After Gaza invasion: Obama White House needs to get its head in the game

Thursday was a head-swiveling day for all of Washington. When not transfixed by the horror of a commercial airliner spread all over the Ukrainian countryside, their eyes are glued to the sight of watching Israeli tanks roll into Gaza.

Unfortunately, that's typical inside-the-Beltway behavior: flitting from one crisis to another, intent on what’s just happened. It would do better to start thinking about what’s going to happen next, and what the U.S. can do to assure the best outcome.

It would do Washington better to start thinking about what’s going to happen next, and what the U.S. can do to assure the best outcome.

What’s next? In Gaza, Hamas will be worse off for picking a fight with the Israeli military. The Arab world isn't rushing to defend the militant Islamist organization.  Indeed, Cairo has sent plenty of signals that it doesn't have much use for Hamas. 

The situation now? Hamas is running short of money. It's been clobbered by the Israeli military. And the latest Israeli land incursion will likely demolish its tunnels and military caches in the south and east along the border with Egypt. This will further degrade the group’s military power.

So the real issue for Washington is how to capitalize on the reduction in Hamas capability and stature.

For starters, the administration should realize that Cairo has just sent a big, fat message that it wants to be a force for good—a partner in on-going efforts to restore stability to the region. President Obama should act to take them up on the offer.

Hamas is a stooge of Iran. A bad day for the militants is a bad day for Tehran. It's time for the White House to forget about making nice with Iran and put their stooges and the regime on the endangered species list.

The White House has supported Israel's right to defend itself. The president should maximize our strategic relationship with the Middle East’s only functioning democracy, rather than marginalize the alliance.

To that end, the US should stop wasting time on the fruitless Palestinian-Israeli peace process. As long as Hamas—an organization sworn to destroy Israeli—holds sway among the Palestinian Authority, any peace “process” is doomed. The administration would do far better to focus its attention and considerable diplomatic resources on equally vital, and far more amenable, problems—such as keeping Iraq from spiraling into utter chaos.

The humbling of Hamas, now underway, opens new options for the U.S. The White House needs to get its head in the game and take advantage of the opportunity.

James Jay Carafano is vice president of foreign and defense policy studies  The Heritage Foundation. Follow him on Twitter @JJCarafano.

View the original article here

Gaza crisis: Obama administration accuses Israel of not protecting civilians

The Obama administration accused Israel on Thursday of failing to do all it can to prevent civilian casualties in Gaza during cross-border attacks.

Noting the deaths a day earlier of four boys who were killed on a Gaza beach by an Israeli strike, the State Department said the high civilian death toll in Gaza has been "heartbreaking." Three more children were killed in Gaza on Thursday.

Still, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki also criticized Hamas militants in Gaza who continue to fire rockets and mortars into Israel, prolonging the latest round of violence in the Mideast that has so far killed 235 Palestinians and at least one Israeli.

"I don't think we've made any secret about our strong concern about the actions of Hamas, the indiscriminate rocket attacks, the targeting of civilians," Psaki said. "And that concern remains."

Of the Gaza beach attacks that killed four cousins on Wednesday, Psaki called the attack "horrifying."

"The tragic event makes clear that Israel must take every possible step to meet its standards for protecting civilians from being killed," Psaki said. "We will continue to underscore that point to Israel."

Asked whether the U.S. believes Israel has not done enough to prevent civilian casualties, Psaki said: "We believe that certainly there's more that can be done."

Secretary of State John Kerry reiterated U.S. concerns about civilian casualties in a phone call to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the State Department said in a statement late Thursday.

Netanyahu described the "imminent threat" posed to Israel by Hamas tunnels from the Gaza Strip, and Kerry reaffirmed strong U.S. support for Israel's right to defend itself against terrorist threats from such tunnels, the statement said. "This should be a precise operation to target tunnels," Kerry said of the Israeli ground incursion into the Gaza Strip.

Kerry also emphasized the need to avoid further escalation of the fighting and to restore the 2012 cease-fire as soon as possible, the department's statement said, noting the importance of Hamas accepting this plan "as soon as possible."

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon also urged Israel on Thursday "to do far more to stop civilian casualties," calling the killing of four boys on a beach in Gaza City "appalling."

The U.S. has been pushing plans for a cease-fire that Egypt proposed. Kerry also spoke Thursday to top diplomats in Cairo and the Qatari capital Doha to try to negotiate an end to hostilities that entered their eleventh day.

But fierce fighting between Israel and Hamas resumed almost immediately after a five-hour lull in attacks that the United Nations brokered to let Palestinians stock up on food and supplies after days of staying at home for protection. There were intermittent rocket attacks during the lull as well.

