Staying Real in Israel
Home of
"The Marty Roberts Show"

This time, it’s a date…The 29th of November…

Radio Show/Podcast!!!

Listen to the show…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

For time immemorial, the Arabs and Muslims have managed to base a substantial portion of their culture on people, places and ideas holy to the Jewish People and Israel…Fromk their claim to the Muslim “holiness” of Jerusalem to countless gravesites and Mosques, they steal the heritage of the Jews and claim it as their own…

This past November 29th, 2012, the Palestinian Authority chose to hijack the anniversary of the United Nations partition of Palestine, creating the Modern State of Israel and what should have been a palestinian State (which the Arabs refused to accept) and make it the day for their being declared a non-member observer “state” at the UN…

On today’s show:

The story of November 29, 1947…the ORIGINAL United Nations Resolution…

Why the recent UN activity is a dual violation of the Oslo Accords…originally intended to be the basis for peace between the Israelis and Palestinian Arabs…A look at the enormous laundry list of violations of Oslo by the Palestinian Authority, which, by all reasonable standards, should make the agreement null and avoid…

Also…How both Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert gave the Arabs MORE opportunities for their Palestinian State…Which they summarily refused, as they did the first time, in 1947…

Plus…Happy Channukah…Especially to you guys in Miami Beach, who got to watch their menorah burn…almost literally, not to mention the anti-semitic statements posted on said menorah…

All this and more on The Marty Roberts Show

Listen to the show…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

What do all three of these “statesmen” have in common? (other than having been appointed to jobs for which they are incompetent to perform by an incompetent president)

Radio Show/Podcast!!!

Listen to the show…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

They have all made headline-grabbing statements about Israel in public forums in the past week…All of which were mis-informed, ignorant, wrong and harmful to the Jewish State…

Find out what they said and why they should have kept their mouths shut…

Also…Honor killings in England…Driving women in Saudi Arabia…

Plus…Barbara Streisand to sing to Israeli soldiers…

All this and more on “The Marty Roberts Show”…

Listen to the show…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Don’t they have something more important to worry about, like maybe saving Greece or Spain from economic collapse?

Ramat Shlomo, Jerusalem

Besides, haven’t the French learned yet that Israel’s building of homes, communities, or even cities has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with peace or the lack thereof in the Middle East?

But I DO hate to see those Frenchmen so deeply concerned over anything…

France deeply concerned over Israeli settlements

France is deeply concerned about Israel’s authorization for the expansion of 2,000 settlement homes built on occupied Palestinian land in east Jerusalem, the Foreign Ministry said Monday

Reprinted from dailystar.com

“Our position is constant: Settlement building is illegal in the eyes of international law, in the West Bank as well as in East Jerusalem,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Bernard Valero.

Jerusalem’s municipal council Sunday approved the expansion of 2,000 homes in the settlement district of Ramat Shlomo, allowing each home to add a room. The Ramat Shlomo neighborhood lies in an area of Arab East Jerusalem, which Israel captured during the 1967 war and later annexed in a move not recognized by the international community.

France called on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to resume peace talks based on proposals made by French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe when he visited the region earlier this month.

“We call on the parties to resume negotiations based on principles contained in the French initiative … and to refrain from unilateral gestures,” Valero said.

Those pesky checkpoints that check for bombs, knives and what-not carried by palestinians crossing into Jewish population centers in Israel …

Israel keeps removing them, under U.S. and European pressure, of course…confidence-building measures to reassure the palestinian enemies of Israel that they have true partners in their quest for peace…

The removal of checkpoints seems to inevitably lead to a successful terror attacks and the spilling of innocent Jewish blood
…and the IDF checkpoints keep on preventing the murder of Israeli Jews on a daily basis…

Palestinian shot trying to stab Israel soldier

A Palestinian was shot and injured on Sunday after he apparently tried to stab a soldier at a checkpoint in the northern West Bank, the Israeli military said

Reprinted from vancouversun.com

“Today, a Palestinian rushed in the direction of an Israeli soldier shouting Allahu Akhbar (God is greatest) and trying to stab him. The soldier opened fire and wounded him in the leg,” a spokeswoman told AFP.

“The Palestinian was evacuated to an Israeli hospital and an investigation has been opened,” she added.

The military said the incident occurred near the Ariel settlement in the northern West Bank, south of the Palestinian city of Nablus.

Palestinian security sources confirmed that their Israeli counterparts had notified them of an incident in the northern West Bank in which they said a man tried to stab a female soldier,

But the sources added that they had no details or independent confirmation.

In January, Israeli troops shot and killed a Palestinian man at the Hamra checkpoint northeast of Nablus.

Initial reports claimed the man had tried to stab soldiers but the military later said troops had opened fire when the man entered an unauthorised lane at the checkpoint, apparently wielding a bottle.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Palestinian+shot+trying+stab+Israel+soldier+army/4971620/story.html#ixzz1PjGRGyjt

Why do actors think that they are qualified to engage in international diplomacy???

Leonard Nimoy

Since when does being very famous and being very good at pretending to be someone that you are not in a situation that is not real in front of a camera or on stage…since when does that qualify you as an expert on international affairs? Why should anyone give an actor any more credence than a plumber (no offense to plumbers…I respect THEM more than I do actors…they do something MUCH more useful to society) when it comes to their opinion on international issues (that they usually know nothing about)???

Nimoy, you may be Jewish, but you do NOT live in Israel, you do NOT have any particular knowledge about events in the Middle East, neither you nor you children serve in the Israeli Army, and you are not even particularly identified as being Jewish or caring about Israel, even if your Vulcan hand signal is an imitation of the Jewish priests’ hand position while blessing the Jewish people (you probably didn’t even know that)…

So, when it comes to your efforts for “peace” in Israel…please keep them to yourself and your family and close friends…

‘Spock’ calls for Jerusalem’s division

Jewish actor Leonard Nimoy known for famous Star Trek role writes letter on ‘Americans for Peace Now’ website supporting two-state solution

Reprinted from Ynetnews.com

The Americans for Peace Now (APN) organization published Tuesday a letter written by actor Leonard Nimoy, best known for his role as Spock in the original Star Trek series and movies, in which the actor supports the establishment of a two-state solution.

The 80-year-old actor called upon the American people to support the peace initiative.

“I reach out to you as someone who is troubled to see the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians continue apparently without an end in sight,” Nimoy wrote.

“In fact, there is an end in sight. It’s known as the two-state solution – a secure, democratic Israel as the Jewish State alongside an independent Palestinian state. Even Israel’s nationalist Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, has come to see this as the shape of the future. The problem is how to reach that end point. It’s something we should be concerned about – not only as world citizens, but as Americans.”

He went on to write that he supports the division of Jerusalem, mentioning 50 other prominent Israelis, including former heads of the Mossad, the Shin Bet and the military who support a two-state solution.

“There is a sizable number of influential voices in Israel saying the same thing… a call for two states for two nations. Their plan includes a Palestinian state alongside Israel with agreed-upon land swaps. The Palestinian-populated areas of Jerusalem would become the capital of Palestine; the Jewish-populated areas the capital of Israel.”

“I’m a strong supporter of APN and the work it does,” Nimoy wrote. “Peace Now’s activities and programs… keep peace on the world’s agenda… Like those Israelis who issued the peace plan, the members of Peace Now have their boots on the ground. They serve in Israel’s military reserves and see every day what life is like without a negotiated peace with the Palestinians.”

Nimoy also addressed the Itamar massacre and the increase in violence in the Middle East.

“A Jewish family was murdered in the West Bank and a woman was killed in a bus bombing in Jerusalem. A rocket attack on southern Israel from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip resulted in a school bus being hit and a teen died of his wounds. Israel, in turn, has retaliated,” he said.

He added that a strong American leadership is needed to “pivot from the zero-sum mentality of violence to an attitude that focuses on the parties shared interests: Security and prosperity.” Paraphrasing his famous Star Trek quote: “Live long and prosper.”

Nimoy recalled a Star Trek episode called, “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield,” in which the Enterprise runs into “two men, half black, half white, are the last survivors of their peoples who have been at war with each other for thousands of years, yet the Enterprise crew could find no differences separating these two raging men… And they were prepared to battle to the death to defend the memory of their people who died from the atrocities committed by the other.”

The actor attempted to convince the American people to act by supporting the APN, mostly through donations, in order to help resolve the conflict.

“I’m a strong supporter of APN and the work it does. It is a leading voice for Americans who support Israel and know that a negotiated peace will ensure Israel’s security, prosperity and continued viability as a Jewish and democratic state,” wrote Nimoy.

Nimoy stressed he does not intend to belittle the issues that divide Israelis and Palestinians.

“What I do mean to suggest is that the time for recriminations is over. Assigning blame over all other priorities is self-defeating. Myth can be a snare. The two sides need our help to evade the snare and search for a way to compromise,” he said.

The actor also noted how the tumultuous situation in the Middle East has a direct effect on the US economy.

“We’ve seen oil prices rise sharply and America become involved militarily in Libya. The cost to American lives and our economy continues to rise at a time when unemployment and deficits are sapping our country’s strength.”

Nimoy explained that it is also in the interest of the US “to spread the message that there is a peace solution, and to let Congress and the White House know it’s preferable for America to be part of the solution than to be drawn into another conflict.”

Sadly, nothing has really changed…RFK was right in 1948, and the facts remain the same…The palestinians want to destroy Israel

The articles show some things have not changed at all, and point to the roots of the Arab-Israeli conflict, which are no different 63 years later:

The Arabs are most concerned about the great increase in the Jews in Palestine: 80,000 in 1948. The Arabs have always feared this encroachment and maintain that the Jews will never be satisfied with just their section of Palestine, but will gradually move to overpower the rest of the country and will eventually move onto the enormously wealthy oil lands. They are determined that the Jews will never get the toehold that would be necessary for the fulfillment of that policy.
They are willing to let the Jews remain as peaceful citizens subject to the rule of the Arab majority just as the Arabs are doing in such great number in Egypt and the Levant states, but they are determined that a separate Jewish state will be attacked and attacked until it is finally cut out like an unhealthy abscess.

Kennedy describes “annihilation” of the Jews as the Arab purpose:

Within the Old City of Jerusalem there exists a small community of orthodox Jews. They wanted no part of this fight but just wanted to be left alone with their wailing wall. Unfortunately for them, the Arabs are unkindly disposed toward any kind of Jew and their annihilation would now undoubtedly have been a fact had it not been that at the beginning of hostilities the Haganah moved several hundred well-equipped men into their quarter.

Read more of what Kennedy wrote in a series of articles for a Boston newspaper in 1948, after his visit to “Palestine”…

Bobby Kennedy in Palestine — Four Boston Post Articles from 60 Years Ago

Robert Kennedy, Special Writer for Post, Struck by Antipathy Shown by ‘Arabs and Jews’

By Robert Kennedy, June 3, 1948 (posted on Lenny ben David’s blog)

Certainly if Arthur Balfour, Britain’s foreign minister during the first World War, had realized the conflicting interpretations which were to be placed on his famous “declaration” calling for a homeland for the Jews, he probably would have drawn it with its meaning clearer and saved the world the bloodshed that its double promises have caused. In his attempt to conciliate both Jews and Arabs in a time of distress for the British empire, conciliated neither.

No great thought was given to it at the time, for Palestine was then a relatively unimportant country. There were then not the great numbers of homeless Jews that we have now and no one believed then that the permission granted for Jewish immigration would lead 30 years later to world turmoil on whether a national home should mean an autonomous national state.

