From the Washington Post:
Obama used far stronger and more specific language than his previous remarks on some of the most contested issues in the Muslim world, including the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Although he urged Arab nations to do more to achieve peace with Israel, Obama also spoke passionately about what he called the Palestinian right to a state.
“America’s strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable,” Obama said. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied.”
Citing the destruction of six million Jews in the Nazi Holocaust, Obama said that “threatening Israeli with destruction, or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews, is deeply wrong.”
At the same time, he said, “it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people — Muslims and Christians — have suffered in pursuit of a homeland . . . They endure the daily humiliations — large and small — that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own.”
The audience, which had stayed silent while Obama described the U.S.-Israel relationship, anti-Semitism and the legacy of the Holocaust, broke into warm applause.
Obama sharply criticized Israel’s policy of settlement construction in lands occupied in the 1967 Middle East War, parts of which the Palestinians envision as their future state. He said “the United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.”
Note where the applause was. Not after mentioning the bond with Israel. Not after castigating the Arab world for Holocaust denial. But after he demanded that the Palestinians have more freedom than the Egyptians gathered before him. It will be tough to do if the Palestinians are more interested in prolonging their statelessness and keeping their grievance alive.
In a transcript of the speech, the President doesn’t mention the word “terrorism” at all. Israelly Cool observes that when it comes to the Palestinians he eschews “terrorism” for “resistance through killing.” Apparently he believes that there’s something unique about “occupation” that it deserves a special denunciation.
So it appears that the bond President Obama refers to is his effort to constrain Israel’s actions regarding its own citizens.
But he sought to explain that he represented the new face of American leadership. He did not mention the name of George W. Bush, who preceded him in office, and whose policies contributed to the mistrust.
Funny, millions of Iraqis get to vote for their own government. And that’s a reason for mistrust. Of course it is, if you’re an autocrat and wish to preserve your own power and position.
Also please see Israel Matzav, Gateway Pundit and especially Elder of Ziyon. Who’s next?
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