Palestinian militants fired more than 50 rockets at Israel, including a barrage at the Tel Aviv area, according to the Israeli military. Israel responded with airstrikes, including the one that killed three youngsters in Gaza City, said a Gaza health ministry spokesman.

The conflict intensified Thursday as thousands of Israeli soldiers backed by tanks invaded the Gaza Strip. That escalated a military operation that was trying to destroy Hamas' weapons arsenal, rocket-firing abilities and tunnels.

The latest wave of violence was spurred by last month's kidnapping and killings of three Israeli teenagers whose bodies were found in the West Bank, followed almost immediately by what authorities believe was a retribution attack on a Palestinian youth who was strangled, beaten and burned to death .

But tensions between Israel and Palestinian authorities have been simmering for years. They threatened to boil over earlier this spring when Israel shelved nearly nine months of peace negotiations that were being personally shepherded by Kerry after Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas agreed to create a unity government with Hamas.

View the original article here

Allies hold up Syria intervention, Obama takes case to Congress

The Obama administration was running into roadblocks as it tried to corral an international coalition in support of intervention in Syria, with U.S. allies appearing to hit pause on calls for a missile strike. 

Britain and France, which helped lead the 2011 mission to impose a no-fly zone in Libya, on Thursday were still in a wait-and-see mode on Syria, as the countries await the results of a United Nations investigation. 

And unlike with Libya, the U.N. Security Council has so far not approved any action on Syria. The five permanent members reportedly will meet Thursday afternoon to discuss the situation. 

Some of the fiercest deliberations were unfolding in London, where British Prime Minister David Cameron faced down a skeptical Parliament as he tried to make the case for intervention. He has already backed off his goal of holding a single vote on Thursday, allowing for a second vote possibly next week. 

Cameron argued that an attack on Syria in response to chemical weapons use would be legal. Met with skepticism in Parliament, though, Cameron said the motion he's put forward would require Britain to wait until U.N. weapons inspectors report their findings, until "further action" is taken at the U.N., and until another vote is held in Parliament. 

The delay in London could prevent Obama from taking any action, as his administration has said it will not act unilaterally on Syria. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says inspectors are leaving the country on Saturday, meaning any report from them is not likely until next week at the earliest. 

But Obama is facing his own set of problems in Washington, where lawmakers currently on summer recess are beginning to voice serious consternation about the possibility of a missile strike. 

"It is essential that you provide a clear, unambiguous explanation of how military action -- which is a means, not a policy -- will secure U.S. objectives and how it fits into your overall policy," House Speaker John Boehner wrote in a letter to the president on Wednesday. 

Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel were briefing top lawmakers on Thursday, as the military continues to prepare for a possible strike. A fifth Navy Destroyer was sent into the eastern Mediterranean on Thursday. 

One senior Hill aide said there was a concern that launching missiles at Syria could simply be a case of "fire and forget." Further, lawmakers are worried about the potential consequences of a bombing mission. And they want to know the endgame. 

"We don't employ the U.S. military just to make a point," groused one congressional source who asked not to be identified. 

In an interview with PBS on Wednesday, Obama bluntly declared that the Syrian government carried out a chemical weapons attack last week. 

He suggested a "shot across the bow" for Syria could be in the interest of U.S. national security. 

But while the administration is expected to release intelligence findings regarding last week's attack as early as Thursday, the Associated Press reported that officials say that intelligence is "not a slam dunk." 

If there is even a shred of doubt that Assad and his top lieutenants ordered the strike last week, Obama is likely to face even more questions from Congress during briefings on Thursday. Many lawmakers are already demanding that he seek a formal vote before moving ahead with any strikes. 

Meanwhile, battle lines are being drawing in the international community. After Russia refused to sign on to a Britain-drafted resolution before the U.N. Security Council on Wednesday, Reuters reports that Russia is sending two warships to the Mediterranean Sea, where the U.S. has also positioned ships. The Navy has also boosted its presence in the Persian Gulf, adding one more aircraft carrier. 

Fox News' Chad Pergram contributed to this report.

View the original article here

'Incoherent' Obama policy on Egypt under fire as violence spreads

As Egypt descends into chaos, President Obama is facing increasing criticism that an "incoherent" policy toward the country -- much like U.S. policy toward Syria -- is putting U.S. money and influence on the line without a clear end-game.

The Obama administration claims to be staying neutral in the violent confrontation between the military-backed government and Muslim Brotherhood supporters of ousted President Mohammed Morsi. More than 600 people have been killed so far across the country.

"America cannot determine the future of Egypt," Obama said Thursday, in brief remarks from Martha's Vineyard, where he's vacationing, as he appealed for calm and condemned the violence.