First let us consider the viewpoint of the Arabs in regard to the national homeland promised to the Jews in the Balfour Declaration.
The Arabs by word and deed leave no question in anyone’s mind how they feel. They argue that the Balfour Declaration supports their point that no national state was promised, pointing to the clauses in the declaration that says the national home shall be set up subject to the civil rights of the people living in Palestine at this time. In recent years they have pointed to the United Nations charger and the Article dealing with the self-determination of nations. Let us adhere to that, the Arabs say, and let the people, that is the Arabs who are involved, decide the question by the democratic processes. If this policy of participation was truly adhered to they say, then why couldn’t there be a partition with the “the” partition set aside for the Arab minorities?

The Arabs are most concerned about the great increase in the Jews in Palestine: 80,000 in 1948. The Arabs have always feared this encroachment and maintain that the Jews will never be satisfied with just their section of Palestine, but will gradually move to overpower the rest of the country and will eventually move onto the enormously wealthy oil lands. They are determined that the Jews will never get the toehold that would be necessary for the fulfillment of that policy.

Always Will Attack

They are willing to let the Jews remain as peaceful citizens subject to the rule of the Arab majority just as the Arabs are doing in such great number in Egypt and the Levant states, but they are determined that a separate Jewish state will be attacked and attacked until it is finally cut out like an unhealthy abscess.

The Arabs believe they contributed greatly to making the Allied victory possible in the first World War. At the Paris peace conference they felt that they received nothing comparable to what they were promised for their fight under Lawrence against the Turks. Rather, due to power politics, British and French domination replaced that of the Ottoman empire. The Arab leaders attribute their country’s backwardness to these 400 uninterrupted years as subservience to the Ottoman empire.

The Jewish people on the other hand believe that if it were not for the wars and invasions that racked Palestine and which sent them scattered and persecuted throughout the world, Palestine would today be theirs.

It would be theirs just as when Moses led them from Egypt into the Palestinian plains which they point out were unoccupied except for a few Bedouin tribes.

Set Up Laboratories

Under the supposition that, at the finish of the mandate, this was to be their national state, they went to work. They set up laboratories where world-famous scientists could study and analyze soils and crops. The combination of arduous labor and almost unlimited funds from the United States changed what was once arid desert into flourishing orange groves.
Soils had to be washed of salt, day after day, year after year, before crops could be planted. One can see this work going on in lesser or more advanced stages wherever there are Jewish settlements in Palestine.
From a small village of a few thousand inhabitants, Tel Aviv has grown into a most impressive modern metropolis of over 200,000. They have truly done much with what all agree was very little.

The Jews point with pride to the fact that over 500,000 Arabs in the 12 years between 1932 and 1944, came into Palestine to take advantage of living conditions existing in no other Arab state. This is the only country in the Near and Middle East where an Arab middle class is in existence.

The Jews point out that they have always taken a passive part in the frequent revolutions that have racked the country, because of the understanding that they would eventually be set free from British mandateship. They wished to do nothing to impair this expected action.

During the second World War they sent numerous volunteer Jewish brigades which fought commendably with the British in Italy. In addition to that, many Palestinian Jews fought as volunteers with Allied troops throughout the world and still others were dropped by parachute into German-held territory as espionage agents. They were perhaps doing no more than their duty, but they did their duty well.

The Jews feel that promise after promise to them has been broken. They can quote freely, for example, from speech after speech of Labor Party leaders in the election campaign prior to the victory of the Labor Party in England, to attest to the fact that one need not even refer back to the controversial Balfour declaration to learn Britain’s attitude and promises toward a Jews state was to be one of the first acts of the Labor government if it were put into power. The Jews, remembering this, have rather bitterly named the black bombed out [area] in the Ben Yehuda disaster, “Bevin square.” [An Arab car bomb in Jerusalem in February 1948 killed some 50 people.]

It is an unfortunate fact that because there are such well founded arguments on either side each grows more and more bitter toward the other. Confidence in their right increases in proportion to the hatred and mistrust for the other side for not acknowledging it.

Never Searched

When I landed at Lydda Airport [see picture] I became immediately aware of it. I carried letters of introduction to both Arabs and Jews and at the airport where both sides intermingle it was explained to me by first one and then the other that I was taking a great risk. The Jew said it was all right for me to carry Arab papers in Jewish territory for I wouldn’t be molested, but when I entered Arab territory I had better be rid of all letters to Jews for I would immediately be searched and, if they found anything, would be quickly shot. The Arab said exactly the opposite and I found both to be half right, in that I was never searched by either side.

Another fact I became immediately aware of was a basic violent hatred of the British by both sides. I talked to a British army sergeant who had been in Palestine for two years, and he placed the blame with the Palestine Colonial Police. Later I found many to be in agreement. He called them the “underpaid uneducated dregs of society.” They were evidently the most corrupt group of police in the world, firstly because they were so underpaid and, secondly, because when colonial police were sent to their posts the worst of the lot were invariably sent to Palestine.

The Arab bitterness and also fear toward the British had as its starting point the 1936-1938 revolution, which was crushed most ruthlessly by the British.

Increasing Bitterness

Leading Arabs in the higher committee speak in all sincerity of the Indian brought by the British into the country because of the great skill and knowledge that he possessed in being able to torture with fire while leaving no scar tissue. Many claim to have suffered by having their nails pulled out from their fingers and toes and others of having burning matches thrust beneath their nails. I found little evidence that these stories were true.

The Jewish attitude toward the British has been one of increasing bitterness. The Jews have looked upon the British civil administration, which some years ago took over from the army, as most unfriendly and uncooperative and which has therefore led to much mutual distrust. Jews received virtually no financial help for building schools and hospitals in Jewish settlements and the post office which was set up to serve Tel Aviv wasn’t suitable for a village of several thousand inhabitants. I was forced to wait well over an hour in line in order to purchase stamps.

When told if they wanted a port they would have to build it themselves, the result was the port of Tel Aviv, which was constructed entirely through Jewish capital and labor. Nevertheless, it is taxed as high as the Arab port of Jaffa, which was built and maintained by funds raised by taxing both Arabs and Jews. These arguments are infinitesimal compared with the larger issues that have swept both sides during the last year, but they are mentioned to show that the hate that exists now is not something newly born and has a substantial background.

Kennedy in Palestine — Part Two
Jews Have a Fine Fighting Force
Make Up for Lack of Arms with Undying Spirit,
Unparalleled Courage — Impress the World
By Robert Kennedy, June 4, 1948

The Jewish people in Palestine who believe in and have been working toward this national state have become an immensely proud and determined people. It is already a truly great modern example of the birth of a nation with the primary ingredients of dignity and self-respect.

Malca and her family to me are the personification of that determination. She is a young girl of the age of 23 and her husband and four brothers are members of the Haganah. She herself is with the intelligence corps and worked on the average of 15 hours a day, which evidently was not unusual. She had seen and felt much horror and told me the story of a case she had just handled.

A Jewish girl in her teens was picked up by some members of the Haganah on the road from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and, as she was injured, she was taken to the Hebrew Hospital in Jerusalem. They believed that she had somehow been separated from a Jewish convoy which had just gone through and which had had a scrap with the Arabs.
She was particularly noticed because of the strange people who were her visitors and by the fact that she insisted on being moved to the English hospital. Malca was sent to question her. She was turned away gruffly by the girl after the girl admitted that she had in reality been in a British tank with a boy friend and wanted nothing to do with the Jews.

The Jewish Agency offered to send the girl out on a farm in order to let her regain her health and give her a new start, but she just demanded her release which they were forced to give her. She continued consorting with the British police despite warnings from the Stern gang.

Brother Shoots Sister

One night the Stern gang followed the tactics of the underground forces in the last war. They shaved all the hair off the girl’s head. Two days after Malca told me the story the sequel took place. The girl’s brother returned for leave from duty with the Haganah up in Galilee and, finding her in such a state, shot her.

Malca’s youngest brother is only 13, but every night he takes up his post as a sentry with the Haganah at a small place outside of Jerusalem.

His mother and father wait up every night until midnight for him and his older brother, 15, to return home. The other two brothers, both younger than Malca, give full time duty with combat troops.

An understanding of the institutions it contains, and of the persons that run these institutions, is most important if one would make up one’s mind as to the worth of this “de facto” Jewish state.
I visited and inspected a community farm through the kindness of a Jew who 40 years ago was in Boston making speeches for my grandfather, John F. Fitzgerald, when he was a candidate for congress. A third of the agricultural population live in such community farms which were set up originally to help newly-arrived refugees who had no money or prospects.

They are in reality self-sustaining States with a State and all the people in common undergo arduous toll and labor and make great sacrifices in order that their children might become heir to a home. An example of this is that when a child is one year old he is placed in a common nursery, with the result that all but the sick and infirm are able to devote their talents to the common cause. They get paid nothing for they need no money. Everything is financed by a group of elected overseers who get their money by selling what the farms produce. In our country we shrink from such tactics but in that country their very lives depend upon them.

The whole thing is done on a volunteer bases and one may leave the farm with this proportionate share of wealth at any time he chooses.

Jewish forces
The one we visited was a Givat Brenner and, although no one paid attention to the firing going on in the plain below, one could see all around preparations being undertaken for the coming fight.

I talked to members of the underground organization Irgun. They were responsible for the King David Hotel disaster and told me proudly that they were responsible for blowing up the Cairo Haifa train which had just taken place with the loss of 50 British soldiers.

Disillusioned
They believed the time had long since passed for the Jewish people to expect anything but treachery and broken promises from the outside world. If they wanted an independent state they would have to fight for it, and before they could even do that, they had to rid the country of foreign troops. They believe unquestionably that if it weren’t for their so-called terrorist activities the British would have remained on in their country. Bevin’s recent speeches in the House of Commons, they argue, have been ample proof of that. The question, though, in other Jews’ minds is whether this compensated for what they have lost in good will by such tactics.

I went to the training camp at Netanya, north of Tel Aviv, where for three weeks and with very little equipment, Jewish youths, trained mostly by former British officers, were attempting to learn the basic tenants of army life. We watch a first-week group attempt an obstacle course, and while maybe the flesh was weak, it emphasized all the more what can be accomplished when the spirit is willing. We watched a graduation class make its final round and they gave the appearance that they might well be whipped into a fighting force before much time has passed.

The security forces and Haganah are far more experienced. After landing at Lydda Airport (pictured), I was immediately taken to be questioned and my credentials examined by the Haganah. After being released and going to my hotel in Tel Aviv, I went for a walk around this city of 200,000 inhabitants. I wasn’t out for 10 minutes before I was recognized as a foreigner and picked up by the Haganah, blindfolded and once again brought to headquarters for questioning.
I talked to a Haganah soldier who fled from Prague as the Germans were taking over the city and he and his brother, who was killed, fought with the British throughout the war. He received news that his mother and two sisters who he had left in Prague were killed by the Germans and that his home had been completely destroyed.

Kennedy in Palestine — Part Three
British Position Hit in Palestine
Kennedy Says They Seek to Crush Jewish Cause Because They Are Not in Accord with It

By Robert Kennedy, June 5, 1948

The convoys that didn’t make it
I was in Palestine over Easter week and even then people knew there was absolutely no chance to preserve peace. They just wanted the British out, so that a decision could be reached either way. An early departure of the British has been far more important strategically to the Jews than to the Arabs.

The City of Jerusalem has more Jews than Arabs but the immediate surrounding territory is predominately Arab. Through part of that hilly territory winds the narrow road that leads from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
It is by this road that the Jewish population within Jerusalem must be supplied, but it is fantastically easy for the Arabs to ambush a convoy as it crawls along the difficult pass. On my trip from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem I saw grim realities of the fact and while in Jerusalem the failure and destruction of another Jewish convoy made meat non-existent and lengthened food queues for other items.

Jews lining up for water and rations
The Arabs living in the old city of Jerusalem have kept the age-old habit of procuring their water from the individual cisterns that exist in almost every home. The Jews being more “educated” (an Arab told me that this was their trouble and now the Jews were going to really pay for it) had a central water system installed with pipes bringing fresh hot and cold water. Unfortunately for them, the reservoir is situated in the mountains and it and the whole pipe line are controlled by the Arabs. The British would not let them cut the water off until after May 15th but an Arab told me they would not even do it then. First they would poison it.

