Arlene from Israel

Right now we are encountering ironies in a variety of situations, both predictable and unexpected.

Among the predictable we have the behavior of the Palestinian Authority/PLO. Once negotiations, which were supposed to be conducted under cover of a media blackout, started, I guessed that we’d be hearing from the Palestinian Arabs before long. It took about 24 hours before Abbas announced at a press conference with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon in Ramallah that the first session had addressed all key issues, including Jerusalem, refugees, borders, settlements, security and prisoners.

That was quick. It seems rather surprising that all these issues could have been addressed in just one session. But never mind. The Palestinian Arabs were off to a start, with regard to talking publicly about the talks. This is their style: Not quiet, steady sustentative negotiations, but negotiations via public opinion.


Yesterday, there was a PLO Executive Committee meeting chaired by Abbas in Ramallah And the tone was uncompromisingly tough. Well, actually, uncompromising is their default position, this had an edge of hostile belligerency:

The peace talks, they said, were merely a “political cover for the implementation [by Israel] of the largest settlement project.”

The Israeli government, went the statement, was undermining “all prospects for peace.”

“The PLO Executive Committee considers the unprecedented settler decisions which were announced by the occupation government as conclusive proof that Israel’s first and last option remains expansionism, Judaization and theft of Palestinian land, and not ending occupation and implementing the two-state solution on the basis of the 1967 borders.”


I’m never able to read about PA/PLO charges that Israel is guilty of “Judaization” of the land without laughing. Folks, this IS Jewish land. All of it. Historically, legally. And even if Judea and Samaria and eastern Jerusalem were not clearly Jewish — which they are — these areas wouldn’t be “Palestinian.” There has never been a “Palestinian” entity. Any claim would be by Jordan, which was on the other side of the “1967 border,” actually the 1949 armistice line.

But what does factual reality have to do with this? The Palestinian Arabs never let it get in their way.


And here we get to the interesting part in the statement by PLO leaders (emphasis added):

“We hold the US administration responsible for stopping these Israeli war crimes and attempts to foil the peace process. The last settlement steps contradict assurances that the Palestinian Authority received during preparatory talks for launching the negotiations…

“Israel’s practices will prompt the Palestinian leadership to demand the intervention of international courts and institutions against these war crimes, racist acts and violations of all international laws and conventions.”


Well now. It seems that, as long as they are demonstrating total lack of regard for fact anyway, they figure they might as well shoot for the greatest hyperbole, the most vile of accusations against Israel. “war crimes”? “violations of all international laws and conventions”? Because we announced that we are putting out tenders to build some apartments?

I do not believe there is a single leader in the international community who can take these clowns seriously. What this tells us, it seems to me, is that those who continue to support PA “rights” are, in the main, more concerned with damaging Israel than with responding to a legitimate Palestinian Arab position.

And Kerry? Kerry is interested in the “victory” of having advanced the “peace process” and the way in which this will advance his career and accrue international esteem. Or so he imagines.


When the Israeli tenders for building were announced, Kerry had made it imminently clear that there had been no commitment by Israel to halt construction, and that there should be no surprise about the building. And, he also made clear, Abbas knew this going into negotiations. What was obvious at that point was that Netanyahu had advised Kerry that he would arrange for the release of prisoners, as this was Abbas’ bottom line, but that he could pull this off only if he made his people happy by announcing building.

But now, the PLO leaders are saying that the announcements of these building tenders “contradict assurances that the Palestinian Authority received during preparatory talks for launching the negotiations.”

Are the PLO leaders so blatant in their defiance that they are going head-to-head with Kerry in a total lie? Or is something else happening?

I can imagine — it’s much in his MO as I’ve come to understand it — that Kerry might have said something to Abbas like, “Look, I cannot get the Israelis to freeze building. But you know that the US is opposed to the settlements, and I give you my word that we’ll do all that we can to keep the building to an absolute minimum.”


It’s likely that we’ll likely never know if Kerry whispered such words to Abbas. But it probably doesn’t matter. What we’re seeing is a PLO that is totally disgruntled and feels what? humiliated, angry at the prospect of continuing talks while Israel is building. Remember, Abbas as putative head of the PA, went ahead without the go-ahead from the PLO in the first place. Never mind that the PA and PLO are so incestuously intertwined that he also sits as head of the PLO.

And so they’re now announcing the possibility of going to international agencies.

According to an Israeli official cited by the JPost:

“The understanding reached before the commencement of the current talks did not include a settlement freeze, and the Palestinians know that full well. But they did include a Palestinian commitment to abstain from going to international institutions, and if they follow through on this threat, that would be a violation of understandings reached.”

Let us not forget that this was a major goal of Kerry’s in getting the two sides to the table before September — to keep the PA from going to the UN in a unilateral move.


