all stops to butt into our domestic democratic processes. He committed the ultimate tactless faux pas by telling Israelis outright which ballot to cast. A vote for the protégé he endorses, he averred, “is a vote for peace.”
The talking heads who now scoff at Netanyahu failed to manage a murmur of protest when Clinton treated us like a no-account vassal state. Taking umbrage for inappropriate meddling is evidently selective, as is the very definition of what meddling is.
This perhaps is why our opinion-molders were deliriously thrilled when Obama appeared on our scene to campaign for Jewish votes during his first presidential run in 2008. At that time, taking America’s politics to our turf was perfectly legitimate.
In fact, Israel’s own leftist media hotshots fell over themselves in their alacrity to outdo one another’s fawning adoration of Obama. It all reached an enthusiastic crescendo during his visit to serially rocketed Sderot. Seasoned reporters swallowed Obama’s kitsch hook, line and sinker without any critical analysis. And there was plenty to be critical of.
Obama punctuated his carefully enunciated phrases with frequent throat-clearings, hemmed a lot and hawed even more, yet – among all the hems and haws- he let us know that “if someone was sending rockets into my house, where my two daughters sleep at night, I’m going to do everything in my power to stop that.”
There was no reason to suspect his sincerity. He doubtlessly would make sure that his little girls were safe. What our adulating left-wing, however, failed to ask was whether he’d be equally as resolute to look after the daughters of Israel.
It was a flawless ploy for Obama to inject his offspring into his message. This imparted the highest degree of folksy empathy: “Like you, I’m a dad. I too would feel impelled to take action.” And these sugary supportive sentiments crossed the ocean with satellite immediacy and appealed directly to the hearts of registered Jewish voters, whom they were foremost intended to sway.
Let’s face it: Obama didn’t spare us a day of his hectic schedule to demonstrate genuine identification with the suffering of the hard-luck residents of a small outlying battered Israeli town. Had their sad lot really touched him, he’d have said something way earlier about Sderot’s ongoing nightmare. But he only spoke when his campaign was switched into high gear and the votes of various less-knee-jerk-liberal Jewish sorts (yes, they exist) were judged significant enough to make a pitch for.
However, even they weren’t Obama’s primary target. The hop-and-skip to Israel was incorporated in the framework of a whirlwind grand tour taken to provide the freshman senator and erstwhile community organizer with an instant education in world affairs. Israel was just one more unavoidable destination with the added bonus of cajoling wary voters. The Sderot photo-op became a diploma in diplomatic savoir faire. Trainee-statesman Obama became an overnight expert who could reminisce about his half hour in Sderot.
His apparent compassion there was hardly surprising. What else would he say at that venue and on such an occasion? He after all came to garner campaign capital. Sderot’s inhabitants were all extras in his meticulously stage-managed extravaganza. They had to play the role of the grateful recipients of his beneficent commiseration with their travails.
The rest of us Israelis were cast as bit players in the rock star’s sideshow. We had to be gracious and perform the parts cynically assigned us – not necessarily for our own good. How else could we react when the trendy harbinger of change opined astutely that it’s “in Israel’s interest” to achieve peace with the Palestinians? We could do nothing but exclaim: “Aw shucks! No kidding! Bless you for showing us the light that evaded us for all these decades until your trailblazing persona graced us with its fleeting presence!”
Did Obama really suppose we hadn’t figured that one out on our own? Condescendingly, he must have assumed that Israel hardly deserved anything more original than regurgitated slogans. At best Obama’s catchphrases could be hollow lip service to mediocrity, feeding the masses with verbal junk food.
But something worse was uniquely apparent when he visited Yad Vashem and couldn’t bring himself to articulate the word “Jew.” He made do with meaningless universalist humbug about “man’s potential for great evil.”
Among his honeyed blandishments lurked an ill omen. It would emerge from the shadows at his 2009 obsequious outreach to Muslims in Cairo, where he unabashedly drew a slapdash equivalence between the Holocaust and the Palestinian “pain of dislocation,” and between ethnic extermination and settlement construction (much of Jerusalem included).