Orthodox Community

Within the Old City of Jerusalem there exists a small community of orthodox Jews. They wanted no part of this fight but just wanted to be left alone with their wailing wall. Unfortunately for them, the Arabs are unkindly disposed toward any kind of Jew and their annihilation would now undoubtedly have been a fact had it not been that at the beginning of hostilities the Haganah moved several hundred well-equipped men into their quarter.

This inability to make any long range military maneuvers because of the presence of the British has been a great and almost disastrous handicap to the Jews. If the brief but victorious military engagement on the Tel Aviv-Jerusalem road had not taken place, the Jewish cause would have suffered such a setback as to be virtually lost. If the Haganah had waited for May 15th and the withdrawal of British troops, there would be few alive in Jerusalem today. Strong units of that body had moved into the hills on either side of that strategic road and repelled Arab counterattacks long enough for several hundred truckloads to make the 40-mile trip into the city, and then, only after threats from the British commander to use force against them, had withdrawn from their positions. As a Jew said to me at the time, “This is our battle of the Atlantic.” The maneuvers had to take place and took place despite the British.

Power Supply

The same basic difficulty that exists in relation to the water exists with regard to electric and power supply. Fortunately, an immediate danger is not yet present, but the Arabs have had months of preparations for a maneuver they know their opponents must eventually make.

The Jewish ghetto in the old city of Jerusalem would not have been in such an untenable position if it could have been periodically relieved, or if with a Jewish victory in that area it could have been connected with the main Jewish section in the new city.

The Jews have small settlements or community farms such as Givat Brenner in completely hostile territory. They take pride that, despite the great difficulties, they have not evacuated any of them. From the very tip of Galilee right down to the arid Negev these communities exist with such Jewish names as Zan, Safed, Yehsem, Mishmar Haemak, Ben Sheba, Laza. All have their supply problems. But no great military operation can be undertaken into Arab territory to relieve the increasing Arab pressure.

Need True Facts

In addition to these handicaps that the Jews suffered through the presence of the British, there are many more far-reaching aspects of British administration which unfortunately concern or, rather involve us in the United States.

Having been out of the United States for more than two months at this time of writing, I notice myself more and more conscious of the great heritage and birthright to which we as United States citizens are heirs and which we have the duty to preserve. A force motivating my writing this paper is that I believe we have failed in this duty or are in great jeopardy of doing so. The failure is due chiefly to our inability to get the true facts of the policy in which we are partners in Palestine.

The British government, in its attitude towards the Jewish population in Palestine, has given ample credence to the suspicion that they are firmly against the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine.

The bombing of the Jewish Agency
When I was in Cairo shortly after the blowing up of the Jewish Agency [March 11, 1948] I talked to a man who held a high position in the Arab League. He had just returned from Palestine where he had, among other things, interviewed and arranged transportation to Trans-Jordan for the Arab responsible for that Jewish disaster. This Arab told him that after the explosion, upon reaching the British post which separated the Jewish section from a small neutral zone set up in the middle of Jerusalem, he was questioned by the British officers in charge. He quite freely admitted what he had done and was given immediate passage with the remark “Nice going.”

British Markings

Just before I arrived in Palestine there was the notorious story of the foundry outside of Tel Aviv. It was situated in a highly contested area and the British accused the Jews of using it as a sniper post for the Jaffa-Jerusalem road. One day the British moved in, stripping the Jews of all arms and ordered them to clear out within 10 minutes. The British had scarcely departed when a group of armed Arabs moved in, killing or wounding all the occupants. The British government was most abject in its apologies.

British checkpoint in Jerusalem
I came in contact personally, however, with evidence that demonstrated clearly the British bitterness toward the Jews. I have ridden in Jewish armored car convoys which the British have stopped to inspect for arms. As always, there were members of the Haganah aboard and they quickly broke down their small arms, passing the pieces among the occupants to conceal them so as to prevent confiscation. Satisfied that none existed, the convoy supposedly unarmed was allowed to pass into Arab territory. If the arms had been found and confiscated and the Arabs had attacked, there would have been but a remote chance of survival for any of the occupants. There have been many not as fortunate as we.

British Informants

When I was in Tel Aviv the Jews informed the British government that 600 Iraqi troops were going to cross into Palestine from Trans-Jordan by the Allenby Bridge on a certain date and requested the British to take appropriate action to prevent this passage. The troops crossed unmolested. It is impossible for the British to patrol the whole Palestinian border to prevent illegal crossings but such flagrant violations should certainly have led to some sort of action.

Five weeks ago I saw several thousand non-Palestinian Arab troops in Palestine, including many of the famed British-trained and equipped Arab legionnaires of King Abdullah [of Trans-Jordan]. There were also soldiers from Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Trans-Jordan, and they were all proudly pointed out to me by a spokesman of the Arab higher committee. He warned me against walking too extensively through Arab districts as most of the inhabitants there were now foreign troops. Every Arab to whom I talked spoke of thousands of soldiers massed in the “terrible triangle of Nablus-Tulkarem-Jenin” and of hundreds that were pouring in daily.

Oversubscribed

When I was in Lebanon and asked a dean at the American University at Beirut if many students were leaving for the fight in Palestine he shrugged and said, “Not now – the quota has been oversubscribed.” When journeying by car from Jerusalem to Amman I passed many truckloads of armed Arabs and even then Jericho was alive with Arab troops. There is no question that it was taken over by the Arabs for an armed camp long before May 15.

Our government first decided that justice was on the Jewish side in their desire for a homeland, and then it reversed its decision temporarily. [Editor’s note: In March 1948 the State Department reversed its support for partition and called for a UN trusteeship.]

Because of this action I believe we have burdened ourselves with a great responsibility in our own eyes and in the eyes of the world. We fail to live up to that responsibility if we knowingly support the British government who behind the skirts of their official position attempt to crush a cause with which they are not in accord. If the American people knew the true facts, I am certain a more honest and forthright policy would be substituted for the benefit of all.

Kennedy in Palestine — Part Four
Communism Not to Get a Foothold
Jews Guard against Red Agents in Guise of Refugees – Want No Part of Russian Tyrant
By Robert Kennedy, June 6, 1948

Jewish defenders
The die has long since been cast; the fight will take place. The Jews with their backs to the sea, fighting for their very homes, with 101 percent morale, will accept no compromise. On the other hand, the Arabs say:

Religious Crusade

“We shall bring Moslem brigades from Pakistan, we shall lead a religious crusade for all loyal followers of Mohammed, we shall crush forever the invader. Whether it takes three months, three years, or 30, we will carry on the fight. Palestine will be Arab. We shall accept no compromise.”

The United Nations is scoffed at by both sides and the United States will never be able to regain the position of ascendancy she previously enjoyed with the Arab world. She lost the love of the Arabs when she supported partition. She lost their respect when she reversed that decision. [Editor’s note: In March 1948 the State Department reversed its support for partition and called for a UN trusteeship.] She lost it irreparably. For days on end Arab commentators drummed into their people that finally the power of the Arab world had been realized.

The Jews are bitter in disappointment. As one Jew said, “Britain let us down for 25 years but you bettered them in a week.” The feeling stops at disappointment and there is none of the hatred that exists for the British. They can understand us not wishing to send troops and so become entangled in a war that does not immediately concern us, but they plead only for the right to make this fight themselves. They want arms and frankly admit that if they cannot get them from us they will turn to the East. “What else can we do?” They are fighting for their very lives and must act accordingly.

Won’t Accept Communism

That the people might accept communism or that communism could exist in Palestine is fantastically absurd. Communism thrives on static discontent as sin thrives on idleness. With the type of issues and people involved, that state of affairs is nonexistent. I am as certain of that as of my name.

When I was in Tel Aviv, a group of refugees was landed and amongst them the Jewish Agency’s “FBI” immediately picked up one of these agents. He was loaded down with money and papers, and all agreed that he must have been sent with the intention that he be captured to mislead the security forces into thinking that all the Russian agents would be as inept as this one and equally easy to capture. Lethargy would set in and it would be then that they would smuggle in their Mata Hari.

Demands Allegiance

Communism demands allegiance to the mother country, Russia, and it is impossible to believe that people would undergo such untold sufferings to replace one tyrant with another. Robert Emmet, the Irish patriot, on trial for his life before a British tribunal stated the principle. When accused of attempting to bring French forces into Ireland to help wrest it from the British, he said why he, who loved and had been fighting for his homeland, deem it to his country’s interests to replace a known tyrant by an unknown one. These people want a homeland of their own.

That to them is the sole issue.

“Take that Goliath!” Pretend slingshot
Vehemence and hatred between the Jews and Arabs increase daily. But in many cases Jews and Arabs work side by side in the fields and orange groves outside of Tel Aviv. Perhaps these Jews and Arabs are making a greater contribution to the future peace in Palestine than are those who carry guns on both sides.

The Arabs in command believe that eventually victory must be theirs. It is against all law and nature that this Jewish state should exist. They trace expectantly its long boundary and promise that if it does become a reality it will never have as neighbors anything but hostile countries, which will continue the fight militarily and economically until victory is achieved.

Stabilizing Factor

The Jews on the other hand believe that in a few more years, if a Jewish state is formed, it will be the only stabilizing factor remaining in the Near and Middle East. The Arab world is made up of many disgruntled factions which would have been at each other’s throats long ago if it had not been for the common war against Zionism. The United States and Great Britain before too long a time might well be looking to a Jewish state to preserve a toehold in that part of the world.

Both sides still hate the British far more deeply than they hate one another. There was a British high commissioner who when attending the opera used to have his car parked directly in front of the main door, a place usually reserved for discharging passengers. An even more unpopular practice was the regulation that at the end of the opera everyone had to remain in their seats until the British high commissioner was out of the opera house and in his car.

But the British have left – and now the issue is to be resolved in a bitter war between Jew and Arab. I do not think the freedom-loving nations of the world can stand by and see “the sweet water of the River Jordan stained red with the blood of Jews and Arabs.” The United States through the United Nations must take the lead in bringing about peace in the Holy Land.

They want to ELIMINATE Israel…wipe her out…make Israel NOT EXIST anymore…
Fatah, the current leadership of the Palestinian Authority under Mahmoud Abbas, aired this speech calling for the establishment of the palestinian state on ALL of the land that is currently Israel. As if that was not good enough, they even re-broadcast the speech…in case there was any doubt whatsoever as to the intentions of the palestinian leadership…This makes if clear…

They have said it time and time again…The palestinians, including their leadership, wish to destroy the State of Israel…NOT make peace with her

Is ANYBODY listening, other than Glen Beck…oh, and the palestinians themselves…

PA leaders attend Fatah performance that presents Israel as “Palestine”

Note: This video orginially aired on Feb. 27, 2011 and was rebroadcast May 12, 2011.

Reprinted from Palestinian Media Watch

“We commit and promise to stand behind you, oh Mahmoud Abbas, until Judgment Day. I am returning to you, the purest land, oh land of the free. No matter how long the nights of exile, I am returning to you, oh land. From Rafah to Rosh Hanikra (northern Israel) our coast, and Beit Shean (Israeli city). Above your soil, oh my land, is a picture of Garden of Eden. From Rafah to Rosh Hanikra our coast, and Beit Shean. Above your soil, oh my land, is a picture of Garden of Eden. From Rafah to Rosh Hanikra, north and south, are the picture’s borders. From Haifa (Israeli city) and Tantura to the [Jordan] valley (i.e., all of Israel). I am returning to you, the purest land, oh land of the free.”

Israel’s position for talks with the palestinians are clear and reasonable…

Radio Show/Podcast!!!

