So much of what we have written about for years is on the front pages that it is an LSD-style flashback to watch the news these days. Whether it is news about Bob Gates and Hillary Clinton versus Barack Obama in the White House, or blasts from the past election of 2008 “news”, more and more of what we have written is confirmed by Big Media these days. We’ll discuss in our next article the Hillary’s Hit List report which misses what really went on with John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Claire McCaskill and other assorted scum and why they are on the top ten of the “hit list”.
Bob Gates helped Hillary in the not very secret war waged by Barack Obama and John Kerry (and Donilon) against Hillary so we’ll then add some clarity to a high profile quote from the Gates book which some mistakenly assume will hurt Hillary Clinton 2016. And there is also the bloodbath to come for the nomination and control of the Democratic Party to discuss.
While Republicans from other potential 2016 campaigns temporarily enjoy the travails of Chris Christie (until they get in the sights of Big Media shotguns), the same outlets writing about Hillary’s Hit List (yes, we mean the Politico co-author) only want to talk about the Republican divide and coming nomination fight. But does anyone think that we have at all been wrong when we write that Barack Obama and his thugs will do what they have to do to keep control of the party and destroy Hillary - or that when/if Hillary Clinton becomes the party nominee the blood bath at the DNC will drench Georgetown and other neighborhoods? As a taste of our next article compare what Politico writes today to what we wrote about a year ago. Here’s today’s Politico take:
“Years later, they would joke among themselves in harsh terms about the fates of folks they felt had betrayed them. “Bill Richardson: investigated; John Edwards: disgraced by scandal; Chris Dodd: stepped down,” one said to another. “Ted Kennedy,” the aide continued, lowering his voice to a whisper for the punch line, “dead.”
This is what we wrote in February of last year:
“LANNY DAVIS today makes us smile and makes the Hopium Guzzlers tremble. The Hopium-laced blood will flow in rivers down the corridors of the DNC if and when Hillary Clinton gets the nomination in 2016. Donna Brazille, the DailyKooks, Judas Richardson, certain Kennedys, and everyone else who sided with Barack Obama over Hillary in 2008 will be disemboweled.
The blood will flow. We haven’t forgotten, Lanny hasn’t forgotten, the racebaiting of 2008. Bill and Hillary have to play a different game, but who thinks they have forgotten?”
Hillary Clinton’s 2008 enemies list: John Kerry, Claire McCaskill, et al. None of us have forgotten. Hear us Donna and Claire “None of us have forgotten. None of us is fooled by your attempts to wash the past with an endorsement. None of us have forgotten. None of us have forgiven.
Today we want to focus on a man who should not be forgotten. That man is/was Ariel Sharon.
Ariel Sharon lived and governed to keep alive the idea and the state of Israel. In a world that wanted and still wants Israel to commit suicide by adoption of policies that would kill it, a defiant Ariel Sharon saw his duty to save Israel and he did it. Ariel Sharon did not worry about his “brand”. Sharon well knew his actions were not welcome in a world that desired elixirs of hope rather than the cold bath of reality.
Ariel Sharon was the last of a generation of leaders that helped create in 1948 the state of Israel, a state that had for so long disappeared from the roster of world nations. Via Wikipedia, a brief, select history of that man that became the eleventh Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon:
“Sharon was a commander in the Israeli Army from its creation in 1948. As a paratrooper and then an officer, he participated prominently in the 1948 War of Independence, becoming a platoon commander in the Alexandroni Brigade and taking part in many battles, including Operation Ben Nun Alef. He was an instrumental figure in the creation of Unit 101, and the Retribution operations, as well as in the 1956 Suez Crisis, the Six-Day War of 1967, the War of Attrition, and the Yom-Kippur War of 1973. As Minister of Defense, he directed the 1982 Lebanon War.
Sharon was considered the greatest field commander in Israel’s history, and one of the country’s greatest ever military strategists. After his assault of the Sinai in the Six-Day War and his encirclement of the Egyptian Third Army in the Yom Kippur War, the Israeli public nicknamed him “The King of Israel,” and “The Lion of God”, a pun on his given name.”
