|
March
1, 2008
Dear Senator
McCain
by Gerald A. Honigman
I
have followed your career fairly closely over the
years, often with pride.
As an independent thinker, I've related to your
willingness to espouse positions even when they
clashed with those of the majority of your
political party.
Among many other things (like your positive
approach to dealing with real or potential
environmental concerns), your willingness to take
on campaign finance reform and lobbyists has also
been admirable--regardless of the recent New
York Times unfounded assertions.
So, here's my dilemma.
Coming home from work today, I heard on the news
that former Secretary of State, James Baker III,
has endorsed your candidacy. No shock here, since
you're both Conservative Republicans and
self-proclaimed admirers of President Ronald
Reagan.
The problem emerges from your end of this story.
Rather than reinventing the wheel, please read
these excerpts from a Jason Maoz article which
appeared back on May 12, 2006 in
JewishPress.com:
McCain told Haaretz that as president, he
would "micromanage" U.S. policy toward Israel and
the Palestinians and would dispatch "the smartest
guy I know" to the region, presumably to jump-start
a new push for a comprehensive accord.
Asked who that "smartest guy" might be,
McCain responded: "Brent Scowcroft, or James Baker,
though I know that you in Israel don't like
Baker."
McCain foresaw "concessions and sacrifices by
both sides" and indicated that Israel would be
expected to "Defend itself and keep evacuating."
Asked whether that meant "movement toward the June
4, 1967 armistice lines, with minor modifications,"
McCain, reported Haaretz, "nodded in the
affirmative."
Before dealing with that last paragraph above,
there's something else that's even more
troublesome.
Imagine, for one moment, the public response if
you suggested appointing someone for a sensitive,
high position in your administration who openly
stated, "f_ _ k the Blacks, they don't vote for us
anyway" and who referred to Black employees and
colleagues as his "Black Boys."
A nauseating and disastrous thought, not so?
Well, Senator McCain, Baker has said just those
very same things about Jews.
While many are taking Barack Obama to task for
his ties to Black racists and anti-Semites,
Baker--your buddy--is cut from this same mold.
While you distance yourself from The New York
Times' unfair allegations regarding lobbyists,
is it wise to embrace the man who most epitomizes
the Big Oil and Arab oil potentate petrodollar
lobby in America, James Baker III (the lobby that
makes AIPAC laughable)? Baker's law firm represents
Saudi and other Arab interests and has made G_d
only knows how many millions of dollars off of
them. His law partner is U.S. Ambassador to Saudi
Arabia, and his firm represents the latter against
American 9/11 victims...!
As President George H. W. Bush's Secretary of
State, Baker promised Iraq's Saddam Hussein's
Syrian Arab twin butcher, Hafez al-Assad, a total
withdrawal from the Golan Heights...without
consulting Israel.
The Golan was lost as a result of repeated
Syrian attacks against Israel launched from the
Heights and was ruled by many different
peoples--including Jews--throughout history.
Indeed, before some imperialist trading after World
War I between the Brits and the French, the Heights
were to be part of the Mandate of Palestine. Please
visit http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/GeraldHonigman51107.htm
for further elaboration on this. Nations who
repeatedly attack neighbors have often lost lands
they launched aggression from.
Let's return to your claim in the quote above
that you'd expect Israel to return to its 1949,
9-mile wide, Auschwitz/armistice line
existence--the one which requires a magnifying
glass to find it on a map.
As a naval aviator, you were shot down defending
America's interests many thousands of miles away
from home. Recall that America has acquired
territories and bases as a result of past wars
fought all over the world. Not to mention America's
own southwest (in the President's and your own neck
of the woods)--which used to be Mexico.
Israel is not three thousand miles wide as
America is, does not have a population of some
three hundred million, and is not separated from
its enemies by two vast oceans.
The wars Israel is forced to fight are not about
projecting influence or protecting interests
thousands of miles away, but are fought for its
very survival and against murderous enemies who
deliberately target the most innocent right in its
own backyard...on land on which Jews have lived for
thousands of years.
Senator, while it's now become proper for you
and others to speak of the al-Qaida bogeyman, long
before the latter existed, other Arab organizations
just like it were disemboweling Jewish kids. By
your statement above, you apparently expect Jews to
once again expose the necks of their children to
such folks.
Neither the alleged good cop Fatah of Abbas and
his latter day, necktied Arafatians, nor the more
honest bad cops of Hamas are willing to accept a
Jewish (as in Polish, Danish, Irish, etc.)
State of Israel. Go to their websites, see their
textbooks, hear their imams, and listen to what
both tell their own people.