Nowhere did Obama deign note Jewish history in or rights to this country and foremost to Jerusalem. After nearly a full presidential term, this is no oversight.
Obama’s calculated agenda culminated in two farcical incidents this year. In March, his secretary of state’s spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland, was adamant that no Israeli capital exists, leastways not one she could name. More recently, White House spokesman Jay Carney stood discomfited on his podium, unable to identify Israel’s capital. The best he could muster were stock inanities like: “You know our policy,” and, “Our policy hasn’t changed.”
In comparison, Romney comes up trumps. No contest. But that’s only for folks whose common sense cannot be twisted with a few syrupy sentences, folks who still know that remembering isn’t divisive and racist, that murder isn’t loving and unifying.
Such an unyielding mind-set is judged untrendy and uncool, much as is Romney’s acknowledgment of the ancient ties of the Jewish people to the cradle of their nationhood. In our topsy-turvy existence, he dared to brazenly overstep the enlightened ones’ mark.
Bucking the Trend ... 
Back on July 26th when The Times of Israel reported the Rajoub story I had the opportunity to respond in the comments section and untwist his propaganda.
I’m happy to have the opportunity to set the record straight.
It’s too bad for them that the Jerusalem Post shut the door on my comments.
“Sports are a bridge for our Muslim terrorists to target the peaceful people, communicate our lies and propaganda, and the spreading of what we see in Syria,Somalia,Pakistan,Iraq,Afghanistan and Yemen between nations and should not be used for reminding the world about the dangers of intolerant and bloodthirsty Islam” Rajoub wrote Rogge.
A home run, Sarah, with the bases loaded!
I didn’t know who Jibril Rajoub was, and I can live without knowing more about him and his vocal shenanigans.
In the same shenaginags context, I would take with lots of salt Romney’s comments, short of commitments, about transferring the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem.
I cannot expect any politicians, including heads of Olympic Committees to mean what they say and to say what they mean. Grandstanding comes with their territory.
Let me repeat myself: our current government has run its course.
Forgive me for paraphrasing Proverbs 31:10.
“A worthy PM who can find?”
Who am I?
I was born in one country, raised in another. My father was born in another country.
I was not his only child.
He fathered several children with numerous women.
I became very close to my mother, as my father showed no interest in me.
My mother died at an early age from cancer.
Although my father deserted me and my mother raised me, I later wrote a book idolizing my father not my mother.
Later in life, questions arose over my real name.
My birth records were sketchy.
No one was able to produce a legitimate, reliable birth certificate.
I grew up practicing one faith but converted to Christianity, as it was widely accepted in my new country, but I practiced non-traditional beliefs and didn’t follow Christianity, except in the public eye under scrutiny.
I worked and lived among lower-class people as a young adult, disguising myself as someone who really cared about them.
That was before I decided it was time to get serious about my life and embarked on a new career.
I wrote a book about my struggles growing up.
It was clear to those who read my memoirs, that I had difficulties accepting that my father abandoned me as a child.
I became active in local politics in my 30’s then, with help behind the scenes, I literally burst onto the scene as a candidate for national office in my 40’s.
They said I had a golden tongue and could talk anyone into anything.
I had a virtually non-existent resume, little work history, and no experience in leading a single organization.
Yet I was a powerful speaker and citizens were drawn to me, as though I were a magnet and they were small roofing tacks.
I drew incredibly large crowds during my public appearances.
This bolstered my ego.
At first, my political campaign focused on my country’s foreign policy…
I was very critical of my country in the last war, and seized every opportunity to bash my country.
But what launched my rise to national prominence were my views on the country’s economy.
I pretended to have a really good plan on how we could do better, and every poor person would be fed and housed for free.
I knew which group was responsible for getting us into this mess.
It was the free market, banks and corporations.
I decided to start making citizens hate them and, if they became envious of others who did well, the plan was clinched tight.
I called mine “A People’s Campaign.”
That sounded good to all people.
