EXCLUSIVE! An Open Letter to Barack Obama from Bibi Netanyahu

(I have amazing sources in Israel and have been given exclusive access to this letter from Bibi to Barack:)

Dear Mr. President,

Now that the Israeli election is behind us, there are a world of possibilities in front of us.  I believe we both agree that it is our duty as our nation's respective leaders to choose the path which best leads to peace domestically and abroad.  Towards that end, I would like to discuss an idea about which much has been made of late:  a two state solution.

As has been reported, I did indicate that a two state solution will not arise during my term.  What was not reported was that this was within the context of the last few years experience.  The Palestinians have been in a constant state of war with my country and continue to deny our right to exist.  There can be no two state solution between Israel and the Palestinians without two peaceful partners willing to coexist.

But there is another path to a two state solution.  Allow me to explain.  

I have a unique proposal that will once and for all put and end to this conflict.  I know I can trust you and the American people to hear me out and give this some careful thought.  If we agree that peace is the desired outcome, and that neither side has been able to secure it after all these years, we must try something new.  Doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome is the very definition of insanity, right? 

Let’s look at some of the elements we can all agree on before getting into the specifics: 

1. Both sides believe their positions are correct, justified, and worth defending. 
2. One side has the military might and the other suffers disproportionately. 
3. Both sides would like to exist and govern themselves in a manner to their liking. 
4. The international community, including the US, has long thought that “land for peace” is the appropriate solution.

In light of the above, I do recommend swapping land to allow those without a country to establish their own self-governed nation.  They would be free to establish their own government, their own bill of rights, and their own laws.   They would be free to arm and defend themselves,  trade with other nations, and produce and export what they choose. We may not agree with how they treat others, what they disseminate, or what their Sharia laws say, but it would be their country, ruled by them, sovereign, free, and independent.

The key Mr. President is you.  You've said that you've got a pen and a phone.  The American people have granted you the power to act unilaterally on whatever you choose.  Whether that be healthcare, immigration, the IRS, internet regulation, prisoner swaps, etc., you have proven you do not need bi-partisan approval to achieve your goals.  Mr. President, you can singlehandedly establish a two state solution with just your pen and your phone!

Here's my plan:

I have done some research and found that your home state of Illinois is the most Muslim state in the US.  Therefore, I believe Illinois would be the perfect place to establish the new Islamic Caliphate, or “ISIL” (The Islamic State of Illinois)!  

If ISIL (The Islamic State of Illinois) were to adopt your own immigration policies, The Palestinians, al Qaeda, ISIS, The Taliban, Ansar al-Sharia, Hezbollah, The Muslim Brotherhood, etc., would all immigrate to the new nation of ISIL.  Not only would this bring lasting peace to the Mid East, but the conflict between America and the Jihadis would finally be over.   Imagine ISIS, al Qaeda, and America living side-by-side in peace!

All it would take is a simple trade of land for peace, which you can do today with your pen and your phone.   Join me Mr. President in this elegant two state solution.  Together we can stop the unnecessary fighting between America and the Jihadis once and for all.
  

Sincerely,

Benjamin Netanyahu

Prime Minister, Israel

P.S.  A majority of The UN has already seen this proposal and endorsed it.  You must use your pen and phone quickly if the US hopes to remain among the community of nations!

P.P.S.  I also believe that Khalid Sheik Muhammad, the political prisoner currently in your custody, should be freed at once like Nelson Mandela.   KSM would then lead the new nation of ISIL!  Moreover, I have taken the liberty to nominate KSM to the Nobel Committee for consideration for the Peace Prize.  As expected, they are onboard 100%.

P.P.S.S.  My understanding is that Illinois is currently bankrupt, so this plan is actually a threefer. Not only will it bring a two state solution and peace to the world, it's also a stimulus plan for your home state!    

Kinetic Islam Déjà vu

In March of 2001, Mullah Omar and the Taliban destroyed two 1700 year-old stone Buddahs in Afghanistan.  One of them stood 165 feet tall.  At the time, few westerners understood that act.  Six months later when the twin towers of The World Trade Center were destroyed, we all got an education in how kinetic Islam feels about infidel idols and symbols. 

Fast forward to today, and the exact same thing is happening in Iraq.  Islamic State, or ISIS, or ISIL, is summarily destroying ancient churches, statues, artwork, and symbols of the infidels.  This time we have some perspective on why this behavior is occurring – Islam, or at least a fundamental interpretation of Islam, leads its followers to destroy these symbols.  Turns out the Quran, like the Old and New Testaments, contains a fair amount of idol destruction.  The difference is, Christians and Jews do not go about re-enacting these verses from the early days of monotheism.  Muslims do, particularly the kinetic radical fundamental type. 

