Trump chickens out again.

[webfact]

Trumps pick for ambassador to Israel sparks hot debate

By JOSH LEDERMAN

 

NEW YORK (AP) — If President-elect Donald Trump wanted to show he planned to obliterate President Barack Obama's approach to Israel, he might have found his man to deliver that message in David Friedman, his pick for U.S. ambassador.

 

The bankruptcy lawyer and son of an Orthodox rabbi is everything Obama is not: a fervent supporter of Israeli settlements, opponent of Palestinian statehood and unrelenting defender of Israel's government. So far to the right is Friedman that many Israel supporters worry he could push Israel's hawkish Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to be more extreme, scuttling prospects for peace with Palestinians in the process.

 

The heated debate over Friedman's selection is playing out just as fresh tensions erupt between the U.S. and Israel.

 

In a stunning decision Friday, the Obama administration moved to allow the U.N. Security Council to pass a resolution condemning Israeli settlements as illegal. The move to abstain, rather than veto, defied years of U.S. tradition of shielding Israel from such resolutions, and elicited condemnation from Israel, lawmakers of both parties, and especially Trump.

 

"Things will be different after Jan. 20th," when he's sworn in, Trump vowed Friday on Twitter. On Monday, he added: "The United Nations has such great potential but right now it is just a club for people to get together, talk and have a good time. So sad!"

 

Presidents of both parties have long called for a two-state solution that envisions eventual Palestinian statehood, and Netanyahu says he agrees. Friedman, who still must be confirmed by the Senate, does not. He's called the two-state solution a mere "narrative" that must end.

 

Under Obama, the U.S. has worked closely with J Street, an Israel advocacy group sharply critical of Netanyahu. Friedman accuses Obama of "blatant anti-Semitism" and calls J Street "worse than kapos," a reference to Jews who helped the Nazis imprison fellow Jews during the Holocaust.

 

For decades, the U.S. has opposed Israeli settlement-building in lands it seized in the 1967 Mideast war. Friedman runs a nonprofit that raises millions of dollars for Beit El, a settlement of religious nationalists near Ramallah. Beit El runs a right-wing news outlet and a yeshiva whose dean has provocatively urged Israeli soldiers to refuse orders to uproot settlers from their homes.

 

So it's unsurprising that Friedman's nomination has already sharpened a growing balkanization of American Jews, between those who want the U.S. to push Israel toward peace and those who believe Obama's approach abandoned America's closest Mideast ally.

 

It's a debate playing out even at Temple Hillel, near the Long Island-Queens border, where Friedman's father was rabbi for almost half a century.

 

"Clearly, David's opinions do not appeal to everybody in the synagogue, and they appeal to others in the synagogue," said Ken Fink, the synagogue's president and longtime congregant. "But there's a huge amount of pride for the hometown boy."

 

Thirty-two years before Trump's election, President Ronald Reagan donned a yarmulke and noshed on chicken cutlets and noodle pudding at Rabbi Morris Friedman's home, after a speech at Temple Hillel affirming the separation between church and state.

 

Coming just two weeks before Reagan's re-election, the attempt to woo Jewish voters struck some as opportunistic, and they protested on the streets of the heavily Jewish town of North Woodmere.

 

Seated at the Sabbath table with Reagan was David Melech Friedman — his middle name means "king" in Hebrew. The rabbi's son went on to become Trump's bankruptcy lawyer, an advocate for far-right policies on Israel, and now, Trump's choice for ambassador, despite having no diplomatic experience.

 

Cindy Grosz, who said she's known Friedman for nearly 50 years, recalled big parties with boisterous debates about Jewish issues held in his family's sukkah, the outdoor hut Jews build during the harvest festival Sukkot.

 

"He still has the same best friends he's had for over 30 years," Grosz said.

 

At his midtown Manhattan law firm, Friedman opens his offices to those in mourning who need a minyan — a quorum of 10 men in Orthodox Judaism — to say the Mourner's Kaddish, a prayer that observant Jews say daily for one year after a parent's death.