Listen to the show…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

NO return to the 1967 Auschwitz borders…
NO division of Israel’s capital, Jerusalem…
NO return of so-called palestinian refugees inside of Israel’s borders…
NO negotiations with the palestinian Al-Queda, Hamas…

And, of course, the palestinians must recognize and accept the existence of Israel as a Jewish State…

All of which the palestinians have already refused to do…but we knew that, anyway, didn’t we?

Also…palestinian leader Abbas openly denies history by repudiating any Jewish historical connection with the land of Israel, while claiming a “palestinian” legacy…none of which is supported by history, OR archeology…

Plus…American AND Israeli leaders have come and gone, but the Jews continue to be fruitful, multiply and settle the Land of Israel…specifically, Judea and Sameria…Why we will never leave, no matter WHO is in “power”…

All this and more on “The Marty Roberts Show”…

Listen to the show…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

He has to be either ignorant and uninformed, totally naive…or totally hostile to America’s best allies in the Middle East …

Radio Show/Podcast!!!

Listen to the show…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

That’s the only possible explanation for the content of his policy speech at the US State Department yesterday.

How can he possibly call for the establishment of a hostile, terrorist state on Israeli land, while returning Israel to the in-defensible pre-1967 “Auschwitz” borders?

How can he expect Israel to make peace with the Hamas/Fatah/Iran terrorist entity now unified in their leadership of the Palestinian Authority…a united administration sworn to Israel’s destruction in both word and deed?

How can America pour massive sums of US taxpayer-dollars into countries like Egypt and Tunis, after causing the ouster of US-friendly leaders, soon to be replaced by Islamist, Jihadist Moslem Brotherhood governments?

How can Obama call for the downfall of Arab leader after Arab leader, but not do so for Syria’s Assad, who is murdering hundreds of his own citizens on a daily basis?

Plus…U.S Congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle call for an immediate halt to American aid to the Palestinian Authority…

Islamic ThinkerTawfik Hamid

And…Former Muslim radical Tawfik Hamid writes:
“The Arab-Israeli conflict is NOT about borders, but about the EXISTENCE OF ISRAEL.”

All this and more on “The Marty Roberts Show”…

Listen to the show…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Special Report on the Friday night palestinian massacre of the Fogel family z”tz”l, with commentary by Marty Roberts

Radio Show/Podcast!!!

Listen to the show…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

After the Massacre of the Fogel Family, of Blessed memory

Please note: All images are presented at the request of the family, with their express permission

How can ANY human being, let alone two together, slit the throat of a 3-month-old baby lying in her father’s arms?…How can anybody with even the remanants of a human sould stab sleeping children in the heart…again and again?…How can an entire nation of people remain silent…not condemning as wrong and evil, such acts?…Quite the contrary…they are willing to be photographed in the streets celebrating the slaughter of innocent women and children…Give them a state?…A state of WHAT???

Palestinians handing out candy in celebration of the slaughter of the Fogel Family

Three-month-old Hadas Fogel

Three-month-old Hadas...Murdered in her father's arms

Three-year-old Elad Fogel...Stabbed twice in the heart

Notice the little boy's yarmulke/kippah besides him

Elad in life

Slaughtered in his bed

Eleven-year-old Yoav Fogel

Eleven-year-old Yoav Fogel was reading in bed when he was slaughtered by palestinians

Yoav Fogel in life

Rabbi Udi Fogel

Ruth Fogel...Mother of six

Listen to the show…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

New Show/Podcast!!!

Listen to the show…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

More accusations…more denials…more nonsense…as The Pope decides to let the Jews off the hook for the “Killing Jesus” thing once again…

Charlie Sheen in lets it out against his hit TV show co-creator, Chuck Lorre in a fuzzy-brained anti-Semitic tirade in Hollywood…

John Galliano

House of Dior’s chief designer John Galliano goes on a drunken rampage in Paris, spewing love for Hitler and leaving a trail of slurs against Jews and Asians in his wake…

As for Tommy Hilfinger…Fact or internet legend…Should the Jews destroy their Hilfinger jockey shorts?

Also…A new, censored version of the Holy Bible for Catholics, and Pope Benedict re-affirms that “all” the Jews did not Kill Jesus in HIS new book…

Plus…The Reform Jewish Movement in America gets on the forgiveness bandwagon, exonerating Glenn Beck, while Reform Jews from the former Soviet Union rebuild the Jewish community in Germany…

Ivanka Trump

And…Newly Jewish-by-choice Ivanka Trump’s clothes come on aliyah to Israel…The palestinians say they will unilaterally declare a new state on Israeli soil by September of this year…with full international support…

All this and more on “The Marty Roberts Show”…

Listen to the show…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Thank you, America for taking the correct decision at the United Nations Security Council…

I am talking about the palestinian-sponsored resolution passed in the UN Security Council, but vetoed by the United States calling for a condemnation of Israeli home-building…one more action that will only harden the palestinian negotiating positions and bring any progress towards a peace agreement with Israel to a screeching halt, as indeed it did. Shortly thereafter, the palestinian leadership announced that there will be no more negotiations until Israel stops building…as if there were any talks talking place anyway… (the palestinians have refused all Israel requests to come to the negotiating table)

Prime Ministers response to the U.S. veto at the Security Council

Israel deeply appreciates the decision by President Obama to veto the
Security Council Resolution today.

Reprinted from IMRA

Israel remains committed to pursuing comprehensive peace with all our
neighbors, including the Palestinians.

We seek a solution that will reconcile the Palestinians’ legitimate
aspirations for statehood with Israel’s need for security and recognition.

Today’s decision by the U.S. makes it clear that the only path to such a
peace will come through direct negotiations and not through the decisions of
international bodies.

We are prepared to pursue those peace negotiations vigorously and are eager
to get on with the work of achieving a secure peace. We hope the
Palestinians will join us in that effort as soon as possible.

Will anyone be surprised if America’s friends and allies around the world begin to question the dependability of commitments made by the United States government?

Mubarak’s Egypt was America’s best and strongest Arab ally in the Middle East. When push came to shove, Obama shoved Mubarak out the door…

Great Britain has historically been the beset friend and supporter of the U.S. in Europe. Immediately after the elections, Obama lost no time in thoroughly humiliating the people and leaders of England, as has been well documented. The U.S. president’s latest kick in the teeth for England was the betrayal of the UK’s secrets regarding their nuclear weapons to Putin and the Russians…all in return for their signature on the questionable, to say the least, SMART treaty…

And now…Israel…The handwriting has been on the wall since the American elections. Obama’s behavior towards Israeli PM Netanyahu in Washington, VP Biden’s behavior while in Israel, the U.S.’s adoption of palestinian positions unequalled in history, leading to the ultimate breakdown of any efforts towards peace, Washington’s behavior towards Israel’s nuclear ambiguity…the list goes on and on…

Obama’s failure to sternly warn any incoming Egyptian leaders about the sanctity and inviolability of the treaty with Israel is inexcusable, not to mention EXTREMELY DANGEROUS for the peace and security of the Middle East, indeed, of the entire world…

“Please move to the back of the bus, so there will be plenty of room for more of you, my friends and allies…”

Cause for serious concern

Pres. Obama declines to mention peace in
comments on resignation of Egyptian President Mubarak

Reprinted from IMRA.org.il…Dr. Aaron Lerner

Facts:

#1. When Angela Merkel of Germany prepared a short two paragraph comment on
developments in Egypt she saw fit to include in it “We also expect future
Egyptian governments to pursue peace in the Middle East so that the
contracts were signed with Israel, are respected and that Israel’s security
is guaranteed.”

#2. When U.S. President Obama prepared a 17 paragraph long address on
developments in Egypt he declined to make any reference to peace and Israel.

#3. This failure to mention peace in these remarks was consistent with Mr.
Obama’s previous public remarks relating to Egypt prior to the resignation.

#4. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, in his last press conference
before leaving the post, also only finally go around to mentioning peace in
response to reporters.

The very unfortunate message from Mr. Obama to the Egyptians in particular
and the Arab world in general is that as far as he is concerned, Egypt
honoring peace with Israel is at best of tertiary importance in his eyes.

#1. Angela Merkel

Transcript of Press Conference Press Statement by Federal Chancellor Angela
Merkel on the situation in ÄgyptenFr, 11.02.2011in Berlin

http://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/nn_683698/Content/DE/Mitschrift/Pressekonferenzen/2011/02/2011-02-11-merkel-ruecktritt-mubarak.html

[Google translation]

ANGELA MERKEL: Ladies and gentlemen, today is a day of great joy. We are all
witness a historic change, and I am pleased with the people in Egypt, with
the millions of people on the streets. In their eyes you can see which power
can have the freedom. And I wish the people on the way forward in a new,
changed society the courage they have shown in previous days. I wish first
of all a society that will be without corruption, without censorship,
without arrest and torture. And I ask of those who now bear the
responsibility and who they are that they make the irreversible development
in Egypt that they make this development peacefully. The legitimate demands
of the people that have been expressed in recent days, must be implemented
with real power.

Ladies and gentlemen, we will support the development in Germany in Egypt,
the legitimate aspirations of people for our forces. We believe that it is
necessary that this development is truly irreversible, and that it leads to
a freer Egypt. At the end of this development must be free elections.
President Mubarak has proved with his resignation today to the Egyptian
people one last time. We also expect future Egyptian governments to pursue
peace in the Middle East so that the contracts were signed with Israel, are
respected and that Israel’s security is guaranteed.

Thank you!

#2 President Obama

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release February 11, 2011 Remarks by the President on Egypt
Grand Foyer
3:06 P.M. EST

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/02/11/remarks-president-egypt

THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon, everybody. There are very few moments
in our lives where we have the privilege to witness history taking place.
This is one of those moments. This is one of those times. The people of
Egypt have spoken, their voices have been heard, and Egypt will never be the
same.

By stepping down, President Mubarak responded to the Egyptian people’s
hunger for change. But this is not the end of Egypt’s transition. It’s a
beginning. I’m sure there will be difficult days ahead, and many questions
remain unanswered. But I am confident that the people of Egypt can find the
answers, and do so peacefully, constructively, and in the spirit of unity
that has defined these last few weeks. For Egyptians have made it clear
that nothing less than genuine democracy will carry the day.

The military has served patriotically and responsibly as a caretaker to
the state, and will now have to ensure a transition that is credible in the
eyes of the Egyptian people. That means protecting the rights of Egypt’s
citizens, lifting the emergency law, revising the constitution and other
laws to make this change irreversible, and laying out a clear path to
elections that are fair and free. Above all, this transition must bring all
of Egypt’s voices to the table. For the spirit of peaceful protest and
perseverance that the Egyptian people have shown can serve as a powerful
wind at the back of this change.

The United States will continue to be a friend and partner to Egypt.
We stand ready to provide whatever assistance is necessary — and asked
for — to pursue a credible transition to a democracy. I’m also confident
that the same ingenuity and entrepreneurial spirit that the young people of
Egypt have shown in recent days can be harnessed to create new
opportunity — jobs and businesses that allow the extraordinary potential of
this generation to take flight. And I know that a democratic Egypt can
advance its role of responsible leadership not only in the region but around
the world.

Egypt has played a pivotal role in human history for over 6,000 years.
But over the last few weeks, the wheel of history turned at a blinding pace
as the Egyptian people demanded their universal rights.

We saw mothers and fathers carrying their children on their shoulders
to show them what true freedom might look like.

We saw a young Egyptian say, “For the first time in my life, I really
count. My voice is heard. Even though I’m only one person, this is the way
real democracy works.”

We saw protesters chant “Selmiyya, selmiyya” — “We are peaceful” –
again and again.

We saw a military that would not fire bullets at the people they were
sworn to protect.

And we saw doctors and nurses rushing into the streets to care for
those who were wounded, volunteers checking protesters to ensure that they
were unarmed.

