Please disable your Ad Blocker in order to interact with the site.

Much of the mainstream media spent the weekend urging first debate moderator Lester Holt to act as the the ‘truth squad.”  But strangely when they have had the opportunity to point out the hypocrisy in Hillary’s positions they ignore the truth. One issue I have been following for the past ten years or so is her relationship with the Jewish State. Sure she claims to be a friend of Israel, but just a little fact checking will prove that Hillary Clinton’s anti-Israel.

If one looks at Hillary Clinton’s public history one finds a lifetime of anti-Israel positions. But wait some might say, Hillary was a big supporter of Israel when she was in the U.S. Senate. Indeed, she was. With the possible exception of the time from her first campaign New York’s Senate seat in 2000 to her resignation from the Senate to become Secretary of State in January 2009– except for the time she needed New York’s Jewish voting bloc, Hillary Clinton has never been pro-Israel.   Some might even claim that she is also anti-Semitic. However, her issues in that area is probably a result of being uncomfortable with observant people of any faith.

In May 1998 Ms. Clinton became the first person attached to any presidential administration ever to call for a Palestinian State. Think about that for a moment, nobody in the Carter administration made that demand, neither did anyone in the Reagan administration. Heck even in the Bush 41 presidency whose secretary of state James Baker once advised, “F**k the Jews they won’t vote for us anyway,” no one ever called for a Palestinian state. It took Hillary Clinton to “break the ice.” She told a youth conference on Middle East peace in Switzerland, that she supports the eventual creation of an independent Palestinian state. Her spokesperson, Marsha Berry quickly told reporters: “These remarks are her own personal view.”

In November 1999, while first lady, she went on a purported state visit to the Middle East. Hillary was at a public appearance with Yasser Arafat’s wife Suha, and listened to Mrs. Arafat made a slanderous allegation:

“Our [Palestinian] people have been submitted to the daily and intensive use of poisonous gas by the Israeli forces, which has led to an increase in cancer cases among women and children.” Suha also accused Israel of contaminating much of the water sources used by Palestinians with “chemical materials” and poisoning Palestinian women and children with toxic gases.”

Mrs. Clinton sat by silently listening to a real-time translation, and the gave the terrorist’s a wife hug and kiss when she finished speaking.

ShowImage

Later, many hours after the event, and only after a media furor put her on the spot for what many view as a bit more than a mere political “boo boo– Mrs. Clinton called on all sides to refrain from “inflammatory rhetoric and baseless accusations.” She included Israel even though her leaders made no such accusations.

Glossing over this repugnant affair, Hillary Clinton has yet to specifically contradict and denounce the monstrous lies uttered by Yasser Arafat’s wife in her presence. Years later she did attempt to make feeble attempt at an excuse—the translator screwed up.

In July 2015 she did the same thing. While taking questions during a campaign appearance at the Brookland Baptist Church, Columbia SC South Carolina,  a woman asked three questions at once.  The first query was about solving poverty, the second was about the three-strike law, and the third:

My third question is about Israel, we spend too much money, $6 billion dollars to Israel funding apartheid! There is not the shared values that we are supposed to share with Israel!

Ms. Clinton was silent about question number three, once again she had the opportunity to show that she was a friend of the Jewish State and correct a slander and once again she was silent. This time however she couldn’t blame the translator.

 

Before her tenure in the State Department, Bill and Hillary Clinton made mega dollars from their extensive involvement with Dubai. Besides being a leader in the movement to boycott Israel, Dubai is the “Hong Kong” of the terrorist world. I learned about Dubai last year when the daughter of a friend of our family got married there. We checked after we received the invitation and learned that anyone with a passport with a stamp showing they once traveled to Israel would not be allowed into the country. Bill and Hilary are major friends of Dubai, to the point where the Clinton Foundation have established Dubai Study departments in universities in the US and London. They worked hard at granting legitimacy to this Jew-hating, terrorist supporting nation.

According to a 1993 New York Times article, Prince Turki bin Feisal was a college classmate of Bill’s at Georgetown University and (at the time of the article’s writing) was the head of the Saudi Arabian intelligence service. While he was still governor of Arkansas, it looks like Bill Clinton cashed in on that relationship, “work[ing] hard to secure a multimillion-dollar Saudi donation to a Middle Eastern studies program at the University of Arkansas.” Due to the intervention of the Gulf War, the first installment of $3.5 million didn’t arrive until 1992, with another $20 million arriving after Bill Clinton’s first inauguration.