Whether the PA (Abbas) will really go to the UN on this remains to be seen. This might just as easily be a threat — part of the classic PA MO — in the hopes of getting Kerry to pressure Israel to stop building.

But what we know with total certainty — and all those analysts who have their heads screwed on properly warned of this — is that the PA is not ready for compromise and will not proceed in good faith with talks. At some point, PA leaders will look for the excuse that will allow them to bow out.

If Abbas decides to play it by going to the UN or international courts, Israel would be incredibly foolish and self-defeating to continue to sit at the table. And so, either way…

It is a reasonable prediction that in the end, Kerry — who pushed parties, who are impossibly far apart on the issues, to come to the table — will have shown himself to be too smart by half.


On the issue of Palestinian Authority participation in peace talks, see what Khaled Abu Toameh says (emphasis added):

“At the request of the Palestinian Authority leadership, the first round of peace talks with Israel, which was launched in Jerusalem on August 14, was held away from the media spotlight.

“The Palestinian Authority leadership requested that no journalist or photographer be permitted to cover the meeting between Israeli and Palestinian negotiators.

“Even the location of the peace talks was kept a secret, again at the request of the Palestinian Authority leadership.

“The Palestinian Authority’s request for secrecy in the peace talks does not stem from its desire to secure the success of the negotiations.

“The main reason the Palestinian Authority does not want the media to cover the peace talks is related to its fear of the reactions of Palestinians and the Arab world.

“Mahmoud Abbas is already facing widespread opposition among Palestinians to his controversial decision — which was taken under heavy pressure from US Secretary of State John Kerry — to return to the negotiating table with Israel.

“It is not as if the Palestinian Authority is saying: We care so much about the peace talks that we prefer to avoid media coverage in order to make sure that the peace process succeeds

“A photo of Erekat and Livni standing together in Washington has since been exploited by Facebook and Twitter activists to hurl insults and profanity at the chief Palestinian negotiator.

“Palestinian sources in Ramallah said that Erekat felt so offended by the insults and obscene language directed against him that he decided that there was no need for ‘photo op’ with Livni or any other Israeli.

“Both Abbas and Erekat are fully aware of the growing opposition among Palestinians and Arabs to the resumption of the peace talks with Israel under the terms of the US Administration.

“That is why the two men do not want to be seen sitting in a room with any Israeli representative. They know that any photo of Erekat and Livni shaking hands or sitting together would provide their enemies with additional ammunition.

“Those who think that the opposition to the peace talks is coming only from Hamas and other radical groups are either ignorant or turning a blind eye to the reality…

“To further complicate matters for Abbas and Erekat, several Palestinian factions are now in the process of forming a ‘national alliance’ the main goal of which is to thwart any deal between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. This rejectionist front will consist of various PLO and other factions and organizations and could create many problems for the Palestinian Authority.

“But there is another reason why the Palestinian Authority leadership does not want media coverage of the peace talks. For many years, the Palestinian Authority has been supporting boycott campaigns against Israel, as well as organizations combating ‘normalization’ with Israelis.

“If Palestinian children are condemned for playing football with Israelis, why should it be acceptable for Erekat to be talking with Livni?”


Good luck, John Kerry!


An unexpected irony is with regard to Egypt.

Two days ago, the NYTimes — the anti-Israel mouthpiece for the Obama administration — accused Israel of “undercutting” an American message to Gen. al-Sisi that was designed to “defuse” the situation in Egypt and prevent violence.


But any notion by Obama that the US might have forged a compromise, in the spirit of cooperative democracy, that would have forestalled the current situation was a pipedream. It wasn’t going to happen.

The Times charged Israel with assuring al-Sisi that he didn’t have to compromise because the US wouldn’t really follow through on threats to cut off financial support.

Israel denies having done this.


In point of fact, cutting of funds would likely bring Egypt to a far greater disaster than we are currently seeing, leading to an indecisive civil war that might cause the implosion of Egypt as a functioning state.

This is well understood here in Israel. And what Israeli leaders have done is to lobby Western governments not to levy punitive actions against the military regime.

As the JPost today cited on Israeli official:

“The name of the game right now is not democracy. The name of the game is that there needs to be a functioning state. After you put Egypt back on track, then talk about restarting the democratic process there.”

Said this official, the present reality is that the only actor that can assert authority in Egypt and keep it from descending into chaos is the military. “Like it or not, no one else can run the country right now…You can scold Sisi all you wish, but at the end of the day, you want a functional government to rule the country.”



As is not infrequently the case, Israeli leaders “get” the situation far better than Western leaders do. Will the Western governments paid heed? I’m not sure. But there is an exquisite irony for me in the current situation.