We saw people of faith praying together and chanting – “Muslims,
Christians, We are one.” And though we know that the strains between faiths
still divide too many in this world and no single event will close that
chasm immediately, these scenes remind us that we need not be defined by our
differences. We can be defined by the common humanity that we share.

And above all, we saw a new generation emerge — a generation that uses
their own creativity and talent and technology to call for a government that
represented their hopes and not their fears; a government that is responsive
to their boundless aspirations. One Egyptian put it simply: Most people
have discovered in the last few days…that they are worth something, and this
cannot be taken away from them anymore, ever.

This is the power of human dignity, and it can never be denied.
Egyptians have inspired us, and they’ve done so by putting the lie to the
idea that justice is best gained through violence. For in Egypt, it was the
moral force of nonviolence — not terrorism, not mindless killing — but
nonviolence, moral force that bent the arc of history toward justice once
more.

And while the sights and sounds that we heard were entirely Egyptian,
we can’t help but hear the echoes of history — echoes from Germans tearing
down a wall, Indonesian students taking to the streets, Gandhi leading his
people down the path of justice.

As Martin Luther King said in celebrating the birth of a new nation in
Ghana while trying to perfect his own, “There is something in the soul that
cries out for freedom.” Those were the cries that came from Tahrir Square,
and the entire world has taken note.

Today belongs to the people of Egypt, and the American people are moved
by these scenes in Cairo and across Egypt because of who we are as a people
and the kind of world that we want our children to grow up in.

The word Tahrir means liberation. It is a word that speaks to that
something in our souls that cries out for freedom. And forevermore it will
remind us of the Egyptian people — of what they did, of the things that
they stood for, and how they changed their country, and in doing so changed
the world.

Thank you.

END 3:13 P.M. EST

#2 White House Press Secretary

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release February 11, 2011 Remarks by the President and Press
Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

3:32 P.M. EST

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/02/11/remarks-president-and-press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs

Q Anything further about Egypt?

MR. GIBBS: I like that tie. ….

But before I lose it, we should probably start the 250th briefing of
the Obama administration with Mr. Feller.

…
Q Shifting to Egypt, a few questions. First of all, could you tell
us whether President Obama was surprised by the news this morning?

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, I think that throughout the morning we had
gotten — and into last night — gotten indications that the last speeches
may not have been given, and the last changes, particularly this morning
when, with the — with everybody reporting that there would be a statement
from the office of the president.

So the President, as I think many of you have reported, was in a
regularly scheduled meeting in the Oval when a note was taken in to him to
let him know what had been announced. And since then, prior to giving the
statement, he spent about an hour with his national security team from about
1:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. in the Situation Room talking about what’s going on
there now, and what we have to plan for now, going forward.

Q But he learned, when he got that note after the announcement –
essentially he learned with the rest of us.

MR. GIBBS: Well, he learned what precisely had been said. I don’t
want to get into what other information he might have gotten.

Q Big picture, is this change helpful or harmful to the interests of
the United States?

MR. GIBBS: Well, Ben, I think that any time that a government changes
based on the popular response of its people, as you’ve heard the President
talk about a lot, is important. All governments have responsibilities to
those that they represent. I think as you heard the President say in his
statement, there will be many bumps along this road as this transition
continues toward free and fair elections.

So I don’t doubt, as I said, that there will be — there’s much work to
be done. This was — this is the beginning of that process, not the end of
it.

Q Does the President have any concerns as that process unfolds about
the unknowns, about the — any sense of instability right now?

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, I think that the partnership that we’ve had
with the people and the nation of Egypt for 30 years has brought regional
stability and has brought peace, particularly between the countries of Egypt
and Israel. And I think it’s important that the next government of Egypt,
as we’ve said in here many times, recognize the accords that have been
signed with the government of Israel.

You know, I think that, again, a lot has yet to be determined. I think
it is clear, though, watching the events unfold over the last couple days,
the real breadth of Egyptian society that’s been out seeking the type of
change that we saw happen today, I don’t think is dominated by a single
group or a single ideology. I think the breadth is quite wide.

Yes, ma’am.

Q Robert, since the protests began, all of your statements about
Egypt have been very carefully worded. I thought last night’s statement
from the President was especially carefully worded. Mubarak wasn’t even
mentioned. Did the President have a sense then, when he issued that
statement, that maybe the speech yesterday from Mubarak wasn’t the final
word?

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, I think it is safe to say that the very same
contacts that we have in Egypt are some of the very same contacts that many
of you all had that seemed to tell everyone that a different speech might be
what we would hear — that we didn’t hear last night.

And I think — I think as the statement says, it was at that point a
missed opportunity for the government of Egypt to take the necessary steps
toward that orderly transition. I think that was — I think, quite frankly,
Caren, that’s been true building throughout the week, that you have seen as
the government failed to take the necessary steps to broaden the coalition
and to make some fundamental reforms that would signal to those in the
opposition that they were serious, the crowds grew larger and larger.

So there is no doubt I think that there has — this is a situation
where I think the phrase we’ve used a lot around here is “threading the
needle.” There are a lot of equities in the country and in the region. And
ultimately this is something that started with, was driven by, and will
ultimately only be solved by the people of Egypt. I think that is true in
the lead-up to the historic announcement today but will be even more
important in the days ahead leading to elections.

Q Can you talk about contacts with leaders in the region that have
taken place since the announcement?

MR. GIBBS: Since the announcement today? The President has not made
any phone calls either to those in the region or — not talked to any heads
of state.

Q What about senior-level contacts? And what kind of assurances, if
any, can you give Israel and Jordan about how this may affect them and their
concerns about stability?

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, we have throughout this process wanted to see
protests that were peaceful, protests that were — our outcome in this
process we wanted to see happen in an orderly way to ensure some of that
very stability. I think that if you — that’s what, quite frankly, is what
has guided us this entire time.

The President — again, the President has not spoken with anybody. I
do not believe at this point — though I would check — you should check
more carefully with the Pentagon, in terms of whether in the last few
hours — I don’t think there have been any contacts. Obviously we’ve got
pretty good relationships, as you’ve seen throughout this process on a
military-to-military basis.

I will say it is remarkable to watch in the region how Iran is dealing
with this. We saw I think about a week or so ago they made some provocative
statements about what these marches meant. We now know what — how they’re
responding to the images that we see in Tahrir Square. They are arresting
people in Iran. They are blocking international media outlets. They are
turning off the Internet.

So for all of the empty talk about Egypt, I think if the Iranian
government — I think it’s up to the — the Iranian government should allow
the Iranian people to exercise the very same right of peaceful assembly and
ability to demonstrate and communicate their desires. I think we’ve all
seen, again, their response. The head of the Revolutionary Guard said
today, “Seditionists are no more than a corpse. We will severely crush any
of their movements.”

So I think what you’ve seen in the region is the government of Iran,
quite frankly, scared of the will of its people.

Jake.

Q Thanks, Robert. Before I ask my last questions of you in this
room, good luck, and I hope you get to spend a lot of time with Ethan. I’ve
also taken the liberty of going back and looking at all the questions you
said you’d get back to us with an answer — (laughter) — that you didn’t
get back to us with –

MR. GIBBS: Jay –

Q — starting in January 2009.

MR. GIBBS: Jay will have a transcript of all of those for you on
Monday. And if you don’t get it, just keeping pinging him.

Q When was the last time President Obama spoke with President
Mubarak?

MR. GIBBS: I’d have to double-check, but I believe it was — I’ll
double-check. I think it was right before he spoke — was it — it was
Monday, right? The Monday that he spoke. The last one we read out.

Q The last time you announced that –

MR. GIBBS: There haven’t been any calls since that that I’m aware of.

Q Under the Obama administration, the State Department changed the
way that civil society in Egypt was funding — was funded. First of all, it
didn’t directly fund civil society groups or democracy groups as the Bush
administration had done. It instead went through the Egyptian government
through approved civil society groups, and then also lowered how much civil
society groups were funded. In retrospect, does the Obama administration
regret that?

MR. GIBBS: No, I — look, I can get you a little bit longer
fact-pattern on this. I think that — I think our commitment to the
universal principles that the President has talked about throughout this
process, and in countries not just in Egypt and not just in the region but
around the world, I think are best exemplified by what he said standing in
Cairo, saying many of the things you’ve heard him say over the past several
days.

Obviously, we are watching the situation and will, as, I think, members
have testified just in the last day or so up at — up on Capitol Hill,
tailor our assistance to a changing situation.

Q Okay. And lastly, Egypt has been a tremendous ally to the United
States, according to the government, on the issue of counterterrorism.
Where are you concerned that there might not be as much support in the next
government, whoever it is? What areas –

MR. GIBBS: Well, I will say this, Jake, let me — obviously, we’re
going to watch the events, as you and many others will, in the days and
months ahead. I can say that our — the important relationships that we
have at different levels in our government with their government, I think
the President was assured continue, and particularly the one you mentioned.

Q Thank you, Robert. And all the best in your next endeavor. Can
you talk to us about the role that the Vice President played in what ended
up happening in Egypt? I know he sent a strongly worded letter to his
counterpart, Mr. Suleiman, a few days ago. Can you describe his role –

MR. GIBBS: Well, I think that — yes, I mean, look, I think the Vice
President has — we talked about it in here, there’s a — he had a
counterpart-to-counterpart relationship with Vice President Suleiman, and
has on a number of occasions spoken directly with him and, quite honestly,
Dan, reiterated largely the very same set of points that you’ve heard us
make public, and that is the genuine steps that needed to be taken to
address the concerns that those in Tahrir Square and throughout the country
have had. I think he has — he’s been on the phone fairly regularly. I
think — obviously he has brought to meetings in the Situation Room and in
the Oval Office, like last evening, quite a bit of knowledge and experience
in foreign affairs and foreign policy that have helped guide the
administration along the last 18 days or so.

Q Was that phone call, though, that we got the readout with some of
the demands, was that a pivotal moment in this crisis?

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, I think that — I think that there — it’s
probably hard to go back and pinpoint all of them, but I would say that it
was — hard to, I think, be any clearer and more blunt than the Vice
President was on that call about the steps that we, that the international
community and, most importantly, the people of Egypt needed to see happen.
And I think that — I think that certainly helped move this process along.

Q Yesterday when the President made his comments on Egypt at the top
of his remarks in Michigan, was the White House at that time fairly
optimistic that Mr. Mubarak was going to step down yesterday?

MR. GIBBS: Well, as I said, Dan, I said earlier in this briefing, I
think many of the same contacts that we had are many of the same contacts
that your network and many others in this room had in reporting what might
happen in Egypt yesterday. I think the President talked about historic
transformations, which we’ve seen, quite frankly, play out each and every
day in the last 18 [days].

But I think what’s important now is we have to look forward and work –
help all work through a process to get us to the free and fair elections
that so many have spent time yearning for.

Q And finally, just to follow up on what Ben was asking, I’m not
sure I heard an answer to this notion of concern from the White House as to
what happens between now and the elections in September. Is there concern
about what the leadership structure will be like, what could potentially
happen before the people of Egypt start voting in September?

MR. GIBBS: Well, again, I think that — I don’t think we have to fear
democracy. I don’t — I think the international community has, and again I
think most importantly the people have, laid out a series of steps that they
need to see taken. But I think it’s important, Dan, to understand that this
was a group of demonstrations and protests that were — that demonstrated
the breadth of concern across Egyptian society.

Again, I don’t think you can look at it and say this was the group that
did this, or these are the people that — again, what you’ve seen is mothers
and daughters. You’ve seen this process in some ways led by somebody that
works for, as I said a couple of days ago, one of the larger companies in
Silicon Valley.

So I think this is — what you’ve seen is the breadth of cause and
concern that had to have been addressed and needed to be addressed by the
government, and I think today was the very first step in that process.