I was the surprise candidate because I emerged from outside the traditional path of politics and was able to gain widespread popular support.
I knew that, if I merely offered the people ‘hope’, together we could change our country and the world..
So, I started to make my speeches sound like they were on behalf of the downtrodden, poor, ignorant to include “persecuted minorities”.
My true views were not widely known and I kept them unknown, until after I became my nation’s leader.
I had to carefully guard reality, as anybody could have easily found out what I really believed, if they had simply read my writings and examined those people I associated with. I’m glad they didn’t.
Then I became the most powerful man in the world.
And then the world learned the truth.
Who am I?
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
ADOLPH HITLER
If you were thinking of SOMEONE ELSE, you should be scared, very scared!
As the clock is very fast running down for Iran to go nuclear, the Muzzie in chief, Hussein Obama has deployed ALL of his dirty tricks, to help the rabid Nazi mullahs to achieve their goal !
That EVIL CREATURE lurking in the Oval Office has now entered into the last phase, to help to prepare for the NUCLEAR annihilation of the Jewish state…
Dear Nephew, I like that….”EVIL CREATURE”….LOLLLL!!!!
***NOW*** is the time to attack Irans illegal nuclear installations !
By doing so BEFORE the US elections, Israel will be in a win-win situation…Obama will be drawn in against his ill will and against Iran and he will loose the election, if he will deal with Iran in a reluctant and cowardly way !!!!!
Syria is paralysed and Nasrallah is trembling in his boots…NOW or NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
“Our newspapers and airwaves bristled with indignation” – Some US commentators estimate the role of the media in presidential elections between 3% and 5%. This fails to explain how this predominantly conservative country has elected its most leftist senator. Having been watching the American scene for some time I’d risk to put this influence at triple the suggested numbers. In Israel it’s even higher. Those who disagree and point out that the so-called “right-wing camp” (in reality, mostly centrist) still wins would do well to look at the margins of victory. Without the media’s brutal interference the extreme left would totally and magically disappear before you could say Jack Robinson.
The payback for Bill Clinton’s meddling in Israel’s internal affairs; and for Obama’s facilitation of an immensely more dangerous Middle East, will come soon. When, and if, the Lebanese army manages to drive Hezbollah out of the country; this will be a blow to Iran. Should this occur,(and there’s a good chance it will), along with Israel’s military striking and disabling a good part of Iran’s nuclear capability, Iran will take quite a tumble on the world stage. Hopefully, these victories will be won with a minimum of casualties and suffering; but only time will tell. However, I wonder if Obama saw the rocket room in Sderot’s Indoor Rec Center in 2008; with the mangled rockets, and their fuselage’s inscribed with “Death to the Jews!” If he did, it made no impression on him. Pray for Israel every day.
You may know there is an outcry by some Jews in the U.S. that Jimmy Carter is going to speak at the Democratic National Convention, especially by Mr. Foxman of the ADL.
I commend Mr. Foxman is correct to point out former President Carter’s views with regard to Israel and to consider him an inappropriate choice.
Yet, Carter is not really the one who will make decisions ultimately about whether or not to come to Israel’s aid in the not too distant future when Iran attacks. I say when, because few doubt it will happen. It’s as if a diabolical force is orchestrating historical events that are yet in the making.
The focus should be on Obama and Romney and especially on which person is really someone who can be trusted.
I speak as a non Jew and as an Independent American voter. My vote will count, but so will the votes of everyone.
I’m inclined to wonder that if we have an “end of days” scenario in the next four years (and it may be 200 years or 2000 years away) as the ancient Hebrew prophet Zechariah painted would pit ALL the armies of the earth against Israel, which of these 2 men would most likely be the one who does not side with protecting Israel and caves to various constituencies and to Israel’s enemies?
In my view, Jews can’t let political loyalties be they “yellow dog” Democratic or “forever red” Republican sentiments determine how they answer this question in this coming election cycle or the ones thereafter up until infinity.
Look at the words of these men in all scenarios and before all audiences and how often they have flip flopped back and forth on the matter of Israel.
