Chef-D’oeuvre: Hudson Institute US Israel Symposium Simply Stellar
Much better than the new season of Smallville..
The Hudson Institute may not be a team in the MLB, but they sure know how to crack one out of the park. The topic? Particularly timely and suitably riveting for political junkies such as myself:
U.S.-Israeli Relations - Challenges to the Special Relationship.

Hudson's 3rd Panel - But they were all very very good!
The Panels? One after the other some of the most balanced I have ever seen, fantastic stuff.
Even the opening speech (usually a borefest) was particularly good, with Ambassador Oren delivering a surprisingly interesting and frankly illuminating speech clearly written specifically for the event – Unlike the usual stump speech.
Highlights:
Certainly included Daniel Levy (of Yossi Beilin, Obama tuchus licking fame) making a total ignoramus of himself (I could watch that all day), but that was just the cherry on top of what can only be described as delicious overall viewing. Look at some of these experts lined up..
Ambassador Oren; Aaron David Miller, Douglas Feith, Robert Lieber, Marty Peretz, Gabriel Schoenfeld, Martin Indyk, Elliott Abrams, David Wurmser, Michael Makovsky.
I love it, only complaint is the oddball video player at the Hudson website which makes access to this excellent content a bit difficult. If you have been following the US / Israel relationship in the age of Obama, or have had concerns over recent US policy, these panels will certainly please!
It should also be noted that one of the panels was clearly designed with the controversial J Street in mind, but J Street founder Ben-Ami was a no show. Judging by Levy’s pitiful display this was probably for the best.
I’ve seen video of dozens of think tank symposiums, hundreds of hours of c-span etc etc. This is definitely memorable stuff imho.
CrazyTown: Leveretts Make the Wrong Policy Calls.. Again.
The weirdly singular duo better known as Flynt Leverett and his wife Hillary Mann Leverett have co-authored another gem for the world to enjoy, and as per the norm the course of action they suggest and their reading of reality leaves one lacking.
A few weeks ago Flynt told everyone Ahmadinejad had legitimately won the Iranian election, and bonus.. Now more than ever this was the time to engage with Iran’s discredited leadership and make an offer! That’s a real doosie now huh? I can hear John Madden.. Boy, I sure made the wrong call on that one! I won’t start pounding out the links worth of credible criticism his little delusion garnered because frankly it isn’t necessary, the position is absurd.
I think I read this book..
Of course Flynt probably engaged in his civilized form of academic insanity for two reasons. One being he’s consistently wrong on the Middle East, and two because along with his similarly deluded co-authoring wife he’s the grand-daddy of the engagement policy with Iran, so like President Obama he is heavily invested in Iranian fantasy.
This whole concept was already pretty pie in the sky before, and everyone knew it from Hillary Clinton on down the list when Obama best exemplified it with his ‘I would meet with dictators without pre-conditions’ nonsense during the campaigns. His goal was squarely in line with the Leverett’s agenda for the Grand Bargain with radical Theocratic, Iran. Recent events have only confirmed what more realistic non-realists already knew, and made clowns of the whole lot of ‘em seemingly.
Incidentally, much of Obama’s harsh Israeli policy is mirrored in the Leverett’s own world view. The latest chef-d’oeuvre is on settlements & the peace process, a topic which Flynt despite his winning track record on being wrong, is still an expert in I gather.
Can we be more wrong? Of course we can.
Mann, who did some work stints at AIPAC in her past seems to take on the leading voice here in this weird creep me out symbiosis format they have going of shared authorship with one voice, she chastises Obama for not going even more strongly against Israel, declaring the need to call Israel’s settlements not just frozen, but illegal..
By shrinking from declaring Israeli settlement activity illegal, Obama has guaranteed that, in substance, his Middle East policy cannot depart significantly from that of George W. Bush. Obama’s insipidly favorable response to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s conditional “acceptance” of the two-state formula underscores an unfortunate continuity in America’s Middle East policy. In the end, Obama’s Middle East policy is rooted in his predecessor’s profoundly flawed 2003 road map for a two-state solution and the feckless process that Bush’s secretary of state, Condoleeza Rice launched at Annapolis in 2007. Worse, in contrast to other policy mistakes made early in his presidential tenure, Obama will be hard put to reverse the damage done by his lack of clarity and courage on the settlements issue by coming back at a later date and arguing that Israeli settlements in occupied territory are, in fact, illegal.
It’s hard to tell where she is coming from other than the fact that she clearly wants to smack Israel around a bit, the feeling after reading this trash is mutual. She discards the road map for peace agreed upon by the parties and the INTL community via the Quartet entirely, replacing it with a fantasy construct that if the USA should ‘make it so’ (declare Israel’s settlements illegal & somehow enforce this) that will magically lead to peace or something like that, from what I could decipher. It’s such wacky foreign policy I have a hard time absorbing because it isn’t reality based or logical. It’s all very Walt / Mearsheimer, I think they should get together and do a show – Maybe a Vegas act or something.