During her Senate years Ms. Clinton became a vocal supporter of Israel because she needed the Jewish vote. But one of her first actions after leaving the Senate and becoming Secretary of State was to ignore a previous deal with Israel and call for the end of the construction of new homes in existing settlement neighborhoods.

As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was the first in the administration to call for a “settlement” freeze in 2009 and was quickly backed up by Obama. What she perceived as a minor concession (a “settlement” freeze including no new housing units in existing communities) was for Israel a grave sacrifice. For all intents and purposes Clinton was telling Israeli parents their married children could no longer live in their neighborhoods

Clinton’s demand for a building freeze in existing settlement communities broke a US/Israel agreement made during the Bush administration.  While she said there was never an agreement between Israel and the US about natural expansion of existing settlements,  Elliot Abrams who negotiated the agreement for the United States said Ms. Clinton’s contention is simply not true.

This was a major error by the Clinton State Department and it was compounded by the inclusion of Jerusalem in the mix and the constant public berating of the Jewish State by Clinton and Obama that as we know, continued even after she left the administration.

Immediately the Palestinians seized upon the Hillary-created settlement issue. Seeing an opportunity to avoid talking, they used the administration’s demands, to make a “settlement” freeze a precondition to further talks even though there were negotiations and construction going on simultaneously before Hilary Clinton became Secretary of State.

This was a major error by the Clinton State Department and it was compounded by the inclusion of Jerusalem in the mix and the constant public berating of the Jewish State by Clinton and Obama. But mostly Ms. Clinton.

As a matter of fact in July 2014 she bragged to CNN’s Fareed Zakaria that she was the  administration’s designated yeller, her responsibility was to scream at Israel:

 And I was often the designated yeller. Something would happen, a new settlement announcement would come and I would call him up, “What are you doing, you’ve got to stop this.”

 

As Secretary of State, Hillary acted as if the Jewish State would give her cooties, compared to others in her position she stayed away from Israel.:

… Clinton made only five visits to Israel — the least of any full-term secretary of state since William Rogers, who served in the Nixon administration.” (Glenn Kessler, “Hillary Clinton’s Overseas Diplomacy Versus Other Secretaries, “The Washington Post”)

3-708a646e6d

 

In August 2009 Prime Minister Netanyahu announced a ten-month “settlement” freeze. It was approved by the cabinet and implemented on November 25, 2009 and was to run till September 25, 2010. Despite pressure from the United States, the Palestinians refused to join any talks the first 9+ months of the freeze; they did not come to the negotiation table till September 2010, three weeks before the freeze ended.

As the end of the construction halt approached, the US began to negotiate with the Israel to extend the freeze. Based on their experience with Clinton denying the deal negotiated by Elliot Abrams during the Bush Administration, Israel demanded that any proposal be presented in writing, as any they considered any oral deal with Clinton and the Obama administration was worth the paper on which is was printed on.

The written offer never came because Clinton, the Secretary of State wasn’t negotiating in good faith. Instead Ms. Clinton was playing “Bait and Switch.” As Israel waited for a letter clarifying America’s guarantees in exchange for a proposed building ban for Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria, a diplomatic source finally came forward saying that no such letter is on its way. Hillary Clinton misled Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The source, a senior diplomat with inside knowledge of Netanyahu’s recent meetings in Washington, said Clinton made commitments when talking to Netanyahu, but later slipped out of her commitments by claiming that she had not been speaking on behalf of U.S. President Obama, did not the end, did not give his approval.

In 2011 speaking at the at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy part of the liberal Brookings Institute, Clinton trashed Israel by expressing concern for Jewish State’s social climate in the wake of limitations regarding female singing in the IDF and gender segregation on public transportation. Both were accommodations made to the Orthodox communities in Israel and Hillary’s complaints were based on false information.

Clinton referred to the decision of some IDF soldiers to leave an event where female soldiers were singing; she said it reminded her of the situation in Iran. It did? Wow! In Iran the women would have been lashed or executed. In Israel they were allowed to sing, and the people who felt it was against their religious beliefs were allowed to walk out. That’s it! Most senior officers in the IDF supported the women’s right to sing. That’s called religious freedom.