Chip.

Q Thank you, Robert, and congratulations.

MR. GIBBS: Thank you.

Q I hope it was as good for you as it was for us. (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: He’s trying to date me and I’m not going to do it.
(Laughter.)

Q You said that obviously there are going to be some bumps in the
road and that the military needs to lay out a clear path. What is going to
be the role of the President, the Vice President, the Secretary of State,
publicly over the next weeks and months? Do they now pull back and say,
okay, this really is up to the Egyptian people now and we’re not going to
intervene? Or do they keep up the public pressure with statements and –

MR. GIBBS: I think again, first and foremost, this was always about
the people of Egypt. This always was going to be solved by the people of
Egypt. No statement here, no comment that was made here, was going to, I
think, bring the fundamental change that people were looking for in Egypt.
We talked about it a lot in here. I think the people of Egypt — again,
they have their concerns and they’re not going to be — the definition of
how to solve those concerns is not going to be solved here.

But again, I think we will continue to try to play a constructive role
in helping this process along. But, again, I think this is — this started
with the Egyptian people, and it will end with the Egyptian people.

Q But do you think the President, Vice President, Secretary of State
will be as publicly out there in pressing the military?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I mean, again, I think this is — I think what we’ve
seen — well, I think at every step along this way we have been very clear
about the response — and you heard the President discuss it today — about
violence. And I think it’s remarkable. What we’ve seen in the past 18
days, in terms of the type of sweeping change, is unlike anything we’ve ever
seen in a short period of time. And I think the next process of this is
going to play out over a much longer arc.

We will continue to be involved and to ensure that the transitional
government in Egypt and ultimately the government that the people choose to
represent the people of Egypt, if they take the steps that are necessary to
meet the concerns of those in Egypt, then this government will be a strong
partner to it and to all of our friends in the region.

Q Why exactly did the President choose not to call a foreign leader,
either Egyptian leaders or other leaders in the region, over the last day or
two?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I — let me go back and see if there’s any been
yesterday — he has not talked to anybody today.

Q Why?

MR. GIBBS: I think we have — I think we are watching events and
monitoring them. And I don’t doubt in the days ahead that the President
will reach out to those. But this is an Egyptian story today.

Q And the last question, is there a hope in the White House that the
example in Egypt could inspire another uprising in Iran?

MR. GIBBS: Well, as I mentioned earlier, I think there is quite a
contrast between the way the government of Egypt and the people of Egypt are
interacting, and the government of Iran is threatening its very own people.
I think if the government of Iran was as confident as they would have you
believe in the statements that they put out, they would have nothing to fear
with the peaceful demonstration like those that you’ve seen in Cairo and
throughout Egypt.

They’re not that confident. They’re scared. That’s why they’ve
threatened to kill anybody that tries to do this. That’s why they’ve shut
off all measure of communication. I think it speaks volumes about the
strength and the confidence that they have in fulfilling the wishes and the
will of its people.

Mike.

Q Robert, do you have any sense if the images coming from Egypt are
somehow getting into Iran? We’ve heard the Vice President and now you talk
about Iran. I’m wondering if the administration thinks there’s a chance
that the message is getting in somehow to Iran.

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, I think we have all seen reports that — over
the past many days that there — those in Iran have and want to march and
demonstrate peacefully. The government of Iran, again, has met those — the
concerns of its people with threatening to kill them. Again, I think it
speaks volumes as to what — it speaks volumes to the grip that they have,
or lack thereof, on the popular beliefs of their own people.

Q Can you talk about Vice President Suleiman’s role at this point?
Is he still in a key role, or is he on his way out as well?

MR. GIBBS: Mike, I think that is a question for the transitional
government in Egypt.

Q Talk a little bit, if you don’t mind, about the communications
challenge with this event unfolding halfway around the globe, trying not to
get ahead of the message. How challenging was that?

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, as I said earlier, I — we have — there are a
lot of different audiences, there’s a lot of different equities. We — and
I think the bottom line was, as I said, this was — this started in and it
will be solved by the people of Egypt. We spoke throughout this process
about the universal values that went into the creation of our country and
what those marching thought needed to go into the creation of their new
government.

I think — I don’t think there’s any doubt it has been challenging and
there have — not in quite some time have we had probably one topic take up
so much space inside of here over the past 18 days like it has. But there’s
no doubt it is, and it’s a — was a challenging topic for us to discuss.
But I don’t — and I think as the President said, there will be challenging
days ahead for those in Egypt to construct what their country will look like
in the months and years ahead.

Q Do you mind giving out your personal email address so we can keep
in touch?

MR. GIBBS: Marissa has it. I probably shouldn’t say it on TV.
(Laughter.)

Q You don’t want the American people to have it?

MR. GIBBS: J-a-y — (laughter.) I’m kidding. (Laughter.)

Q Everything’s been said before, I guess just everyone hadn’t said
it yet, right? Let me ask you –

MR. GIBBS: And that’s sort of — that’s the –

Q Isn’t that the way this works?

MR. GIBBS: — that’s the thematic of the briefing, isn’t it?

Q Sometimes it is. Was it a bigger — the events of yesterday or
the events of today the bigger surprise to you guys and to the President?

MR. GIBBS: Well, again, I think everyone was surprised at — a bit at
yesterday. Again, I — we — I think you can go look at my transcript from
yesterday. I was on the cautious side because I think it was clear that
things were happening, as they have over the course of 18 days, very
quickly.

Again, it is remarkable to stand here or to sit there or anywhere in
our country and watch what’s happened over the span of that 18 days. It is
a remarkable arc in human history. But, again, I think many people were
surprised at yesterday.

Q How much — is there a sense of relief in the administration,
versus trepidation?

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, I think that — as I said a minute ago, I don’t
think we have to fear democracy. I don’t — I think that whenever the will
of the people shapes the demands of those that govern it, that’s what many
had in mind with democracy and representation. So I think that’s an
important step. And again, this is about Egypt and about its people.

Q Does this change Middle East policy for the United States from
here on out? Just what happened in Egypt, what could happen elsewhere, is
it fair to say that this is going to change America’s foreign policy in the
Middle East over the long term?

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, again, I don’t — we don’t know the ultimate
outcome of what free and fair elections will be. We don’t have a sense of
who that next leader will be, but — we don’t know that person’s exact
identity, I should say.

But I think that we will continue to have important relationships.
This is a volatile region of the world. The relationships — the bilateral
that we have — bring some measure of stability and peace to the region.

Obviously, there’s still great work to do to bring peace throughout
this region, and the President has worked tirelessly with the team on that.
But — and I think, again, there will be many days ahead to see what comes
next here. But I also think it’s important, we will continue to talk
about — as we have — as we did with the Egyptian government — of the
universal values that we hold dear.

Q On Iran, I just want to follow up on that. Obviously, you guys
made a decision to do something — on those, the Vice President’s comments,
you read from specific — what appears to be things that you wanted to say
about it –

MR. GIBBS: I wanted to get the Revolutionary Guard senior commander
quote correct.

Q You guys have always walked this line with Iran, even the last
time when there were protesters, that you don’t want to look like America is
interfering, that you’ve always feared that. So I guess talk about that
line today.

MR. GIBBS: Well, I don’t — look, we’re not interfering. This is –
remember, this started with the government of Iran discussing what was
happening in Egypt. And I think probably a week or 10 days ago, I think I
said to Stephen Collinson in question that if that’s what they believe, then
they wouldn’t have any problem letting their people demonstrate about the
concerns that they have.

Now we know they didn’t really mean that. Now we know that what they
really are scared of is exactly what might happen. They’re scared of that,
and they’re threatening those that might do it with death. It’s a
strange — to say the least — reaction to a government and a military
that — governments and militaries are pledged to protect their citizens.
And it is clear that the government of Iran is quite scared of theirs.

Q I feel like I should give you an opportunity to talk about Cam
Newton’s pro day yesterday. You did bring plenty of college football to the
room.

MR. GIBBS: Auburn will be — Auburn will be here in mid-April, and I
will be back. (Laughter.)

Q Following up on Chuck’s last question, second to last question –

Q On the Cam Newton? (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: They go together, don’t they?

Q With the benefit of hindsight, are there any regrets that the
administration didn’t do more to support the revolution in Iran at the time
and boost it?

MR. GIBBS: No, I think you — I think what we said then is true now.
And I think we — again, we supported universal rights, and we support the
ability for those to exercise them. And I think it’s up to the government
of Iran to allow that to happen.

Q So it was handled –

MR. GIBBS: Again, I — I think there’s — as we’ve talked about in
here, there’s different degrees of development in each society.

Q And on a different subject, because I do think we’re maybe getting
to the end of the possible Egypt questions, but I’m sure there are — others
will be more creative –

MR. GIBBS: You seem hopeful, Laura. (Laughter.)

Q On the budget, do you think that what you put forth on spending
cuts will be enough to be credible in the eyes that the bar that Republicans
have set for cuts to federal spending? And do you think you can have a
credible budget without taking on entitlements?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I think it’s important — I think if you go back and
see what I said about the budget yesterday and the day before, I think it’s
important that we not just talk about cuts, but we talk about its — their
impact on the deficit. And I make that point because I think the
seriousness with which anybody approaches this has to be taken in some
totality, right?

We’re going to have a debate for a number of years — for a number of
the next two years about tax cuts for those who make above $250,000. We
have had a debate that takes us back to the debates of the last two years
about whether or not we should repeal health care.

We know the impact of both of those is to add far more than anybody
pledges to reducing cuts to the deficit. So I think that what the President
will put forward on Monday will be a — will certainly meet the measure of
credibility: a spending — a five-year spending freeze that results in a
10-year reduction of about $400 billion, and the smallest percentage of
government spending in relation to size of the economy since Eisenhower was
President.

I think the President, though, has been clear that there’s more that we
have to do. And I think that will be part of the conversation over the next
many years.

Peter.

Q I bet you’re going to be following every facet of that budget
process over the next few weeks. (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: I will email Jay repeatedly about –

Q Back on Egypt, looking back at the full scope of everything that’s
been said, starting on January 25th when Secretary Clinton talked about the
stability of the Mubarak government to what the President said today, do you
think that you all have been proactive or reactive to what’s happened there
over these 18 days?

MR. GIBBS: Peter, I think we have been — I think we have been fairly
steady in what we’ve said. I think you can chart what the President said
today and what — from when he talked publicly about this the first time and
when I talked publicly about this the first time, the measure of what we
were for, the fact that this was about the people of Egypt and would be
solved by them.

Look, I don’t doubt that — there were some people, again, in the
region that saw us too much on one side, and others watching the same
statement saw us on too much of the other. I think we had to — and I think
the President and his team showed steady leadership that continued to voice
the concerns of those that wanted greater rights and greater opportunities.

Q Is what happened today that result that the President desired?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I think the President and the team desired to see
greater recognition of the rights that he talked about in Cairo in 2009 and
that those that have marched in Cairo in 2011 have sought. Again, I don’t
think we have to fear — I don’t think this is something we should fear. I
think this is, as I said and the President have said, that we — those that
are in government have an opportunity to represent the will of the people.
And I think that process, that long transition, has just begun in Egypt.

Q One more shot on Iran. Would you like to see in Tehran — would
you like to see what happened in Cairo today happen ultimately in Tehran?

MR. GIBBS: I would like to see, and I think the administration would
like to see, the ability of the people of Iran to voice what they’d like to
see from their government. And I think if the government of Iran didn’t
fear the voices of their own people, they’d let them do that.

Q So you don’t want to go so far as to say you’d like to see that
government overthrown?

MR. GIBBS: I’m comfortable with my previous answer.

Q Does that apply to Saudi Arabia?

MR. GIBBS: Again, I — we have conversations with governments
throughout the world in this region and in other regions about adhering to
universal values.