She also takes issue with the parallel nature of peace moves in the road map, effectively excusing the Palestinians of the need to halt terrorism & violence, or incitement as a requisite step to peace. In reality this is excusing them of the need to actually make peace as part of her proposed ‘peace process’. Someone needs to remind people that the concept which is flawed enough already is known as ‘land for peace’, not ‘land for padding the leftwing resume’ or ‘land for testing out insane theories at your allies expense’.
Of course it all makes more sense a few more paragraphs into this 3 page delusion festival, when she makes the case for simply imposing the peace on the parties, including imposing US determined terms for all the key final status issues which US longstanding policy advocates is to be negotiated between the parties themselves. It’s all ok though since one gathers the US no longer stands by US policy commitments in the age of Obama as evidenced in dealings with Israel over settlements.
Piling On..
Mann also rationalizes these delusions by stating that Ariel Sharon’s friendly tenure along with GW Bush did not result in anything advancing the cause of peace!? Instead it is better to slap Israel around I take it and put some hostility into the relationship by pressuring Israel to make concessions its electorate rejects. This is a delusion so deep one needs to depressurize one’s ears coming out of it. It illustrates nicely why ground breaking massive concessions like withdrawal from Gaza and razing our settlements bought us nothing from those hostile to Israel. Not even acknowledgment of our monstrous sacrifice and efforts for peace contrasted with the Palestinians total failure in every realm imaginable as a people.
Hard to reconcile her outlandish views. If not for the confidence Israel had in the American Israel relationship under those leaders we would never have entertained Gaza withdrawal. Without some serious confidence building by Obama in regards to the US administration (never mind the Palestinian Israel relationship) there is only going to be ever growing mass resistance to American policy & blatant interference in our country. Overall, Mann dishes out here foreign policy totally removed from reality, but in line with the J-Street ultra left wing view currently pervasive in Obama’s administration to which one assumes the duo are now even more left of (after serving under the Bush terms). The Leveretts have been consistently mistaken, their policy ideas discredited by events themselves and history, I don’t see much changing in light of their recent articles.
Our PM Netanyahu may say rosie words about the relationship because he’s our elected politician and that’s his job, but there can be little doubt that the hostility toward Israel has been felt by the public here and their willingness to make concessions or take risks for peace are diminished by Obama’s policies thus far, I can’t see how strangling Israel even further brings the prospect for peace closer.. Maybe she is trying to deflect the criticism of Obama as anti-Israel by cajoling for him to take an even more extreme harsh line but if anything, the delusions she puts forth and the extreme nature of these views hardly accomplishes that task. It only highlights how extreme you need to actually get in order to ‘outflank Obama on Obama policy’ these days..
Bravery: Voight Stands Up to Call Out Obama, Defend Israel (Video)
Jon Voight, calls Obama’s policies ‘disastrous’. Asks if we are supposed to just wait while a new Holocaust develops, hammers the President on his arrogance for presuming to know & dictate to Israel what is best.. He is clearly concerned for both America, and Israel’s well being.
What can you say other than thank you Mr Voight?
I praise his bravery, because he says what many Americans no doubt think but have no venue or opportunity to express today with such wall to wall media adulation for Obama, and his cult like atmosphere. The Chicago community organizer turned President of the United States based on his ability to read a teleprompter! It is truly historic, and for more reasons than just having a man with African lineage elected to the White House. As for me here in Israel, what can I say? We knew the guy was a socialist, had ties to black liberation theology which is deeply tied to the American ‘Nation of Islam’ and the Farrakhans of the world, non of it is surprising or shocking sadly.
We saw over & over how for political expediency Obama was willing to toss everyone & anyone under the bus. We knew he was a Palestinian sympathizer, we knew he wanted to ‘engage with’ and pander to the worst rogue regimes.. One could go on listing a litany of facts that we all knew. We saw him pledge not to divide Jerusalem at AIPAC only to do a full 180 the VERY NEXT DAY. In that same speech we saw him promise to NEVER pressure Israel for concessions which might harm her security, yet one of the 1st things he did in office was.. Pressure Israel for dangerous concessions, and it has only now just begun.
Here in Israel we will do our best no doubt to ride it out, but I for one am grateful for our true friends in the USA, and if I haven’t been clear enough until now – Obama is certainly not one of them. Both Jon Voight & Obama visited Sderot to witness the Hamas terrorism first hand, both had strong words of support for our struggle with these terrorists, ironically it appears as if one of them was ‘acting’, it wasn’t Jon Voight.