Israel was promised, in the wake of the '67 War,
that it would not be expected to return to the
Auschwitz lines. The final draft of UNSC Resolution
242 called for secure and recognized borders
to replace those lines; and any withdrawal at all
was to be made in the context of real peace
treaties--not Arabs' hudna ceasefire bull
manure, designed only to gain the latter time to
strengthen themselves.
Here's what President Reagan, whom you and Baker
supposedly admire, had to say about this same
subject on September 1, 1982:
In the pre-1967 borders, Israel was barely
10-miles wide...the bulk of Israel's population
within artillery range of hostile armies. I am not
about to ask Israel to live that way again.
In 1988, Secretary of State George Shultz
declared, "Israel will never negotiate from or
return to the 1967 borders."
As Ambassador Dore Gold and others continued to
also point out, right after hostilities subsided,
President Lyndon Johnson summarized the situation
this way on June 19, 1967:
A return to the situation on June 4 (the day
before outbreak of war) was not a prescription for
peace but for renewed hostilities." He then called
for "new recognized boundaries that would provide
security against terror, destruction, and
war."
Johnson was then backed up by General Earle
Wheeler of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and many
others as well. Here's a brief excerpt from
Wheeler's Pentagon document prepared for Secretary
of Defense Robert McNamara on June 29, 1967:
...Israel would require retention of some
captured Arab territory to provide militarily
defensible borders.
Keep in mind that in 1967, in Judea and Samaria
(the West Bank), Israel took these lands in
a defensive war from an illegal
occupant--Transjordan--which subsequently renamed
itself Jordan as a result of its 1949 illegal
acquisition of non-apportioned lands of the
original 1920 Mandate west of the Jordan River that
Jews as well as Arabs were legally entitled to live
on. Indeed, Jews have thousands of years of history
connecting them to these lands and owned property
and lived there up until their massacres by Arabs
in the 1920s and 1930s.
Also recall that Transjordan was itself created
by the Brits in 1922 on some 80% of the original
1920 Mandate of Palestine. The 22nd Arab
state the world insists upon--while ignoring the
continued plight of 35 million used and abused
stateless Kurds--will be the Arabs' second one in
Palestine--not their first. Additionally, many, if
not most, of the Arabs themselves were relative
newcomers, pouring in--as The Records of the
Permanent Mandates Commission and other
documentation show--from Syria, Egypt, and
elsewhere in the region.
General Wheeler's document also envisioned
Israel acquiring an adequate buffer zone atop the
West Bank mountain ridge, in command of the high
ground, giving it at least some semblance of in
depth defense.
Surely, as a military man who asserts America's
right to fight all around the world on behalf of
our own interests (which I largely agree with),
your position regarding a miniscule Israel's right
to some semblance of defensible borders is a source
of serious confusion...especially given the nature
of the enemy Israel faces.
After its total withdrawal from Gaza over two
years ago, Israel has been attacked daily
anyway--Sderot bearing most of the brunt of the
death and destruction. This is precisely what
Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, and so forth can look forward
to if Israel is forced into an updated
Chamberlain/Munich-style "peace" with either the
good cop or bad cop Arab rejectionists. Would an
America led by President McCain expose itself this
way? If not, then why bully Israel so?
Arafat's hand-picked chief lieutenant, the
"moderate" Mahmoud Abbas, heads an organization
with at least as much Jewish blood on its hands as
Hamas has. He simply sweet talks an
all-too-willingly gullible West better. Billions of
dollars are at stake, and Arafat's foreign bank
accounts are legendary.
Folks like James Baker indirectly cash in on
this too. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
already has an oil tanker named after her, not to
mention the Bush family's own substantial Arab
petrodollar connections. And fear not, the Arabs
have not ignored their Democrat buddies either, as
Jimmy Apartheid Israel Carter and Bill Clinton can
testify to. Millions of dollars were contributed to
the latter's library not long after he had Arafat
to the White House repeatedly.
The coming presidential election promises to be
a close one. There are many qualified folks who are
not tainted the way Baker and his ilk are.
All it will take is for folks who are upset with
the above (and many besides Jews are) to stay home
rather than vote at all to assure a Republican
defeat.
While some, if not many, will not vote for Obama
or Clinton, they will also not be able to vote for
Senator John McCain either.
And that, in my opinion, would be a shame.
Honigman
Archive
Gerald
A. Honigman is a Florida educator who has done
extensive doctoral studies in Middle Eastern
Affairs. He has created and conducted counter-Arab
propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured
on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has
publicly debated many Arab spokesmen. His articles
and op-eds have been published in dozens of
newspapers, magazines, academic journals and
websites all around the world. Visit his website at
http://geraldahonigman.com/.
Because
The Radical Academy publishes essays and articles
on its website does not imply acceptance or
approval of the comments or opinions expressed by
the author of the material. Nor is the Academy
responsible for any misrepresentation of the facts
included. It is your job to be a critical
reader.
|