Q Following on Karen’s question earlier, how concerned is the
administration specifically about unrest spreading to Jordan? Queen Rania
has been accused of corruption. How closely are you looking at that
situation?

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, I mean, throughout this process we have
watched — again, we’ve watched throughout the region. And again, I
reiterate that when we have meetings with — when we have bilateral meetings
with these countries, we discuss, again, the universal values that we
discussed on many occasions with the government of Egypt.

Q Are you particularly concerned about unrest spreading to Jordan
and Syria and these other –

MR. GIBBS: I’m not going to get into some of those conversations.

Q Could you talk a little bit more about the role the administration
thinks that the Egyptian military should be playing now that they’ve
essentially taken over?

MR. GIBBS: Well, the — look, this is — I don’t — I’m not going to
go through each and every step of this process. I think the President was
clear in the responsibilities as a transitional government that they have.
Some of the changes that are necessary need to take place, and the important
steps that have to be demonstrated and the constitutional change that we
need to see, that the people of Egypt need to see, on the road to free and
fair elections. And I think they have those — they have those obligations
to that.

Connie.

Q Best of luck, Robert. Be happy. Three housekeeping questions.
Are you going to recommend to Jay that he continue the pattern of really
very heavy questions in the first two or three rows? (Laughter.) It’s a
serious question for everybody in the back rows.

MR. GIBBS: Connie, would you have that question if you weren’t
situated today in the middle of the second row? (Laughter.)

Q It’s not my seat, but I’ve been here for 43 years.

MR. GIBBS: Connie, I am only moments away from not having to wade into
the politics of many of the rows in this room, and I am not going to — I
know that you guys will solve all these problems together.

Q Two more. Will you recommend that you have the prearranged
questions, a list of questions, at press conferences?

MR. GIBBS: We don’t have a prearranged list of questions at press
conferences.

Q Arranged questioners, I think.

MR. GIBBS: Is that what she meant?

Q Yes, that’s what I meant.

MR. GIBBS: I think we bring some order to how the President calls on
you guys. We don’t have — I want to be clear, because I think your
original question before Jake amended it was, does the President have a
prearranged list of questions at the press conference?

Q He reads my mind.

MR. GIBBS: I’m going to leave that aside. (Laughter.) Again, the
President does not have a prearranged list of questions at a press
conference.

Do you realize that you’re just — Dana is just writing all this down.
(Laughter.) He’s absorbing all of this, and this stuff just writes itself.

Q He had a great book, by the way.

MR. GIBBS: I’ll have some time to read it.

Q I can’t remember my last question now.

MR. GIBBS: Jake may know. (Laughter.)

Q Prearranged question. (Laughter.)

Q Who decides — oh, yes, the last question. Will you keep your
excellent staff, press staff, on board?

MR. GIBBS: Keep these guys? Absolutely. (Laughter.) No, no, this is
very serious. These guys — there’s no better group of — there’s no better
group that I’ve ever worked with, and I’ve done this — I took my first job
in politics February 14th, 1994, paid job. And I will walk out of here on
February 13th, 2011 — 17 years. I have not had and not worked with a
greater group of people than what I have worked with on a campaign and in
this office. And they are terrific. Each and every day they make the
President and they make all of us look good. They are and will continue to
be the backbone of the White House press operation.

Q Thank you. You guys owe me one for that.

Q Now, this is a prearranged question — (laughter) — so you
already know it, but for the benefit of everybody else here –

MR. GIBBS: I’ll let you finish it just so it looks –

Q Just for appearances.

MR. GIBBS: “No.” (Laughter.) Oh, I didn’t, sorry. (Laughter.) Go
ahead.

Q What is your — what is the President’s message to people in
Jordan and Saudi Arabia who are looking at Egypt, saying, we want to have
the same sort of nonviolent revolution; get rid of our monarchy. Would he
encourage that?

MR. GIBBS: Well, again, I don’t think it is — it hasn’t been during
the 18 days here, and it’s not our role to make that kind of statement.
Again, I think it is important that — we have bilateral relationships and
in those meetings we say publicly and we say privately that governments
throughout the world — we just did this when the government of China was
here — have to recognize a certain level of individual and basic freedom.
And I think that has been true for this administration and previous
administrations that were here before us.

Q Thank you, Robert. Now that you have more time on your hands, you’ll
be returning all our phone calls and emails, won’t you? (Laughter.) I love
he does a “no comment.”

I’m going to depart from the Egypt questions and follow on Laura’s
budget questions. The House Republicans have been very divided among
themselves over how much cutting to do. As you know, conservatives are
pressing for additional cuts. The President met with Speaker Boehner
earlier this week, and I’m wondering how closely is President Obama watching
this debate among Republicans? And how concerned is he that the pressure
that their party faces from the right will make it more difficult for him to
reach some kind of agreement with Republicans on a budget?

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, I don’t — I think the President obviously is a
pretty big consumer of news. I have not heard him discuss in the past few
days the articles about, as you mentioned, the pressure that House
Republicans have come under from different entities in their caucus.

I think that — I think out of that lunch and I think even well before
that lunch we had a model in December of being able to sit down and make
some important decisions for the people of this country to take some
important steps like reducing our deficit that only can be done when we both
seek common ground. And I think that’s what will be the end of this, is
there will be some agreement.

I think there will be some tough decisions along the way, and you’ll
see some of those tough decisions from our side in the budget. But I think
in the end you will see that the two parties have to come together. And we
have divided government. That’s the nature of any our solutions.

Q So he’s confident that he can avert a shutdown of the sort that
happened in the mid-1990s, and that you’ll –

MR. GIBBS: I doubt that — I think there’s probably some very serious
concern in the Republican caucus of not wanting to repeat that. And I think
that you’ve heard the notion of some of — even Speaker Boehner has said we
have to make some tough decisions around and some tough votes on the debt
that require us all to be adult.

Yes, ma’am.

Q Thank you, Robert. Compliments to you and your family.

MR. GIBBS: Thank you.

Q Regarding the six-party talks, South Korean government had mentioned
today the issue of the preconditions for resumption of the six-party talks.
And does the United States have any preconditions to rejoin six-party talks?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I think what was clear in the bilateral talks that
quickly broke down earlier this week between South Korea and North Korea was
that North Korea genuinely lacked the seriousness to be involved in this.
And I think before we return to six-party talks, I think North Korea has to
demonstrate a seriousness — the seriousness with which they need to employ
to live up to their commitments.

And I think it was clear, again, when talks broke down earlier this
week bilaterally, that they were — they had no real intention of entering
into a constructive dialogue like this. And I think it results in further
isolation of North Korea, and they can make a conscious decision but it’s
going to require that conscious decision.

Q What is the detail of the United States –

MR. GIBBS: Well, I think — look, I think the broadest thing is they’ve
got — again, they have to show a willingness to live up to their
commitments and to denuclearize. And I — that’s what we have said
throughout this process and I think they need to demonstrate how serious
they are about that.

Yes, sir.

Q Thank you. Mr. President said Egyptians have changed the world.
And so far what I am hearing about states, other oppressive states in the
region, it looks like your administration has not yet adapted to this
changing world. Or could you please walk us through what is the changing
world and what does your administration need for the changing world?

MR. GIBBS: I think I gave this — I’ve given this answer a couple of
times, but I’ll repeat it. We spend time in public and in private with
governments throughout the world — not just in this region, but throughout
the world — on what we see — I’m not sure what that noise is. There we
go. Sorry. Caren’s recorder went from recorder to player, or somebody’s
did. I thought maybe — I thought that was in my head, but now it appeared
to be — (laughter.)

Q That’s why –

MR. GIBBS: It appeared to have been — I felt much better when you
guys recognized it as a noise too.

Q Is that why you’re leaving? (Laughter.)

Q He’s hearing noises.

MR. GIBBS: I think that — again, there are certain basic and
universal rights that people yearn for throughout the world. That’s exactly
what the President talked about, and I think that’s what — that’s the –
the responsibility of governments is to meet those rights.

Q But the statement came from the President and he openly said the
world has changed. So my question is, again, has any kind of policy changed
so far that can we see dealing with these states? Have you adjusted your
policies yet?

MR. GIBBS: Well, again, I — I’ll try it one more time. We had these
conversations directly with those — with governments throughout the world.
Again, we mentioned what happened not too long ago with the government of
China that resulted in the leader of the Chinese saying there was much work
to be done.

Ann.

Q You’ve worked for the President both — while he was President and
as a presidential candidate. Do you think as we move in toward the 2012
campaign — presumably we’ll see you again sometime during that period — do
you think he can make governmental decisions and simply leave politics out
of it? Is he the kind of person who can make governmental policy decisions
without always thinking maybe in the back of his mind on his own political
future?

MR. GIBBS: Like that brilliant auto bailout? (Laughter.) I mean, I
will say I think most of the first couple years of our administration have
been marked with decisions that you didn’t need anybody to tell you weren’t
hugely popular but needed to be taken.

Q Saw how that came out.

MR. GIBBS: And — but I think part of that is because we had an
election — there’s a calendar of elections and then there’s an arc of
recovery that may not perfectly align with an interim election.

This is a President who has, again, made a series of very tough,
sometimes unpopular decisions to ensure that we didn’t go from what some
have called a great recession to a great depression. And I think the
President — I think one of the things you’ll see is you’ll see a lot more
of the President trying to tell the story of why we’re making these
decisions.

I think that’s — I think he said that. That’s one of the threads that
we lost over the first two years was we made a series of decisions that had
to be made quickly, and we forgot to tell a larger story.

Q Will you and others advise him to make those tough decisions even
when it’s him up for reelection?

MR. GIBBS: We will. I mean, I will tell you that I remember being in
the final decisions around the — what to do about the auto companies, and
it is a tremendous story and people that have worked on it here have done a
tremendous job.

But even — I remember sitting in that meeting and even with — the
notion was even if you give — if you make some of the required management
changes and give them a lifeline, it was still a 51-49 proposition. I think
it will go down as one of the best decisions we made because now you see
companies that are fundamentally restructured and capable of surviving and
thriving in this economy and that will only get stronger.

Mike.

Q Two questions if I can. First, can you talk about what — how
much, if at all, the recommendations from the budget commission, deficit
commission, are going to be reflected in the budget that we see on Monday?

MR. GIBBS: That is a good question for somebody next week.
(Laughter.)

Q All right. Well, then on the subject of –

MR. GIBBS: I should use that more often in the next few minutes.

Q CPAC is happening just up the road, and a number of potential
candidates are speaking there today. Mitt Romney called the President a
weak President who lacks clear direction, and Tim Pawlenty invoked the birth
certificate controversy and asked what planet the President is from. I’m
wondering if you want to take a shot at responding to potential rivals of
the President –

MR. GIBBS: I think we did pretty well Minnesota and I think the
President has — though he didn’t talk about it a lot, Mitt Romney — I
think what Governor Romney did on health care was one of the decisions that
Ann just alluded to that was a tough decision, but it was a series of the
right decisions. I’d be interested to see if throughout the next two years
the two words “health care” come out of his mouth.

Carol.

Q Can you — I know you won’t be here, but can you give us a little
week-ahead, how the President plans to –

MR. GIBBS: I have a week-ahead, yes. You want to just fast-forward
this whole thing, don’t you?

Q No, no. And then I have others. One or two.

MR. GIBBS: I’ll do the week-ahead last, how about that?

Q The Chicago election, do you know how the President intends to
vote? Is that absentee?

MR. GIBBS: He has requested his absentee ballot. The last time I
checked, the First Lady had voted and the President had yet to. I will –

Q But do check, because she hadn’t voted as of Tuesday.

MR. GIBBS: I think — I think the last time I checked was yesterday.

Q Okay, so you think –

MR. GIBBS: So I think she voted — she’s voted sometime in between. I
don’t know whether the President has voted, but I will check on that
right — as soon as I get out here.

