Republican Party Platform 100% with Israel – Unlike Dems with Bernie Sanders, Hillary, and anti-Israel Zogby, Ellison, Cornel West, with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the wings.

Here we see the powerful input of Donald Trump on the Republican Party’s platform on Israel. Republicans now stand solidly behind Israel and assures the Jewish State we will be with it through thick and thin, unlike the Democrat Platform Committee that welcomed in such overt Israel haters as James Zogby, Keith Ellison and Cornel West, all close advisors of radical Bernie Sanders. Sanders’ large voter-following will force the Democrat platform to accommodate Palestinian causes.

The feeling among the Left is that Jews will still vote the Party Line and ignore (at their peril) the Jew hating forces now in control of The Party. The National Jewish Democratic Council had the chutzpah to scream out that “the Republican Party is overcompensating in support of Israel. ”

My goodness! This group should change its name to the National Anti-Jewish Democratic Council in order to more clarify its stance and at least show some semblance of honesty.

Please read the piece below on the Republican platform and pass it on to your Liberal minded friends, relatives and neighbors who still believe that FDR is alive and well.

Alan Bergstein

GOP draft platform sidesteps (deliberately) two-state solution

Ahead of party convention, party doubles down on Jerusalem, offers implicit criticism of Obama administration

Redacted from an article BY REBECCA SHIMONI STOIL

Times of Israel
July 12, 2016

WASHINGTON — The Republican Party platform committee held its first meeting Monday in Cleveland in advance of the party’s nominating convention, reviewing a draft platform that doubled down on the party’s support for Israel, while avoiding explicit support for a two-state solution.

(Which makes more sense than the self-destructive Israelis choose to do in allowing, even the possibility, of yet another Arab terrorist state two minutes away!)

The Republican draft platform restores language recognizing Jerusalem “as the eternal and indivisible capital of the Jewish state,” as well as explicitly calling for the American embassy “to be moved there in fulfillment of US law.”

The change marked a dramatic departure from the wording of the 2012 platform, which did not discuss the indivisibility of Jerusalem or any move to enforce the embassy legislation – which has been in place for over a decade.

The platform draft seemed to roll back recognition of Palestinian nationhood, with key clauses neglecting mention of two states for two peoples. The 2012 platform stressed that the party supported “Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state with secure, defensible borders; and we envision two democratic states — Israel with Jerusalem as its capital and Palestine — living in peace and security.”

On Monday, CNN reported, the subcommittee reviewing the platform specifically rejected language affirming the party’s commitment to what is known as the two-state solution.

This distinction was further strengthened where the draft echoed a sentence used in 2012 – that “the US seeks a comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East, negotiated between the parties themselves with the assistance of the US, without the imposition of an artificial timetable.

Essential to that process will be a just, fair, and realistic framework for dealing with the issues that can be settled on the basis of mutually agreed changes reflecting today’s realities as well as tomorrow’s hopes.”
In the 2016 draft, the same sentence – that “the US seeks to assist in the establishment of comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East” – described the process as one “to be negotiated among those living in the region.”

While perhaps offering a nod to Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump’s emphasis on scaling back some US overseas involvement, the draft seems to favor an approach that would accommodate additional regional actors.

The 2016 draft also warns that the party “oppose[s] any measures intended to impose an agreement or to dictate borders or other terms, and call for the immediate termination of all US funding of any entity that attempts to do so” – a possible reference to repeated attempts by the Palestinian Authority to introduce and pass resolutions regarding the conflict in the United Nations.

The 2016 draft also stressed that “our party is proud to stand with Israel now and always” – a statement entirely absent from the 2012 platform.

In addition, the draft includes language condemning the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, describing it as an “alternative form of warfare” and emphasizing that the party “reject[s] the false notion that Israel is an occupier, and specifically recognize[s] that the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement (‘BDS’) is anti-Semitic in nature and seeks to destroy Israel.”

The draft went on to call for legislation “to thwart actions that are intended to limit commercial relations with Israel, or persons or entities doing business in Israel or in Israeli-controlled territories, in a discriminatory manner.”

While some anti-BDS initiatives have gained traction in Congress, the current administration has expressed reluctance regarding clauses that include “Israeli-controlled territories,” with leftist groups arguing that such language normalizes Israel’s presence in areas Israel conquered in 1967, including the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Golan Heights.

Many of the changes to the platform language seemed to reflect either a tightening of the party line regarding support for Israel, or an implicit criticism of the current administration that may signal a desire to use a fight over Israel policy as ammunition in the 2016 election campaign.

“Beyond our mutual strategic interests, Israel is likewise an exceptional country that shares our most essential values. It is the only country in the Middle East where freedom of speech and freedom of religion are found,” the draft reads. “Therefore, support for Israel is an expression of Americanism, and it is the responsibility of our government to advance policies that reflect Americans’ strong desire for a relationship with no daylight between America and Israel.”

The last line was likely an implicit reference to President Barack Obama, who reportedly said in a closed-door meeting with US Jewish leaders in 2009 that under former president George W. Bush “there was no space between us and Israel, and what did we get from that? When there is no daylight, Israel just sits on the sidelines, and that erodes our credibility with the Arab states.”

Christians United for Israel, a right-wing group which boasts some 3 million members and defines itself as “a national grassroots movement focused on the support of Israel,” backed the current language on Jerusalem, as well as the description of the BDS movement as “anti-Semitic.”

Supporters of presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton staved off a push by runner-up Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders to include language criticizing Israel’s “occupation” of the West Bank. The Democratic platform committee held its final meetings over the weekend, approving a platform that also condemned BDS, but offered explicit support for a two-state solution.

The National Jewish Democratic Council (Think the abominable Debra Wasserman Schultz and now the Far Left, approaching-senility,  Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg)  accused the Republican platform committee of tone-deafness and trying to “over compensate” on Israel.
“When it comes to Republican rhetoric on Israel, they can’t even find themselves to be inline with the rhetoric of the prime minister of Israel when it comes to a two state solution,” the organization responded in a statement.

Rebecca Shimoni Stoil is the Times of Israel’s Washington correspondent.

(It always amazes me that my Gentile friends and Evangelists, in particular, have a far better understanding as to what is “Good for the Jews” and Israel including its Prime Minister,  than the Jews themselves. So, what else is new?) jsk

Fan Club:
Twitter: @israelcomment
Israel Commentary Blog: Subscribe at:



Powered by Facebook Comments