Yet the administration is sending mixed signals. While the president directly spoke out against the military-backed government on Thursday -- and canceled upcoming joint military exercises -- the U.S. has refused to label Morsi's ouster a coup. That means, under U.S. law, the administration can continue to send $1.5 billion in annual aid to the Egyptian government.

The mixed signals raise concern that the U.S. is simply breeding distrust on both sides.

The argument in favor of aid is that it helps secure U.S. influence in Cairo, which is critical not only to Mideast stability but also the security of U.S. ally Israel. Yet the crackdown this week showed U.S. influence with the Egyptian military is waning, analysts warned. A wave of phone calls from top administration officials to their counterparts in Cairo, as well as an unconventional delegation of U.S. lawmakers to the country, did not quell the unrest.

"While President Obama 'condemns the violence in Egypt,' his administration continues to send billions of taxpayer dollars to help pay for it," Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said in a statement on Thursday.

John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. under the George W. Bush administration, called the current policy "completely incoherent."

"You can't have your press secretary say ... that this is up for Egyptians to answer, and then try and get in the middle of it," Bolton said.

Security analysts, diplomats and editorial pages across the country are deeply divided over whether Obama should throw U.S. weight behind the military or the protesters, or stay out entirely. Few, though, are praising the administration for its current policy.

Bolton said the wisest thing for the president to do would be to not say much at all. He claimed that the reality for the U.S. is that the best option is for the Egyptian military to stay in control, "ugly as it may be." The Muslim Brotherhood, he said, is an "armed militia" and not a political party.

But he said the United States' fuzzy policy only tells the current government "we're irrelevant."

Others say the U.S. should take a stand by declaring the overthrow a coup and/or suspending aid.

"I think we may have to (suspend aid) as a short-term measure now," the Brookings Institution's Michael O'Hanlon told Fox News, likening the crackdown to Tiananmen Square.

The Washington Post published a blistering editorial on Thursday, accusing the administration of being "complicit" in the interim government's crackdown.

Dalibor Rohac, a policy analyst with the Cato Institute, told FoxNews.com that the "equivocating" over whether to call the overthrow a coup is "truly embarrassing."

He said it's evident the U.S. has "no leverage," and "the fact is we are taking sides by sending them this aid money."

Barak Barfi, a research fellow at The New America Foundation, said a big problem is the amount of aid the U.S. sends simply isn't enough to buy that much influence anymore.

"A billion dollars does not buy as much as it could in 1980," he told Fox News. Yet, Barfi said, if the U.S. suspends the aid, the move would be used by the generals to stoke an anti-foreign backlash and consolidate support for itself.

The U.S. has struggled to articulate its position as the situation became increasingly dire in the aftermath of Morsi's ouster. Pressed earlier this month by a reporter to explain the U.S. stance on whether the ouster was a coup, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said: "There was a determination made that we (do) not need to make a designation."

The chaos has raised broader and more troubling questions about the impact of the so-called Arab Spring, which the Obama administration has touted. The overthrow of Hosni Mubarak was arguably the most significant transition to come out of the 2011 sea change in the Middle East. But the country is now caught between an Islamist movement with questionable credentials on democracy and a military-backed government that is flirting with the tactics of the Mubarak reign.

In nearby Syria, a civil war has engulfed the country amid modest U.S. steps to aid the opposition. And in Libya, militants attacked the U.S. compound in Benghazi last fall despite U.S. military support for the overthrow of Muammar Qaddafi.

Obama, speaking in Martha's Vineyard, acknowledged that he's being accused of supporting both sides in Egypt, but urged Egyptians to focus on righting their own problems.

"I know it's tempting inside of Egypt to blame the United States or the West or some other outside actor for what's gone wrong. We've been blamed by supporters of Morsi. We've been blamed by the other side as if we are supporters of Morsi," he said. "That kind of approach will do nothing to help Egyptians achieve the future that they deserve."

FoxNews.com's Judson Berger contributed to this report.

View the original article here

NAACP ripped for demanding federal probe of rodeo clown dressed as Obama

Calls by the Missouri chapter of the NAACP for a federal investigation into a rodeo clown who donned a President Obama mask at the state fair last week are misguided and hypocritical, a Texas Republican congressman told FoxNews.com on Thursday. 

U.S. Rep. Steve Stockman, who has invited the clown who wore the mask to perform in Texas, said the request for probes into the incident by the Justice Department and Secret Service are “silly” and should be ignored. 

“A rodeo clown is really a nominal thing and it hurt no one,” Stockman told FoxNews.com. “They didn’t speak out when George Bush was being portrayed as a murderer. To become relevant again, they need to become more of an honest broker and not have contrived anger.”