Look at their deep level emotional attachments — including any back to their childhoods that shaped their formation and how they see the world or how they want to shape they world to fit a political ideology.
Look at their actions, past and present.
Look at the number of times either man has voted Present to avoid “being known” or having a record.
Look a their character…and doing anything for political expediency either to gain power or to keep power at all costs speaks to the character issue.
If Iran and its allies are allowed to attack Israel, it’s not just their “Zionist” enemies who “get it”. It’s all people in the land…Muslims, Christians and others. Its nuclear winter for the area and for those in neighboring non-Jewish nations.
I care very much about what happens to Jews here and abroad…and to all people.
I also have strong suspicions about which of the two men running for President is not likely to equivocate when push comes to shove with Iran (and it’s coming) or whose life speaks of character at every part of his development.
By the way, if you read all of Zechariah — whether you are a religious or secular Jew who is agnostic — the God of Israel comes through and saves Israel at the end of days. That is the good news in this picture.
It’s not what an American President does NOT do which is why I do not follow man in the end.
Sarah, I have to apologise for having evaded your text…but I am just mad like hell about all that b.s. going on around the Iranian nuke program and Obamas siding with the enemy !
Of course you made some great points…as always…it is a complete scandal that the Olympic world ignores the Israeli victims of Arabic terror !!!
In my opinion, the so called Olympic spirit already evaporated in 1936…
Obama does not recognise Israels capital, but he de facto recognises Irans nuke program…maybe Israel should finally act according to her own interests !
You may view Mitt Romney as good for Israel, but the problem is that he and his running mate are very bad for the United States. Even though as a Jewish-American I support the idea of Greater Israel, for me as an American, the interest of the United States trumps the interest of any other country.
Eli, when reading your comment I had a sudden deja vu and thought ‘Didn’t I read something like that somewhere?’
I did.
In Sarah’s article describing her American cousins.
https://sarahhonig.com/2010/07/09/another-tack-isolation-ii-my-american-cousins/
and I quote: “You people liked Nixon. He was good for you but he was awful for us.”
My gosh, how she hits the nail on the head.
I’m an American Jew too.
Naturally, I care about my country.
This is why I am NOT voting in November for Obama.
To vote for Obama would be to ruin the greatest country this planet has ever known.
But personal politics aside, the Jews of the US need to start waking up. We aren’t American first and Jewish second. To the non-Jewish citizens of our great land, we are Jew first and Americans second. No matter how much we would like it to be the other way around. While the United States is my home, Israel is too. It’s the only country free from antisemitism. Where “Jew” and “Israeli” don’t come second, but go together.
America doesn’t stand alone in the world, despite how much we would like to believe it does and enjoy our cozy bubble. Like in interpersonal relationships, “show me your friends and I will tell you who you are” the same goes for countries. America’s good is Israel’s good and Israel’s good is America’s good.
It’s a shame you can’t see that.
Alas, an aphorism such as “America’s good is Israel’s good and Israel’s good is America’s good.” has a problem: the definition of the word, good. For me it is the ideology of Romney/Ryan that would bring the United States to ruin. R/R will bring no “good” to the U.S., in my opinion, only harm. I have a lot of issues with Obama, especially in foreign policy, but the domestic issues I have with R/R trump the foreign policy issues I have with Obama, and so I will be voting for Obama. Since you do see “good” in R/R, then your choice makes sense for you, but since I do not, my choice makes sense for me. BTW, should R/R win the election, their current stance on Israel will all but disappear once the pressure is applied by those countries on which we depend for fuel, manufactured products and mineral resources. It has happened before, and it will happen again.
Thanks for responding, Emily.
Take another look at Obama’s domestic policies. On the economy, his goal seems to me to be more socialist than is good for the USA. And I’d stop to think twice (or 3 or 4 times) about someone who pushes a health plan that he and all of congress don’t have to use, although many others will be forced to. And lots more….
Thanks, excellent article! (I missed this one earlier, for some reason).