Clinton also spoke of her shock that some Jerusalem buses had assigned separate seating areas for women. “It’s reminiscent of Rosa Parks,” she said, taking the typical progressive position that faith should not matter outside a place of worship.  Clinton’s statement was part of the continued attempt by the Obama administration/Clinton State Department to de-legitimize the Israeli democracy and destroy one of the reasons for American support of Israel, the fact it is the only democracy in the Middle East.

And then there was her book “Hard Choices” which included some of Clinton’s anti-Israel passages:

When we left the city and visited Jericho, in the West Bank, I got my first glimpse of life under occupation for Palestinians, who were denied the dignity and self-determination that Americans take for granted” (pg. 302).

She says nothing about terrorism, such as blowing up buses with school children, nothing about the fact that during the presidency of her husband Yassir Arafat walked away from a great peace deal (at least that’s what Bill Clinton said).

“The sticking point would be Jerusalem. East Jerusalem had been captured along with the West bank in 1967, and Palestinians dreamed of one day establishing the capital of their future state there.” (pg. 317).

Hillary’s statement is totally biased. Israel didn’t capture Jerusalem; Jordan did in 1948. Jews were the majority of the Jerusalem Population from 1844 through the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 when they were kicked out by Jordan.  In fact, Muslims were the third largest religion in the city until about 1890.  The Palestinian’s want East Jerusalem as their capital because they don’t want Israel to have it.

Even after the Bar Kochba revolt in 135 CE when the Romans punished the Jews for revolting by changing the name of their country from Judea to Palestinia (after the Philistines the ancient enemy of the Jewish people who no longer existed) and the name of the holy city from Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina (literally Capitoline Hill of the House of Aelius), most of the world recognized the Holy Land and Jerusalem as Jewish. The truth of the matter is that even ancient Muslim writings recognized Jerusalem as a Jewish City.

“There has been nearly a decade of terror, arising from the second intifada, which started in September 2000. About a thousand Israelis were killed and eight thousand wounded in terrorist attacks from September 2000 to February 2005. Three times as many Palestinians were killed and thousands more were injured in the same period.” (pg. 308).

Like many who are anti-Israel Hillary Clinton draws a false equivalency between the terrorist attacks on Israel and Israel’s attempts to defend herself.  To maintain her ridiculous logic, the US should be chastised because more al Qaeda terrorists died than Americans were killed on 9/11/01.

The second intifada followed soon after Yassir Arafat walked away from what Bill Clinton called “the best deal any Palestinian leader will ever get.”

The second intifada was a horrible period of Palestinian terrorism against Israeli civilians, bus loads of children blown up, pizza places bombed, even a hotel where families were celebrating the Passover Seder in peace. There is no equivalence between the attacks and Israel’s attempts to defend herself. According to Yasser Arafat’s wife, it was not a spontaneous terrorist uprising, but a pre-planned surge planned out by the late murderer. 

Sbarro Jerusalem Bombing
“Because of higher birth rates among Palestinians and lower birth rates among Israelis, we were approaching the day when Palestinians would make up a majority of the combined population of Israel and the Palestinian territories, and most of those Palestinians would be relegated to second-class citizenship and unable to vote.” (pg. 312)

The page 312 quote was reminiscent of John Kerry’s apartheid remark (which he backed away from).  What the deputy defense minister at the time Danny Danon said about Kerry’s remark applies here also:

To suggest that the Jewish people would ever establish an apartheid regime was particularly hurtful.

Equally hurtful was the implied double standard. Although the administration has from time to time chided the Palestinians for “unhelpful” steps, those comments have not come close to the pointed criticism that has been leveled at our government. This policy of sharing the blame for the collapse of the peace talks, which from the outset was deemed by most independent experts as a long-shot attempt at best, has created the illusion of parity between the two sides. The secretary’s comments make it seem that Israel’s decisions to issue housing tenders, or to exhaustively debate whether to release convicted murders who would have very likely received the death penalty in U.S. courts, were just as damaging to the peace process as the “unity” pact that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has now signed with Hamas, a virulently anti-Semitic terrorist organization.

And then there are the Clinton emails. While most of the media coverage of the emails from her close friend Sidney Blumenthal are about his recommendations about Libya. Blumenthal sent many emails about Israel. Some of them consisted of forwarding articles from his anti-Semitic son, writer Max Blumenthal.  But others were recommendations of policy, generally one sided describing Israel as the oppressor. As reported by NRO:

Blumenthal sent dozens of e-mails advising Clinton on Israel in 2010. Before her March speech at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Blumenthal sent Clinton a breathless article from left-wing Israeli writer Uri Avnery accusing the Netanyahu government of “starting a rebellion” against the United States and defending interests that diverge from America’s. “I have to speak to AIPAC tomorrow,” Clinton responded. “How — and should I — use this [sic]?” Blumenthal promised to send another memo the next day.