Israeli leaders are addressing the realities as they see them. But who would have imagined a few months ago that it would be Israel defending the Egyptian regime. Quite a turn-around. And, it is to be hoped, we will see a whole new dynamic between Jerusalem and Cairo. Hints of this already exist.


Yesterday’s posting was so heavy, I wanted to end today with a link to a video that shines a very positive and uplifting light on Israelis.



Trevor Loudon Speaks to the Myrtle Beach SC Tea Party Aug 26th

Pacific Freedom Foundation

Trevor Loudon presents his new book, “The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress,” to the Myrtle Beach Tea Party on Monday, August 26th, 6 pm

Join the Myrtle Beach Tea Party at The Train Depot for an evening with acclaimed Anti-Communist researcher and author, Trevor Loudon. The event begins at 6 pm EDT.

The Myrtle Beach Train Depot
851 Broadway St ‎
Myrtle Beach, SC 29577
(843) 918-4906

Contact: Regina Thompson

More info here.


Hear Trevor Loudon Speak Wednesday August 21st in Fairfax, VA

Pacific Freedom Foundation

The Tea Party and ACT! Present Acclaimed Author of “The Enemies Within”

Trevor will be presenting his new book, “The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress.” The book is published by Pacific Freedom Foundation and will be available for purchase at the event or here online.

Waterford at Fair Oaks Convention Center
7:00 pm EDT
12025 Lee Jackson Memorial Highway
Fairfax, VA 22033
Convention (703) 352-3200

Contact: Regina Thompson

More info here.



New Zeal

Prominent investigative author Jerry Corsi has reviewed my new book The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the US Congress.

From World Net Daily:


Book names names, details strategies to ‘transform’ U.S.


timthumb (2)

New Zealander Trevor Loudon has just published an encyclopedic new 689-page volume, “The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress,” to accompany his 668-page 2011 book, “Barack Obama and the Enemies Within.”

In both volumes, Loudon has proved himself to be among the foremost experts in the world investigating and reporting the penetration of communists, socialists and the current group of “progressives” affiliated with Democratic Party politics who portray themselves as liberals.

In his 2011 book, Loudon presented documented evidence that Barack Obama’s rise in politics was not an accident, but a conscious, decade-long effort by the radical left to promote a candidate with African roots. Obama, he said, was packaged as an engaging and seemingly harmless Trojan Horse radical, sent to Chicago to refine his skills running for office as a Democratic Party politician.

It is impossible to read “Barack Obama and the Enemies Within” without being convinced that Obama’s education in communist ideology stretches from the extracurricular education he received from Communist Party mentor Frank Marshall Davis in Honolulu to his recruitment as a New Party candidate in Chicago, with strong ties to the Democratic Socialists of America.

Loudon continues naming names in his current volume, “The Enemies Within,” which documents how extensively communists, socialists and progressives have penetrated the U.S. Congress, running on the Democratic Party ticket.

The goal of these radicals in Congress, Loudon demonstrates, is the same goal Obama announced when running for president in 2008, to transform the United States from the constitutional republic established by its Founding Fathers into a radical socialist state. The aim is to be achieved through passing extensive social welfare legislation designed to bankrupt a government adhering to concepts of private property and private enterprise.

In an insightful essay on the Democratic Socialists of America, Loudon emphasizes the impact on U.S. radicals of the late Italian Communist Party theoretician Antonio Gramsci, whose writings from prison declared that the “working class revolution” is a dead end, arguing instead that communism can best be achieved “by infiltrating civil society – political parties, churches, labor unions, universities, the media, community groups, etc., to turn them into revolutionary vehicles.”

Similarly, Loudon documents how the Communist Party of the USA itself has adopted a stealth plan to achieve revolutionary goals by decisions made in the 1970s to infiltrate and manipulate the Democratic Party. The plan is to form alliances with the radical elements in organized labor in conjunction with radicals in the African-American community and the feminist movement to establish a progressive coalition on the left that could dominate the national political agenda for decades to come.

His essay on the Institute for Policy Studies provides extensive evidence that the IPS, operating today with the distinction of being oldest – founded in 1963 – and most influential of the far left “think tanks” in Washington, D.C., “works closely with several U.S. Marxist groups, but is particularly close to the Democratic Socialists of America.”

The congressional profiles of current members of Congress provides extensive evidence of radical leftist ties in the backgrounds of top Democratic Party legislators, including Democratic Party Sens. Barbara Boxer, Dick Durbin, Tom Harkin, Barbara Mikulski, Elizabeth Warren, Ed Markey, Debbie Stabenow, Al Franken, Sherrod Brown, Ron Wyden, Jeff Merkley, Patty Murray and Tammy Baldwin.