Stockman said the NAACP would better serve its constituents by focusing on ways to decrease unemployment among the black community. He also noted that the national civil rights group was silent after a July incident on a Florida bus where three black teens beat a fellow white student. Though Gulfport Police Chief Robert Vincent told Fox News the attack did not appear to be racially motivated, former Florida Rep. Allen West, who is black, chided Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, noting they condemned Florida's laws in the wake of the Trayvon Martin shooting yet remained mum on the bus attack.

Daily politics news delivered to your inbox: sign up for our newsletter 

“We can’t get the Justice Department to look at Benghazi, so it would be ironic that the Justice Department would investigate a clown."

- U.S. Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas

“It’s really patently false that they’re angry at this, but not angry at other issues,” Stockman continued. “There has to be some consistency.”

Stockman said he thinks it’s unlikely federal officials will investigate the matter.

“We can’t get the Justice Department to look at Benghazi, so it would be ironic that the Justice Department would investigate a clown,” he said. “They should focus on their member’s needs rather than theatrics.” 

Still, the rodeo clown has been widely condemned for his off-color act. 

On Wednesday, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the rodeo clown incident was “not one of the finer moments” for The Show-Me State.

“I haven’t heard about the president’s reaction or if he had one,” Earnest told reporters. “I can tell you as a native Missourian, it was certainly not one of the finer moments for our state and not the way I like to see our state depicted in the news.”

Stockman said widespread reports of Saturday’s bull riding event at the Missouri State Fair in Sedalia was an example of what he calls “pop news,” distractions from serious issues facing the country. 

The performer, meanwhile, has been permanently banned from future state fair events and subsequent performers must undergo sensitivity training.

Messages seeking comment from Justice Department and NAACP officials were not immediately returned Thursday.

Jehmu Greene, a Fox News contributor and Democratic strategist, said she agreed with Stockman’s take that the call for a federal probe was unwarranted. It’s far from the first time a sitting commander-in-chief has been mocked, she said.

“Absolutely it is misguided,” she said during an appearance on Fox News. “The NAACP has jumped the shark on this one.”

View the original article here

Umbrella-toting Marines protect Obama, Turkish PM from raindrops

Nearly four months ago, Oklahoma Senators Tom Coburn and James Inhofe both voted against H.R.152, the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act that eventually sent $50.5 billion in relief to victims of Hurricane Sandy. And in the flurry of last night's devastation in Moore, Oklahoma. it was impossible not to forget that fact, knowing the federal government would soon rally to the cause.

View the original article here

History Channel denies show’s Satan character resembles Obama

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
Does the actor who portrayed Satan in a new miniseries too closely resemble Obama? (Twitter)

The History Channel miniseries “The Bible” has been generating heavenly ratings, with more than 14 million viewers tuning in to its debut episode. But the show generated some controversy with its Sunday night episode in which the character playing Satan made his debut. The controversy was not over anything happening on screen, but rather whether or not the actor playing Satan looks a little too much like President Barack Obama.

Conservative media figure Glenn Beck was the first big name to address the odd similarity, writing on his Twitter account, “Anyone else think the Devil in #TheBible Sunday on History Channel looks exactly like That Guy?”

Beck was not alone, with thousands of viewers and several media outlets jumping on the story. Many were quick to note the similarity reminded them of a recent controversy in which it was discovered that the makers of HBO’s “Game of Thrones” had used a prop of George W. Bush’s head in a grisly scene.

History Channel has been quick to deny any similarities between the two, issuing the following statement:

“HISTORY channel has the highest respect for President Obama. The series was produced with an international and diverse cast of respected actors. It's unfortunate that anyone made this false connection. HISTORY’s 'The Bible’ is meant to enlighten people on its rich stories and deep history.”

And honestly, while the actor does bear a striking resemblance to Obama in the image posted to Beck's Twitter account, he looks more like a Jedi from "Star Wars" that the president is always talking about than history's biggest villain.

Interestingly, Moroccan actor Mohamen Mehdi Ouazanni, who portrays Satan, has appeared in a number of film productions with religious connections over the years, including “The Satanic Angels,” “The Ten Commandments,” “In the Beginning” and “David.”

In other images, any similarity between Obama and Ouazanni is far less striking.

Even Beck has tried to brush off any hidden agendas, posting that his original tweet was a joke: “Media—relax. Actor has been in similar roles b4. Funny, nothing more. For different reasons, #TheBible is 1 of my fav shows. Keep watching”

“The Bible” executive producer, Roma Downey, also released a statement saying she and fellow producer Mark Burnett made no conscious effort to cast an actor resembling the president. "Both Mark and I have nothing but respect and love our President, who is a fellow Christian,” the statement reads. “False statements such as these are just designed as a foolish distraction to try and discredit the beauty of the story of The Bible.”

View the original article here