 

And it was a parent's death, in a way, that brought Friedman and Trump closer together. Over the years, Friedman has told friends the story of how the billionaire real estate mogul defied an oppressive snowstorm that had kept others away to "sit shiva" for Friedman's father during the Jewish mourning period.

 

Educated at Columbia University and NYU School of Law, Friedman developed a reputation as an aggressive, high-stakes bankruptcy attorney, representing Trump when his Atlantic City casinos went through bankruptcy.

 

In the courtroom, he's known as a formidable opponent, said attorney Tariq Mundiya, Friedman's adversary in several cases. He said he'd been aware of Friedman's advocacy on Israel but added, "When you're in the fog of war with David, the last thing you're talking about is the Middle East."

 

Enraged by Trump's pick, left-leaning groups and Palestinian officials have suggested his confirmation could spell the end of any serious discussions about peace.

 

Netanyahu has stayed publicly quiet about Trump's pick. Friedman and Trump's transition team didn't respond to requests for comment.

___

Associated Press writers Josef Federman and Daniel Estrin in Jerusalem and Tia Goldenberg in Beit El, West Bank, contributed to this report.

 

-- © Associated Press 2016-12-27

[ezzra]

Now that BDS and the Palestinians are pooping the cockers on the champagne bottles following the US decree to reprimand Israel, comes the cold icy winds from the soon to be the president of the USA to wake them up with the appointment of a far right and a staunch settlements supporter the new US  ambassador to Israel,

 

Time will tell if the UN resolution and Obama stand on the issue was the right one....

[Ulysses G.]

Good news. Anyone planning to obliterate President Barack Obama's approach to Israel is alright by me.

[dexterm]

From the OP...[Friedman] "called the two-state solution a mere "narrative" that must end."

 

Well at least he is calling a spade a spade. Netanyahu's and the US charade that Israel wants to negotiate a two state solution is over. We can now forget his flip flops.

 

Looks like we will reach a one state solution much sooner than I anticipated.

When the choices will be:

 

Equal citizenship for occupied Palestinians, overt apartheid, or ethnic cleansing.

 

Interesting times ahead.

[geriatrickid]

Jared Kushner and his gang do not represent the US jewish community and this will backfire. The orthodox community  think they know everything, but they will only spark resentment and a reticence amongst  the jewish community to support Israel.  The settlers are disliked in Israel and seen as pushy moochers who cost the country  because of the need to provide for their security. Although vocal, they are a minority. Israelis may soon  be cursing their blessing soon enough.

[geriatrickid]

9 minutes ago, dexterm said:

From the OP...[Friedman] "called the two-state solution a mere "narrative" that must end."

 

Well at least he is calling a spade a spade. Netanyahu's and the US charade that Israel wants to negotiate a two state solution is over. We can now forget his flip flops.

 

Looks like we will reach a one state solution much sooner than I anticipated.

When the choices will be:

 

Equal citizenship for occupied Palestinians, overt apartheid, or ethnic cleansing.

 

Interesting times ahead.

 

There is no apartheid in Israel. Take you  bigoted slander and  go save some Syrians.

[tutsiwarrior]

Trump is a madman and his 'ambassador' is a maniac...now americans will not be safe anywhere in the middle east...

[Ulysses G.]

2 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Looks like we will reach a one state solution much sooner than I anticipated.

When the choices will be:

 

Equal citizenship for occupied Palestinians, overt apartheid, or ethnic cleansing.

 

 

 

Whatever, the choices will be, you can be sure that Israel and the Israelis will win. They have been winning for 7 decades already.

[tutsiwarrior]

3 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

 

There is no apartheid in Israel. Take you  bigoted slander and  go save some Syrians.

 

yeah...we all wanna see a bunch of jihadis take over in Syria...the israelis would love it...

[tutsiwarrior]

1 minute ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Whatever, the choices will be, you can be sure that Israel and the Israelis will win. They have been winning for 7 decades already.

 

yeah...there's somethin' to be said for havin' the only nuclear arsenal in the middle east...and the insanity to use it...

[retarius]

A pick for peace? 

[geriatrickid]

11 minutes ago, tutsiwarrior said:

 

yeah...we all wanna see a bunch of jihadis take over in Syria...the israelis would love it...