Ariel Sharon was a great military strategist. But Sharon’s finest hour of leadership and courage came about because he was a brilliant political strategist.
The obese, grey haired, pasty Sharon looked over the landscape and saw trouble. A young, brilliant, charismatic, hard working, American president was determined to bring peace to the region through creation of a Palestinian state and a “two state solution”. President Bill Clinton thought his legacy would be a lasting Middle East peace. It was rumored that Bill Clinton was so immersed in maps and geography of Israel and the surrounding areas that he would trade one boulder for another boulder as he tried to reshape Israel and the region.
If it wasn’t for the recalcitrance of Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat (a hostile recalcitrance that continues unto today) it is likely that Bill Clinton would have succeeded. President Clinton would have gained a well earned, well deserved legacy item for the history books (and probably his legacy item would have been adorned with a glittering Nobel Peace Prize, at a time when that award required monumental achievement). The vast majority of the world wanted President Clinton to succeed. Who didn’t want peace in our time?
President Bill Clinton had as a partner a distinguished Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Barak, hoping a two state solution and peace could be achieved. President Bill Clinton and Ehud Barack proposed a fair and just solution and had a fair chance to achieve a lasting peace. But there was one flaw, one fly in the ointment, one necessary participant who was not participating in good faith.
Yasir Arafat and the Palestinian leadership did not really want peace. What they wanted was the destruction of Israel. Ariel Sharon saw this clearly but how could he prove it? How could Ariel Sharon expose the Arafat rejection of a genuine peace? It was an election season as Prime Minister Barak and President Bill Clinton continued to try to convince Arafat to climb on board the peace train so any statement from Ariel Sharon denouncing Arafat would have been seen as so much election season bombast.
What to do? Ariel Sharon came up with a plan that was as daring as it was despised:
“As part of his election campaign in September 2000, Sharon, then leader of the opposition party, led a Jewish delegation to the Temple Mount, the holiest site in Judaism. The Al-Aqsa Mosque is part of the compound that Jews call the Temple Mount and is considered the third holiest site in Islam. The visit, which was aimed at emphasizing the Jewish claim to the holy place, sparked outrage among the Palestinians who called it a deliberate provocation.
The day after Sharon’s visit, following Friday prayers, large riots broke out around the Old City of Jerusalem. In the following days, demonstrations erupted across the West Bank and Gaza.
Many mark Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount as the start of the Second Intifada and the end of the peace process. An estimated 3,000 Palestinians and 1,000 Israelis were killed in the violence that did not end until 2005.”
Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount was not the start of the Second Intifada. It was the start of a growing realization that the Palestinians did not want a genuine peace but rather a territorial entity from which to attack Israel with the intent of destroying Israel. And yes it was a deliberate provocation which could have backfired on Sharon. But Sharon’s dramatic ploy worked because it proved Sharon was right about Palestinian intentions.
Imagine the reverse consequences if the Palestinians had welcomed the Sharon visit. Sharon claimed his visit was not a provocation because Sharon believed that provocation was in the eyes of the beholder. Sharon would have lost the election and Ehud Barack reelected and a Palestinian state would eventually be birthed IF the Palestinians had only had the decency and good intentions of welcoming Ariel Sharon. But that is not what happened:
“Tightly guarded by an Israeli security cordon, Ariel Sharon, the right-wing Israeli opposition leader, led a group of Israeli legislators onto the bitterly contested Temple Mount today to assert Jewish claims there, setting off a stone-throwing clash that left several Palestinians and more than two dozen policemen injured.
The violence spread later to the streets of East Jerusalem and to the West Bank town of Ramallah, where six Palestinians were reportedly hurt as Israeli soldiers fired rubber-coated bullets and protesters hurled rocks and firebombs.
