After two Palestinians killed 4 diners in a Tel Aviv restaurant and wounding others before being caught alive, the New York Times writes about how Israelis find solidarity in the aftermath of the attack.
The mainstream media isn’t covering the attack. But The State Department made a statement about it. Deputy Spokesperson Mark C. Toner made it clear how the administration feels about the attack and how if feels about Israel’s response to it.
He made it clear that the United States did not share the solidarity subsequent to that attack that Israelis are feeling. Instead, he admonished Israel five times to not over-react. Not to “escalate tensions any further.” Translation, leave them to fight another day.
This is – I think a couple thoughts on that is – one is that we would just hope that any measures that Israel takes would be designed to not escalate tensions any further. But we certainly respect their desire to express outrage and to protect the safety of their people.
I think what I’m trying to say, Arshad, is that we understand the Israeli Government’s desire to protect its citizenry, or its citizens rather, after this kind of terrorist attack, and we strongly support that right. But we would hope that any measures it takes are designed to – would also take into consideration the impact on Palestinian citizens, or civilians rather, who are just going – trying to go about their daily lives.
And why I prefaced my response by saying that we understand their desire to protect their citizens and to send a message, but we would only urge that any measures that it takes be done under – with the consideration towards the many innocent Palestinians who are simply trying to go about their daily lives.
I think ultimately, first of all, that’s something for the Israeli Government to ultimately decide about, decide on. I’m just simply trying to give a full sense of the dynamics here, which are that this is going to affect thousands of Palestinian civilians who are, again, just trying to go about their daily lives.
Said, again – and let me be very clear – we condemn yesterday’s attack. We completely understand the right of Israeli authorities to ensure the security of their civilians and to carry out measures that they believe will, in fact, provide for that security. I would simply caution – and we’ve said this before – that in carrying out those kinds of measures that they do take into consideration the impact on innocent Palestinians and that they exercise restraint.
Exactly the wrong response to an ally responding to acts of war from a country, or territory, with an elected government that refuses to recognize Israel’s right to exist and, wants them dead. They are no longer renegade terrorists. They are a duly elected terrorist state that has been (with Iran’s help) lobbing missiles at Israel and using suicide bombers for decades. The Palestinian people are the ones who elected Hamas. They have democratically and simultaneously picked their fight and chose their fate. To make matters worse, which explains the administration’s adversarial attitude towards Israel, the United States has been and still is giving $400 million a year to the terrorist government in Gaza, Hamas.
Have you heard similar admonitions of France or Belgium after they were attacked? That the Obama administration is on the wrong side of the war on terror is not even debatable. The mere fact that Raqqa, the ISIS capital, has not been leveled two years ago, and their oil assets were not attacked (pin pricked as they were) until Donald Trump called them on it, is all the evidence you need to come to that conclusion. And that’s if you don’t count the previous post.
Links: Israelis Find Rare Moment of Solidarity in Aftermath of Tel Aviv Shootings | Tel Aviv attack: Israel clamps down on Palestinians | GAZA SOLUTION THE SAME | U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians
always. Not to let a crisis go to waste. That’s what this is about. In this case, he makes the case for taking away our rights to defend ourselves, a constitutional right, for his inability to protect us from terrorism. In other words, to protect us from the terrorist invasion that he is creating, his response is to disarm law-abiding citizens. This might makes sense if you are a Mullah in Iran, or an ISIS terrorist. But it does make sense to Barack Hussein Obama.
This law was written in 1952. It was passed by a Democrat-controlled Congress, House and Senate, and signed by a Democrat president… Everybody in the establishment in the political class, Republican, Democrat, media, you name it, is all claiming that what Trump said is dumb, stupid, reckless, dangerous, unconstitutional, while it is the law of the land. And it was utilized by Jimmy Carter, no less, in 1979 to keep Iranians out.
