Israel’s new lawyer: Hillary Clinton

[LiberalArkie]

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.610007

She sees the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through Bibi’s eyes, which could be the reason she gets so much wrong.

Who’s the Israeli government’s best spokesperson? Ron Dermer? Michael Oren? Bibi himself? Nope. It’s Hillary Clinton. In her interview on Sunday with Jeffrey Goldberg, Clinton offered the most articulate, sophisticated, passionate defense of Netanyahu’s conduct I’ve heard from a government official on either side of the Atlantic. Unfortunately, important chunks of it aren’t true.

Let’s take her claims in turn.

In his first term, Netanyahu moved towards a Palestinian state

Clinton began her defense of Bibi by noting that in his first term, in the late 1990s, he had “give[n] up territory” and “moved in that direction [towards a Palestinian state], as hard as it was.”

<snip>

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.610007

[Electric Monk]

1. The full text is available for subscribers & registered users.

I'm not a subscriber.

[Spider Jerusalem]

3. Google the URL and click the "cached" link;

you'll be able to read the whole thing.

[KoKo]

4. I couldn't find the cached link....

I just get links to the Premium subscriber article? Where do I find "cached link?"

Maybe it's too recent?

[Spider Jerusalem]

5. Here:

http://is.gd/2SymK4

[KoKo]

6. Thank You!

[monmouth3]

2. Too bad she can't support her own President who gave her a job in the first place..Ugh..n/t

[KoKo]

7. Another snip from end of article:

Clinton again and again endorse Netanyahu’s view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict even when it contradicts long-standing American positions? Because she’s so willing to see the world through his eyes. Notice how she begins her statement about security control of the West Bank: “If I were the prime minister of Israel.” There’s nothing wrong with that. U.S. officials should understand, and empathize with, Israeli leaders, even right-wing ones. But what’s missing from Clinton’s interview is any willingness to do the same for Palestinians. If it’s so easy to understand why some Israelis might want perpetual military control of the West Bank, why can’t Clinton understand why Palestinians - after living for almost fifty years under a foreign army - might not want it to indefinitely patrol their supposedly independent state.

One of the hallmarks of Barack Obama’s statements about Israel and Palestine, going back to his 2008 presidential campaign, has been his insistence on giving voice to the fears and aspirations of both sides. Writing about his trip to Israel in The Audacity of Hope, Obama wrote that, “I talked to Jews who’d lost parents in the Holocaust and brothers in suicide bombings; I heard Palestinians talk of the indignities of checkpoints and reminisce about the land they had lost.” In Jerusalem last March, he spoke movingly, and in detail about the Jewish story, but also asked Israelis to “put yourself in their [the Palestinians] shoes. Look at the world through their eyes.” In her interview with Goldberg, that’s exactly what Clinton does not do. Her interpretations of recent Israeli-Palestinian history reflect from a deep imbalance: a willingness to see reality through Israeli eyes and an almost total refusal to do the same for Palestinians.

“For far too long,” wrote Aaron Miller in 2005, “many American officials involved in Arab-Israeli peacemaking, myself included, have acted as Israel's attorney, catering and coordinating with the Israelis at the expense of successful peace negotiations.” From the beginning, Barack Obama has tried to avoid that. Although he hasn’t brokered Israeli-Palestinian peace, he has tried to make good on his campaign promise to “hold up a mirror” to both sides. In Hillary Clinton, by contrast, at least judging from her interview on Sunay, Israel has yet another lawyer. And a very good one at that.

[Ichingcarpenter]

8. Bullet points from the interview.

Archer on Hillary's foreign policies.

[KoKo]

11. Good Campaign Ads...OPPOSITION...when we get to that. Thanks.......!

Recommend.

[Trillo]

9. Well, if the title is true, then we're deep in imperialism

and lack of representation for common folks. Do average Americans have more in common with Palestinians than those who run everything here in the U.S. want us to believe?

[Marrah_G]

10. I will not vote for her