In the House of Representatives, Loudon profiles the radical left background of Democratic Party Reps. Nancy Pelosi, Louis Gutierrez, John Conyers, Charles Rangel, Marcy Kaptur, Peter DeFazio, Sheila Jackson Lee, Jim McDermott and dozens more.

Loudon’s profiles of the radical lawmakers is extensively footnoted, complete with photos, news clips, website screen captures and quotations from published sources that leave no doubt as to the authenticity and accuracy of his allegations.

In documenting the success with which the radical left has captured the politically correct core of Democratic Party politics since the 1970s and the end of the Vietnam War, Loudon joins bestselling author Paul Kengor, who published in 2010 “Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Conservatives for a Century,” followed in 2012 by “The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor.”

What authors Loudon and Kengor show is that communism in America did not die with the fall of the Berlin Wall. It is alive and well, with ties that run deep today with Barack Obama in the White House and the radical leftist Democrats serving in the halls of Congress.

Loudon will be in Washington, D.C., at the National Press Club Aug. 20 to participate in the all day conference “The Crisis in American Journalism and the Conservative Response,” hosted by the public policy group America’s Survival Inc.

Joining Loudon, who is listed on the program to speak about his book “The Enemies Within,” will be Kengor, presenting his new book, “All the Dupes Fit to Print: Journalists Who Have Served as Tools of Communist Propaganda.”

To register for the conference go here.


Forum: What do you feel you know now about life that you wish you’d known when you were eighteen?

The Watcher’s Council

Every week on Monday morning, the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher’s Forum with short takes on a major issue of the day. This week’s question: What do you feel you know now about life that you wish you’d known when you were eighteen?

Simply Jews: That it (the life) succeeds to be too long and too short simultaneously.

Liberty’s Spirit: As the parent of two young men with autism spectrum disorders, the thing I wish I knew at 18 that I know today, is how to “embrace my inner bitch.” Throughout our lives, we women are told to be quiet, to be gentle, to be circumspect in how we deal with issues that are important to us. What I learned as I needed to advocate for my sons, is that when you want something done properly you not only need to speak up, but at times you need to be forceful, dogmatic and unswerving in your beliefs, whether you are fighting with educators at every level (secular or religious), school districts, post secondary institutions, workplaces or even medical professionals. Remember though, “embracing your inner bitch” doesn’t mean being vulgar, ignorant nor threatening. It is using your intelligence, education and ability to reason in such a way that you leave no margin for argument, nor prevarication. It is showing strength of purpose and strength of character.

To many this means coming off as a “bitch.” Well let me tell you, it took me until my forties to understand that there is nothing wrong with being seen as a “bitch” especially when you have right on your side. I take it as badge of honor that I can so disarm someone that they have no way to respond to me except to attempt to disavow what I stand for by infantile bullying and name-calling. It means that they have no legal underpinnings to their argument and cannot defend their actions towards my child with any rational thought process.

it is important to remember too, that society uses the word “bitch” to denigrate and disarm women of their empowerment. As someone who rejects any unequal status associated with being female, I have learned to embrace the word and use it to my children’s advantage. Whenever anyone tries to call me “bitch” quite frankly, I teach them a new definition of that word and let them know that they had better get out of my way or they will get steamrollered.

By the way, I would like readers to know that I am a volunteer advocate for special needs children. Please visit my blog Raising Asperger’s Kids, for practical information on raising children with autism spectrum disorders. Additionally, anyone who has questions on raising a child with special needs (autism, LD, OCD, epilepsy, etc) can also reach me through my autism blog. I will happily get back to everyone.

GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD: Well, see – 18 yo is not so far back for moi. I can only say at 18, I thought money was everything. Now I know it is.

Rhymes With Right: Wow — is that question rife with possibilities. I can think of a number of things.

1) Sign those enlistment papers for the Navy Reserve now — you can always start college a semester later. Instead I injured my back in a car wreck and was physically disqualified.

2) You really ought to consider that college that seemed interesting but was located in that out-of-the-way town in Pennsylvania — there’s a girl there who you’ll meet in another dozen years who will make you the happiest man on earth. Who knows? An extra dozen years of happiness might have been in the cards.

3) Whatever you do, don’t kiss the crazy girl. I can think of at least three painful relationships that would have saved me before I met the girl in the previous item.

Oh, wait — that isn’t what you meant by that question, was it? How about these instead:

1) No matter how smart you think you are, you have to sell yourself — no one will hand you a job (even one you are well-qualified for) just because you want it and apply for it. You have to show that they need you.

2) Keep in touch with friends. I’ve spent the last couple of years reconnecting with people from my past on Facebook and Twitter. It would have been nice to have had relationships with them for the intervening couple of decades.

3) Idealism is nice, but the reality is that you have to compromise to move toward change you believe in.

Well, there you have it.

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere and you won’t want to miss it.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?