 

In case you missed it, the Kurds who have carried much of the fight against ISIL in Syria and Iraq are not jihadis, and are skewed to secularism. The free Syrian army was not jihadi oriented.  The Russians have been ruthlessly bombing these people using the excuse that they were going after ISIL. If it wasn't for the Kurds, ISIL would still have much of Iraq under its control.  Take the time to learn who is who in this war.

[geriatrickid]

12 minutes ago, tutsiwarrior said:

 

yeah...there's somethin' to be said for havin' the only nuclear arsenal in the middle east...and the insanity to use it...

 

That didn't stop the Arab world from its attacks in 1967 or 1973 did it? It didn't help in Iran's proxy war in Lebanon did it? Pakistan and North Korea  had supplied Iran with nuclear dirty bombs decades ago, so go back and  review your history.

[tutsiwarrior]

6 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

 

In case you missed it, the Kurds who have carried much of the fight against ISIL in Syria and Iraq are not jihadis, and are skewed to secularism. The free Syrian army was not jihadi oriented.  The Russians have been ruthlessly bombing these people using the excuse that they were going after ISIL. If it wasn't for the Kurds, ISIL would still have much of Iraq under its control.  Take the time to learn who is who in this war.

 

yeah...like the kurds wanna rule Syria, right...the free syrian army has no meaning when jihadi organizations outgun them by a big margin...take the time to open yer eyes and see what's actually goin' on...

[geriatrickid]

10 minutes ago, tutsiwarrior said:

 

yeah...like the kurds wanna rule Syria, right...the free syrian army has no meaning when jihadi organizations outgun them by a big margin...take the time to open yer eyes and see what's actually goin' on...

 I have. the Kurds have died in the tens of thousands keeping the west safe so that you can mouth off simplistic justifications for wholesale destruction. All those "darkies" look the same to you don't they? Go Putin go. The Kurds have  been risking their lives for principle for 100+ years

[tutsiwarrior]

8 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

 

That didn't stop the Arab world from its attacks in 1967 or 1973 did it? It didn't help in Iran's proxy war in Lebanon did it? Pakistan and North Korea  had supplied Iran with nuclear dirty bombs decades ago, so go back and  review your history.

 

sorry, can't see any relationship between some terrorist attacks and a potential nuclear holocaust and hizbollah was the only obstacle to Israel annexing southern Lebanon...the rest of the world woulda loved that scenario...and, of course those that objected would be accused of anti semitism...

[tutsiwarrior]

1 minute ago, geriatrickid said:

 I have. the Kurds have died in the tens of thousands keeping the west safe so that you can mouth off simplistic justifications for wholesale destruction. All those "darkies" look the same to you don't they? Go Putin go. The Kurds have  been risking their lives for principle for 100+ years

 

hey, man...calm down...I ain't got nothin' against the kurds...yer mixin' up yer arguments here...the kurds ain't the syriam opposition and all they want is autonomy and to be left alone which I support...

 

now clean the froth offa yer mouth and make yerself a cuppa...

[Ulysses G.]

31 minutes ago, tutsiwarrior said:

 

yeah...there's somethin' to be said for havin' the only nuclear arsenal in the middle east...and the insanity to use it...

 

They do NOT have the only Nuclear arsenal in the Middle East and no matter how many Arab armies have attacked them they have never used it. As said before, review your history.

Edited December 27, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[tutsiwarrior]

2 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

They do NOT have the only Nuclear arsenal in the Middle East and no matter how many Arab armies have attacked them they have never used it.

 

oh yeah? and who else in the middle east has a nuclear attack capability? please enlighten...

 

it's not so much the arabs that they fear as them dumb ragheads couldn't organize a piss up in a brewery...it's if the west withdraws support and turns on them...this is something that many in the west fear but is never discussed...outrageous israeli barbarity, settlements, etc would never be tolerated otherwise...

[Ulysses G.]

12 minutes ago, tutsiwarrior said:

 

oh yeah? and who else in the middle east has a nuclear attack capability? please enlighten...