”I brought a message of peace,” Mr. Sharon said after a one-hour tour that Yasir Arafat, the Palestinian leader, condemned as a ”dangerous action” against Muslim holy sites.
The complex, known to Muslims as Haram al Sharif, or the Noble Sanctuary, contains Al Aksa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock, sacred shrines of Islam. It is revered by Jews as the site of the First and Second Temples as well as the place where Abraham was prepared to sacrifice his son, Isaac. A dispute about sovereignty over the area, in Jerusalem’s walled Old City, has created an impasse in the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.
”I believe that Jews and Arabs can live together,” Mr. Sharon declared as stones and rubber-coated bullets flew at the holy site. ”It was no provocation whatsoever,” he said of his visit. ”It’s our right. Arabs have the right to visit everywhere in the Land of Israel, and Jews have the right to visit every place in the Land of Israel.” Injured Palestinians and police officers were carried off on stretchers minutes after the visit ended.”
Ariel Sharon was right. The world was angry that he exposed delusions and lit the dark corners of reality. If the Palestinians ever gained control of any portion of Jerusalem, Jews would lose all rights to attend the sites they wished to attend. Under Israeli control all people had the rights of access to holy sites. But Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount demonstrated what the future would be like for Jews and non-Muslims in the holy land:
“Mr. Sharon’s tour was meant to assert Israeli sovereignty over the Temple Mount, but the vast security operation organized for the visit suggested that he had anything but free access to the compound, which is effectively run by Islamic officials.
Mr. Sharon entered as a police helicopter clattered overheard and a thousand armed policemen were positioned in and around the Temple Mount, including antiterror squads and ranks of riot officers carrying clubs, helmets and plastic shields. Throughout the tour, Mr. Sharon was ringed tightly by agents of the Shin Bet security service.
Faisal Husseini, the top Palestinian official in Jerusalem, said that the extraordinary police deployment belied Israeli claims of sovereignty over the Temple Mount, which was captured along with the rest of East Jerusalem in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. ”Israel has no sovereignty here,’‘ Mr. Husseini said. ”They have military might, they have the power of occupation, but not sovereignty.”
Mr. Sharon went into the compound through a gate used by tourists above the Western Wall, a remnant of a wall that surrounded the ancient temple plaza. His head was barely visible in the crush of security men and police officers around him. Inside, police officers kept Palestinians behind barriers as Mr. Sharon and his entourage walked around, pausing to listen to explanations by an Israeli archaeologist.
Scuffles broke out when a few hundred Palestinian youths shouting ”God is great!” and ”With soul and blood we will redeem you, Al Aksa!” surged against police lines in an attempt to reach Mr. Sharon. Palestinian officials and Israeli Arab lawmakers who were with the crowd said that they were pushed and beaten.
As Mr. Sharon left, dozens of youths hurled stones, chairs and metal objects at the police, who responded with rubber-coated bullets and riot sticks. At least four Palestinians were later reported to have been treated for injuries.
Mr. Sharon was trailed by Israeli Arab legislators who shouted ”Murderer, get out!” and ”Al Aksa is Palestinian!” [snip]
Mr. Sharon’s visit was ”a direct attempt to derail the peace process and an attempt to inflame the whole region,” Mr. Husseini said.
Peace efforts were further shadowed by an overnight bombing in the Gaza Strip that killed an Israeli soldier and wounded another. Two roadside charges were detonated near an army-escorted convoy of cars heading for the Israeli settlement of Netzarim.
Despite the unrest and injuries in Jerusalem, Mr. Sharon said, his visit had been worthwhile.
”I’m sorry about the casualties, and I wish the wounded a speedy recovery, but a Jew in Israel has the right to visit the Temple Mount,” he said. ”The Temple Mount is still in our hands.”
In one masterstroke, one that was almost universally deplored, Ariel Sharon demonstrated that the proposed “peace” was in reality appeasement that would have deadly consequences to Israel and the greater region if not the world. Eventually President Bill Clinton would confront Arafat and blame him for the failure to achieve a just and lasting peace.
