If there was any question about whether or not Hillary Clinton was running for president, it was erased by her interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic. In a far-ranging foreign policy discussion, Clinton who only supports Israel when she is running for office, announced her strong support of the Jewish State’s actions in Gaza:
“I think Israel did what it had to do to respond to the rockets,” Clinton said. Israel, she added, may have made some mistakes that led to civilian casualties, but that is what happens in the “fog of war.”
“I don’t know a nation … that hasn’t made errors, but ultimately the responsibility rests with Hamas,” Clinton said, pointing to the terrorist group’s rocket attacks against Israel and the way its fighters base their operations in civilian areas.
Clinton criticized the “enormous international reaction” against Israel, calling it “uncalled for and unfair,” especially in comparison to the relatively more tepid responses to the far greater death toll in Syria and Russian aggression against Ukraine.
“You can’t ever discount anti-Semitism,” she added, “especially with what’s going on in Europe today.
Forgive me for not believing the former Secretary of State, but except for the times she needed New York’s Jewish voting bloc — the time from her first campaign for New York’s Senate seat in 2000 to her resignation from the Senate to become Secretary of State in January 2009 — Hillary Clinton has never been pro-Israel. And now that she is running for president once again she is peeing on the legs of Israel supporters and telling us it is raining.
Now that she is running for president, all of a sudden she is once again a supporter of Israel.
Even before her marriage to Bill, Hillary Clinton was opposing Israel and promoting the forces of terrorism. In his book American Evita, on page 49, Christopher Anderson writes.
At a time when elements of the American Left embraced the Palestinian cause and condemned Israel, Hillary was telling friends that she was “sympathetic” to the terrorist organization and admired its flamboyant leader, Yasser Arafat. When Arafat made his famous appearance before the UN General Assembly in November 1974 wearing his revolutionary uniform and his holster on his hip, Bill “was outraged like everybody else,” said a Yale Law School classmate. But not Hillary, who tried to convince Bill that Arafat was a “freedom fighter” trying to free his people from their Israeli “oppressors.”
On page 50 the author relates an experience that Hillary and and her future husband had during a trip to Arkansas in 1973.
It was during this trip to his home state that Bill took Hillary to meet a politically well-connected friend. When they drove up to the house, Bill and Hillary noticed that a menorah-the seven branched Hebrew candelabrum (not to be confused with the more common and subtler mezuzah) had been affixed to the front door.
“My daddy was half Jewish,” explained Bill’s friend. “One day when he came to visit, my daddy placed the menorah on my door because he wanted me to be proud that we were part Jewish. And I wasn’t about to say no to my daddy.”
To his astonishment, as soon as Hillary saw the menorah, she refused to get out of the car. “Bill walked up to me and said that she was hot and tired, but later he explained the real reason.” According to the friend and another eyewitness, Bill said, “I’m sorry, but Hillary’s really tight with the people in the PLO in New York. They’re friends of hers, and she just doesn’t feel right about the menorah.”
Hillary’s attitude did not change when she became first lady. In May 1998, Mrs. Clinton became the first member of any presidential administration ever to call for a Palestinian state. She told a youth conference on Middle East peace in Switzerland that she supported the eventual creation of an independent Palestinian state. Her spokesperson, Marsha Berry told reporters: “These remarks are her own personal view.”
In November 1999, while on a purported State visit to the Middle East, she publicly appeared with Yasser Arafat’s wife Suha. Mrs. Arafat made a slanderous false allegation, saying, “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 gave the terrorist’s wife hug and a kiss when she finished speaking.
Later, many hours after the event, and only after a media furor put her on the spot for what many viewed as a bit more than a mere political “boo boo, Mrs. Clinton called on all sides to refrain from “inflammatory rhetoric and baseless accusations,” including Israel, whose 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. Only years later did she make feeble attempt at an excuse: the translator screwed up.
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 Arab world, and a major commerce and shipping point for the “business-side” of terrorism. Bill and Hilary are major friends of Dubai, to the point where the Clinton Foundation has established Dubai Study departments in universities in the US and London. They worked hard at granting legitimacy to this Jew-hating, terrorist-supporting nation.
While she was running for President in 2007, San Francisco Examiner columnist P.J. Corkery wrote that Clinton made $10 million a year from Yucaipa, a Dubai firm. Ron Berkle, the owner of Yucaipa companies was a major fund-raiser for Bill and Hillary.
The Clintons also had a connection to the worlds biggest exporter of terrorism, Saudi Arabia. The Saudi royal family donated $10,000,000 to the Clinton Library.
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 Mrs. Clinton became a vocal supporter of Israel because she needed the Jewish vote.
One of her first actions after leaving the Senate to become 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. Five years later, her call for the end of building is still haunting Israeli/Palestinian peace talks.
As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton first demanded the “settlement” freeze in 2009 and was quickly backed up by Barack 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
This was a major error by the Clinton State Department and it was compounded by their inclusion of Jerusalem in the mix and the constant public berating of the Jewish State by Clinton and Obama.
Clinton’s demand for a building freeze in existing settlement communities broke a US/Israel agreement made during the Bush administration. Mrs. Clinton said there was never an agreement between Israel and the US about natural expansion of existing settlements. But Elliot Abrams, who negotiated the agreement for the United States said Clinton’s contention is simply not true.
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.
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 until September 2010, three weeks before the freeze ended.
As the end of the construction halt approached, the US began to negotiate with 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 oral deal with Clinton and the Obama administration was worth the paper on which it was printed upon.
The written offer never came; the Secretary of State wasn’t negotiating in good faith. Instead Mrs. 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 was on its way. Hillary Clinton misled Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. According to a source, a senior diplomat with inside knowledge of Netanyahu’s recent meetings in Washington, Clinton made commitments when talking to Netanyahu, but later slipped out of them by claiming that she had not been speaking on behalf of U.S. President Obama – who, she said in the end, did not give his approval.
In 2011 speaking at the at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the liberal Brookings Institute, Clinton expressed concern for Israel’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.
She 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. But in Iran the women would have been lashed or executed. In Israel they sang, but the people who felt it was against their religious beliefs walked out. Most senior officers in the IDF supported the women’s right to sing.
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.
Now Hillary Clinton is running for President. She will campaign on the basis that she is a friend of Israel, just as Barack Obama did in 2008. The truth is 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 her entire life, with the exception of the nine-year period where she ran for and held the office of U.S. Senator from New York State.