Q And then if you could –

Q And get back to us.

MR. GIBBS: Yes.

Q How would you — just on your departure, how would you assess the
President’s relationship with the press corps at this point in his
present –

MR. GIBBS: Soon somebody is going to pay me a lot of money to give
that assessment and I look forward to — (laughter) — I look forward to
sharing that with them.

Q Thank you, Robert.

MR. GIBBS: April.

Q Hey, wait a minute. (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: He does that just to do that, April. That’s why — if you
can see the size of the grin on Ben’s face every single day when he does
that. I’m sorry. I don’t mean to stir the pot as I leave.

Q Oh, yes, you do. (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: Go ahead.

Q Thank you, Ben. For the last time, promise me –

MR. GIBBS: Oh, I will get that to you. I have not had a chance to –
(laughter.) [Email Redacted] — (laughter.) No, I will — I will try to
find that out.

Q You promised Wednesday you were going to call me at home, and you
did not. (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: Yes, I did.

Q You did, on tape.

MR. GIBBS: Promised I’d call you at home?

Q Well, you said you’d call me that night. (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: I don’t think I said that I’d call you that night.
(Laughter.)

Q You said that night –

MR. GIBBS: April, can I –

Q Okay, just on the cell phone — you said –

MR. GIBBS: April, there may be –

Q Anyway, moving on –

MR. GIBBS: April, can I — I’ve got a follow-up. Who were you talking
to that promised to call you? I will go find out whether he’s voted or not.

Q I know these are things that I — I have an interest in that
answer, too, so –

Q A lot of people do, yes.

MR. GIBBS: I will go find out as soon as I walk out of here.

Q All right, now on the economics of Egypt, now that there is –

MR. GIBBS: Quite a segue. (Laughter.)

Q Now that there is a change in leadership, let’s talk about the
American pocketbook and gas prices and things of that nature. Should we
expect to see some change in prices of a barrel of oil now because things
have changed? Or is there still volatility to push the price up?

MR. GIBBS: Look, I think inherent in the pricing of oil is some
volatility. As much as I would love to tackle a few subjects that they tell
me never to talk about, I should not do that in the last briefing I have. I
will say this –

Q What can they do? (Laughter.)

Q Fire you? (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: I don’t want to make people rich or poor based on what I
say.

Q You’re not an oil expert.

MR. GIBBS: But on a daily basis in the deputies committee meeting that
have been taking place around Egypt, we have discussed what is happening
with transportation in ports of entry and in the Suez, and we continue to
monitor that and do not see a disruption on that.

Q And lastly, congratulations on your new chapter.

MR. GIBBS: Thank you.

Q Now — (laughter) — Monday it’s going to be different for you.
Do you think you will be going through news and information withdrawal?

MR. GIBBS: No doubt.

Q How are you going to handle Monday when it comes?

MR. GIBBS: I will do that in my week ahead. I’ll show you –
(laughter.)

Q Thanks. I wanted to follow up on Mitt Romney’s glaring omission
in his remarks today. Has the President been watching the CPAC coverage
inbetween watching the — okay. (Laughter.) And why do you think — do you
think that it’s important for Mitt Romney to talk about his health care
plan, and why? Why would that be important?

MR. GIBBS: I don’t know why he wouldn’t.

Q Really? Okay.

MR. GIBBS: I don’t know.

Q I had an Egypt one, believe it or not — actually a couple on
Egypt. Have the — have the Secretary Clinton and the Samantha Power camps
kind of gotten together? Are they on the same place now on — in terms
of –

MR. GIBBS: I’m not entirely sure what you’re speaking about.

Q Internal divisions on how publicly to push for change and on how
much change is enough change, in terms of the Egyptian government. Is
there — is the White House and the administration all on the same page
about –

MR. GIBBS: Margaret, I think we’ve been all on the same page for quite
some time. Rich and Stephen and then I’ll go.

Q No, it’s okay, it’s fine.

Q Robert, congratulations. And on Egypt, I’m wondering — you’ve
been talking about, like with Jordan and Saudi Arabia, the bilateral
relations, what the President says privately and publicly. I’m wondering,
though, at this moment, isn’t there more that he could be saying publicly?
Does he plan to play any sort of a greater role in terms of trying to
empower the people of other countries, like the Egyptian people are now
being empowered?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I think, again, Rich, I don’t know of anything that
is planned to do that. I would point you to what he said today. And I
think what’s important to remember about all of this is it didn’t start
by — we didn’t start it. We didn’t finish it. This is an issue for the
people of Egypt and the people of countries around the world to petition
their governments.

Stephen.

Q The President just said now that the Egyptian people forged change
through peaceful means, and not terrorism and violence. Is the
administration arguing now that expressions of popular will like this and
democracy could drain a sort of swamp where — from which extremists find
their recruits?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I think that — I think the line, Stephen, that you
point to is one with some I think very specific meaning. And I think if you
go back to what the President said in his inaugural address by — there are
those that seek to change by building, and those that seek to change by
blowing up and destroying. And I think what we have seen in Cairo goes
greatly in contrast with entities like al Qaeda that have killed people that
share their belief, their religious belief, in order to scare and to
terrorize.

Q So, in that case, is it — will we see more of an emphasis on
pushing for democracy in the Middle East in the foreign policy than we’ve
seen –

MR. GIBBS: I think you’ll see the President continue to hold up the
concerns of those throughout the world that seek a greater recognition.

I’m going to do the week ahead and then I am going to go.

Q One more –

Q Robert –

MR. GIBBS: Let me just do the week ahead, guys. Before I do, I’m
going to give you my week ahead, April. Are you ready?

Q Yes.

MR. GIBBS: On Monday, the former press secretary will travel with
Ethan Gibbs to school.

Q Awwww!

MR. GIBBS: In the morning he’ll catch some SportsCenter and a bike
ride if the weather holds up. In the afternoon he’s hoping for a nap –
(laughter) — before walking several hundred feet to the bus stop to greet
Ethan. Travel pool will accompany. (Laughter.) Fortunately for me, I do
not anticipate any further public events for the remainder of the week.

The President, on the other hand, and you all have a very busy week.
On Monday, the President will travel to Baltimore County, Maryland — I
don’t know if it’s city or not — to speak to the students at Parkville
Middle and Center of Technology. I don’t know if that’s the right –

Q Parkville Middle and Center of Technology.

MR. GIBBS: I see, there’s an “and.” Education Secretary Arne Duncan
and OMB Director Jack Lew will join the President for the visit, where he
will lay out key priorities in the 2012 budget and discuss the importance of
investing in education to prepare our children to be competitive in the
global economy.

On Tuesday, the President will honor recipients of the 2010 Medal of
Freedom in a ceremony at the White House. The Medal of Freedom, America’s
highest civilian honor, is awarded to individuals who make an especially
meritorious contribution to the security or national interests of the United
States, world peace, cultural, or other significant public or private
endeavors.

On Wednesday, the President will meet with state legislators at the
White House. Later the President will deliver remarks at the White House on
the America’s Great Outdoors Initiative.

On Thursday, the President will attend meetings at the White House
before leaving in the afternoon to travel to the West Coast.

On Friday, the President will visit Intel Corporation in Hillsboro,
Oregon. While at Intel, the President will tour the world’s most advanced
semiconductor manufacturing facility, as well as learn more about Intel’s
science, technology, engineering and math education program.

It has been a tremendous honor and a privilege to do this over the past
little more than two years. I wish you all good luck. I will miss you. I
had a lot of fun. And I hope, as we covered some very serious subjects and
we watched the world change, I hope you had some fun, too.

Thank you.

Is this guy kidding????…He has GOT to be on drugs….or maybe just severely brain damaged (in which case I pity him and the people of Great Britain…but I doubt it)…Perhaps he is blind and deaf…or is it early senility?

The largest, strongest Arab nation in the Middle East is about to fall into the hands of terrorist-islamo-fascist ayatollahs, who will control the mega-military built and paid for by the United States of America. This country, Egypt, is sitting on Israel’s southern border. The likely new rulers have openly declared that they will void Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel. That’s Israel’s southern border. On the north, Israel has Lebanon, which has just had its government hijacked by Iranian proxy Hizbullah. They have more than 40,000 missiles pointing at Tel-Aviv and environs. The damage to Israel from Hizbullah missiles in the last war has still not been completely repaired. The people of Israel might just be a bit nervous…wouldn’t you????

Israel’s Prime Minister, Netanyahu is attempting to respond to the citizens of Israel’s concerns by stating Israel “will be ready for any outcome” and promised to “reinforce the might of Israel”.

Britain’s genius of a foreign secretary calls this “belligerent rhetoric”???!!! He wants Israel to focus on preventing Jews from building homes in Israel rather than the growing existential threats to the Jewish State? Ignore the jihadist sandwich that is enveloping Israel?

Must be nice over there in La-La Land…Can I have a taste of some of that primo stuff you are smoking?

form action=”https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr” method=”post”>

Hague warns Israel over ‘belligerent’ rhetoric

Foreign Secretary William Hague warned “belligerent” Israel to tame its rhetoric and said unrest in Arab countries may hinder the peace process, in comments published on Wednesday.

Reprinted from AFP

LONDON — Foreign Secretary William Hague warned “belligerent” Israel to tame its rhetoric and said unrest in Arab countries may hinder the peace process, in comments published on Wednesday.

Hague told the London Times that recent popular uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt and Jordan could undermine the search for a permanent solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and urged the United States to take action.

“Amidst the opportunity for countries like Tunisia and Egypt, there is a legitimate fear that the Middle East peace process will lose further momentum and be put to one side, and will be a casualty of uncertainty in the region,” Hague said.

“Part of the fear is that uncertainty and change will complicate the process still further,” the foreign secretary, who is on a three-day trip to north Africa and the Middle East, told the newspaper.

“That means there is a real urgency for the Israelis and the US. Recent events mean this is an even more urgent priority and that?s a case we are putting to the Israeli government and in Washington.”

The former Conservative party leader reacted strongly to Israel leader Benjamin Netanyahu’s call to his nation to be ready for “any outcome” and his promise to “reinforce the might of the state of Israel.”

“This should not be a time for belligerent language,” Hague argued. “It is a time to inject greater urgency into the Middle East peace process.”

Israel’s stance on settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territories is “disappointing” and peace may become “impossible” within a few years, Hague said.

He also voiced concern over possible conflict between the Jewish state and Shiite Muslim militant group Hezbollah following last month’s collapse of the Lebanese government.

“The scale of any military conflict that may happen between Israel and Hezbollah is growing, because of the growth of armaments in the area,” Hague warned.

Hague spoke while traveling to Jordan from Tunisia, where he met members of the country’s interim government, including Prime Minister Mohammed Ghannouchi.

Why Obama’s commitments to Israel in return for an extension of the the Jewish building ban is not worth the paper it is (NOT) written on…

New Show/Podcast!!!

Listen to the show…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

The American president is not omnipotent. Another president, another time, any agreements made by a predecessor can be voided or countermanded. Then, there’s the U.S.Congress that sometimes just seems to have a will of it’s own now, doesn’t it?…

History does not speak well for the veracity of U.S. presidential promises…Remember the US/Taiwan defense treaty in 1954, Israel’s retreat from the Sinai with US promises in 1957, President Ford’s Golan Heights promise in 1975, Ronald Reagan’s stipulations about Saudi Arabian F-15s in 1982, Bush’s promise to reward Shamir for Israeli restraint in 1991, Clinton’s promised reward for Israel’s retreat from Southern Lebanon in 2000…and then there’s the story of the US Embassy move from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem…Every one…a promise made…a promise broken, by a U.S. president…

The Israeli Prime Minister would do well to take Obama’s promises with more than a grain of salt…

All this and more on “The Marty Roberts Show”…

Listen to the show…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download