Had the Palestinian leadership and people welcomed their visitor, Ariel Sharon would not have become Prime Minister and a Palestinian state seeking peace in good faith would have been born – a long time ago. But Ariel Sharon was elected and the Palestinians still do not have leadership that will bargain in good faith and with the majority support to win a peace and a homeland.
Ariel Sharon has been proven right unfortunately. Now even Arab Christians are waking up to the need for Israel in a region where Christians are an endangered minority:
“For decades, Arab Christians were considered part of Israel’s sizable Palestinian minority, which comprises both Muslims and Christians and makes up about a fifth of the country’s citizens, according to the Israeli government.
But now, an informal grass-roots movement, prompted in part by the persecution of Christians elsewhere in the region since the Arab Spring, wants to cooperate more closely with Israeli Jewish society—which could mean a historic change in attitude toward the Jewish state. “Israel is my country, and I want to defend it,” says Henry Zaher, an 18-year-old Christian from the village of Reineh who was visiting Nazareth. “The Jewish state is good for us.”
The Christian share of Israel’s population has decreased over the years—from 2.5% in 1950 to 1.6% today, according to Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics—because of migration and a low birthrate. Of Israel’s 8 million citizens, about 130,000 are Arabic-speaking Christians (mostly Greek Catholic and Greek Orthodox), and 1.3 million are Arab Muslims.
In some ways, Christians in Israel more closely resemble their Jewish neighbors than their Muslim ones, says Amnon Ramon, a lecturer at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a specialist on Christians in Israel at the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies. [snip]
As a minority within a minority, Christians in Israel have historically been in a bind. Fear of being considered traitors often drove them to proclaim their full support for the Palestinian cause. Muslim Israeli leaders say that all Palestinians are siblings and deny any Christian-Muslim rift. But in mixed Muslim-Christian cities such as Nazareth, many Christians say they feel outnumbered and insecure.
“There is a lot of fear among Christians from Muslim reprisals,” says Dr. Ramon. “In the presence of a Muslim student in one of my classes, a Christian student will never say the same things he would say were the Muslim student not there.”
“Many Christians think like me, but they keep silent,” says the Rev. Gabriel Naddaf, who backs greater Christian integration into the Jewish state. “They are simply too afraid.” In his home in Nazareth, overlooking the fertile hills of the Galilee, the 40-year-old former spokesman of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate in Jerusalem is tall and charismatic, dressed in a spotless black cassock. “Israel is my country,” he says. “We enjoy the Israeli democracy and have to respect it and fight for it.” [snip]
“We were dragged into a conflict that wasn’t ours,” says Father Naddaf. “Israel takes care of us, and if not Israel, who will defend us? We love this country, and we see the army as a first step in becoming more integrated with the state.” [snip]
“We are not mercenaries,” says Mr. Khaloul, who served as a captain in an IDF paratrooper brigade. “We want to defend this country together with the Jews. We see what is happening these days to Christians around us—in Iraq, Syria and Egypt.”
Since the Arab revolutions began in Tunisia in 2011, many Christians in the region have felt isolated and jittery. Coptic churches have been attacked in Egypt, and at least 26 Iraqis leaving a Catholic church in Baghdad on Christmas Day were killed by a car bomb. Islamists continue to threaten to enforce Shariah law wherever they gain control.“
These Christian groups are learning the lesson Ariel Sharon taught at the dawn of the new century.
There is no hope for Obama or from Obama. But whoever becomes president in 2016, Hillary or Christie or Paul or Cruz or any of the many who will soon need a campaign theme song we hope they learn the lessons taught by Ariel Sharon.
Ariel Sharon did not worry about his “brand” he cared about policy and what was best for his country no matter that the world hated him for bringing the harsh light of truth instead of gauzy hopey feely. The world needs leadership. America needs leadership. We hope that all American leaders learn the lessons from Ariel Sharon’s finest leadership hour.