 

 

 

Have you ever heard of Pakistan (although the greater Middle East is more accurate)?

 

The West is never going to turn on the only liberal democracy in the region and they certainly will not going to war with them. The Arabs/Muslims are the only enemies that count.

Edited December 27, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[tutsiwarrior]

4 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

 

Have you ever heard of Pakistan?

 

The West is never going to turn on the only liberal democracy in the region and they certainly will not going to war with them. The Arabs/Muslims are the only enemies that count.

 

Pakistan is in south asia last time I looked...yer confusing all muslims together, UG...I'm not suggesting that the west would go to war against Israel but there may be moves to 'contain' them...the recent abstention by the US in the UN security council is a move in that direction; there is absolutely no justification for the settlements...now Trump wantsta reverse that and in addition revive the possibility of nuclear conflict...nothing less than insane...

 

there are only so many outrages that one can commit in the name of 'liberal democracy'...

[JKfarang]

1 hour ago, geriatrickid said:

 

There is no apartheid in Israel. Take you  bigoted slander and  go save some Syrians.

 

Geez... he was referring to possible future scenarios.  It's amazing (but not surprising) how quickly supporters go into attack mode.

 

[tutsiwarrior]

8 minutes ago, JKfarang said:

 

Geez... he was referring to possible future scenarios.  It's amazing (but not surprising) how quickly supporters go into attack mode.

 

 

the alt - right comin' outta the woodwork...

[dexterm]

1 hour ago, geriatrickid said:

 

There is no apartheid in Israel. Take you  bigoted slander and  go save some Syrians.

As you wish.

 

But there will be if Israel annexes the West Bank and does not give equal rights to the 2.5 million Palestinians they have just inherited.

 

[evadgib]

As a non-septic I'll ask; Why are Ambassadors changed simply because there's a regime change in DC? Elsewhere career diplomats get on with it regardless.

[dexterm]

1 hour ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Whatever, the choices will be, you can be sure that Israel and the Israelis will win. They have been winning for 7 decades already.

70 years is a mere pinprick in history.

 

Politicians in the past and the future bluster and blunder into the most disastrous errors of judgment with unexpected consequences. 2016 has been a doozy for that world wide.

 

I suspect Trump, Friedman and Netanyahu are just about to paint themselves into a corner.

 

[Ulysses G.]

46 minutes ago, tutsiwarrior said:

 

Pakistan is in south asia last time I looked...yer confusing all muslims together, UG...

 

 

 

Not according to the World Atlas. 97% of the people are Muslims and they have threatened to use nukes on Israel, India and the USA. They are a lot more likely to use the bomb than Israel.

Trump's new ambassador understands people like this.

 

http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/me.htm

Edited December 27, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[hawker9000]

4 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

Good news. Anyone planning to obliterate President Barack Obama's approach to Israel is alright by me.

 

Wingnuts are going to have their hands full battling every one of Trump's appointments.   This is just the tip of the iceberg (per Nancy, the Wicked Witch of the West). 

 

Gee now, wasn't there some sort of "nuclear option" once proposed by (....wait for it ....)   DEMOCRATS????    Oh the hypocrisy is going to be flowing deep and wide!   Get a load of the new "Party of No"!!

 

 

 

[Enoon]

4 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Whatever, the choices will be, you can be sure that Israel and the Israelis will win. They have been winning for 7 decades already.

 

Maybe they will manage to "win" for as long as the Levantine Crusader States.

 

The longest lived of which was, I believe, The Kingdom of Jerusalem, at 192 years.

[simple1]

2 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

 

Not according to the World Atlas. 97% of the people are Muslims and they have threatened to use nukes on Israel, India and the USA. They are a lot more likely to use the bomb than Israel.

Trump's new ambassador understands people like this.

 

http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/me.htm

 

The treat made against Israel was stupidly based on a 'false news' report claiming Israel threatened to use nuclear weapons against Pakistan. Just shows how extremely dangerous comments can be communicated & picked up via social media.

 

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.761146

 

Both India and Pakistan have threatened each other over the years. Exactly how would Pakistan be able to make a viable threat of nuclear attack against the US?