 

In that memo, he instructed Clinton to “hold Bibi [Netanyahu]’s feet to the fire” on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. “Perhaps most controversial,” he continued, would be for Clinton to “remind [AIPAC] in as subtle but also direct a way as you can that it does not have a monopoly over American Jewish opinion. Bibi is stage managing US Jewish organizations (and neocons, and the religious right, and whomever else he can muster) against the administration. AIPAC itself has become an organ of the Israeli right, specifically Likud.”

By the way, if you asked Likud, they would claim that AIPAC favors Israel’s leftist parties.

On May 17, Blumenthal forwarded Clinton an article on the Israeli government’s decision to deny professor and Palestinian activist Noam Chomsky access to the West Bank. “Barring him for his political opinions has created a needless PR disaster,” he wrote. “The US should not be a passive onlooker. . . . The US effort on his behalf to gain entry should be part of the story.” Clinton forwarded the memo to staff with instructions to “pls print 3 copies.”

Chomsky has been fierce in his opposition to Israel’s right to defend herself from terrorism (some even say he is an anti-Semite), and had been officially banned from the country since 2010

In an e-mail from May 31 entitled “Several observations on the Israeli raid,” Blumenthal blames Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu’s family inferiority complex for his decision to launch a raid on the so-called “Gaza Flotilla,” a group of ships seeking to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza. “Bibi desperately seeks his father’s approbation and can never equal his dead brother,” Blumenthal wrote. He then hinted that the raid was deliberately orchestrated to kill the peace process and humiliate President Obama before his scheduled visit with the prime minister. Clinton forwarded the message to Jake Sullivan, her deputy chief of staff at the State Department. “FYI and I told you so,” she wrote

Consider long-time Clintonite Sandy Berger:

[In] September 2010 [Berger] sent Ms. Clinton ideas on how to pressure Israel to make concessions for peace. Mr. Berger acknowledged “how fragile Abbas’ political position [is],” and how “Palestinians are in disarray” and that “[f]ailure is a real possibility.” Mr. Berger was well aware, and informed Ms. Clinton, of the very real possibility that Israel would be placing its national security at grave risk in a deal that would very likely fail and lead to a Hamas takeover. But Mr. Berger felt the risks to Israeli lives were worth it. He advised making Mr. Netanyahu feel “uneasy about incurring our displeasure…”

Astoundingly, Mr. Berger seemed to accuse the Jews in America of racism toward Obama. “At a political level, the past year has clearly demonstrated the degree to which the U.S. has been hamstrung by its low ratings in Israel and among important segments of the domestic Jewish constituency,” he writes. “Domestically, he faces a reservoir of skepticism on this issue which reflects many factors, including inexcusable prejudice.”

Now consider Anne Marie Slaughter, Clinton’s director of policy planning from 2009 to 2011:

She wrote Ms. Clinton in September 2010, devising a scheme to encourage wealthy philanthropists to pledge millions to the Palestinians (which no doubt would have been embezzled by Abbas and his cronies, as were other funds). Ms. Slaughter writes, “This may be a crazy idea… Suppose we launched a ‘Pledge for Palestine’ campaign… Such a campaign among billionaires/multimillionaires around the world would reflect a strong vote of confidence in the building of a Palestinian state.”

She adds, “There would also be a certain shaming effect re Israelis, who would be building settlements in the face of a pledge for peace.”

Here’s how Clinton responded to this call for aiding “Palestine” and “shaming Israelis”: “I am very interested-pls flesh out. Thx.”

Now Hillary Clinton is running for President. And she is campaigning on the basis that she is a friend of Israel, just as she did in the Senate, just as Obama did twice.

As Secretary of State she was the architect of the policy of the most anti-Israel president since the rebirth of Israel in 1948. It was a policy which reflected views she has held most of her life. A belief she put into action exception of the nine-year period where she ran for and held the office of U.S. Senator from New York State. Let’s hope the Republican who gets the nod will not let the former Secretary of State get away with hiding her true past, because sadly the mainstream media only fact-checks what they want.

Become a Lid Insider

Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Send this to friend