What scares me is the timing of all this.  Six months after the Buddahs came down, we got 9/11.  I hope kinetic Islam has a different schedule this time.   

The Golf War

What To Do About ISIS? (bumped again)

What should we do about ISIS?  (Or as the president prefers, ISIL, which uses the French diplo-speak term "Levant" for the mideast, and after all who amongst us doesn’t get a tingle up their leg from using French diplo-speak?)  Whatever you call it, we should do everything we can here in the US to prevent domestic attacks from these extremely dangerous jihadists.  Overseas, we should retreat from areas where any jihadists may attack.  Beyond that we should probably just pray.

I realize this is a contrarian position.  There seems to be a bi-partisan consensus forming that the Obama administration must take bold and decisive action to fight ISIS “over there, so we don’t have to do it here”.  Never mind that this sentiment was once known as “The Bush Doctrine”, and that it’s repudiation is one of the core ideologies of our current president -- it only makes sense as national policy with a competent Commander in Chief.  Barack Hussein Obama is not and will never be that person. 

If you want to occupy the student union, Obama is your guy.  If you want to choose brackets for March Madness, Obama is your guy.  If you want to hear platitudes read off a teleprompter, Obama is your guy.   If you want to hear how this country is racist, guilty, flawed, corrupt, unfair, mean, nasty, sexist, and has a crappy constitution, Obama is your guy.  If you want to play golf, attend fundraisers, and do talk shows, Obama is your guy.  But if you want to communicate with deadly jihadists in the only language they understand, the language of force, I’d recommend anyone other than Barack Hussein Obama, and that includes my Labradoodle.  

So let’s prepare ourselves here and do everything we can to ensure the jihadists can't hurt us.   Beyond that, let's do nothing until we have a competent president.  Will there be chaos and mass casualties?  Perhaps.  But going to war with an incompetent commander would be like having open heart surgery performed by a comedian -- better to do nothing, pray, eat healthy, and get to the gym.

What to do about ISIS?

(Bumped for the president's speech tonight)

What should we do about ISIS?  (Or as the president prefers, ISIL, which uses the French diplo-speak term Levant for the mideast, and after all who amongst us doesn’t get a tingle up their leg from using French diplo-speak?)  Whatever you call it, we should do everything we can at the local level, here in the US, to prevent domestic attacks from these extremely dangerous jihadists.  Overseas, we should retreat from areas where ISIS may attack.  Beyond that we should probably just pray.

I realize this is a contrarian position.  There seems to be a bi-partisan consensus forming that the Obama administration must take bold and decisive action to fight ISIS “over there, so we don’t have to do it here”.  Never mind that this sentiment was once known as “The Bush Doctrine”, and that it’s repudiation is one of the core ideologies of our current president -- it only makes sense as national policy with a competent Commander in Chief.  Barack Hussein Obama is not and will never be that person. 

If you want to occupy the student union, Obama is your guy.  If you want to choose brackets for March Madness, Obama is your guy.  If you want to hear platitudes read off a teleprompter, Obama is your guy.   If you want to hear how this country is racist, guilty, flawed, corrupt, unfair, mean, nasty, sexist, and has a crappy constitution, Obama is your guy.  If you want to play golf, attend fundraisers, and do talk shows, Obama is your guy.  But if you want to communicate with deadly radical jihadists in the only language they understand, the language of force, I’d recommend anyone other than Barack Hussein Obama, and that includes my Labradoodle.  

So let’s prepare ourselves here and do everything we can to ensure the jihadists can't hurt us.   Beyond that, let's do nothing until we have a competent president.  Will there be chaos and mass casualties?  Perhaps.  But going to war with an incompetent commander would be like having open heart surgery performed by a comedian -- better to do nothing, pray, eat healthy, and get to the gym.

What to do about ISIS?

What should we do about ISIS?  (Or as the president prefers, ISIL, which uses the French diplo-speak term Levant for the mideast, and after all who amongst us doesn’t get a tingle up their leg from using French diplo-speak?)  Whatever you call it, we should do everything we can at the local level, here in the US, to prevent domestic attacks from these extremely dangerous jihadists.  Overseas, we should retreat from areas where ISIS may attack.  Beyond that we should probably pray.

I realize this is a contrarian position.  There seems to be a bi-partisan consensus forming that the Obama administration must take bold and decisive action to fight ISIS “over there, so we don’t have to do it here”.  Never mind that this sentiment was once known as “The Bush Doctrine”, and that it’s repudiation is one of the core ideologies of our current president -- it only makes sense as national policy with a competent Commander in Chief.  Barack Hussein Obama is not and will never be that person. 

If you want to occupy the student union, Obama is your guy.  If you want to choose brackets for March Madness, Obama is your guy.  If you want to hear platitudes read off a teleprompter, Obama is your guy.   If you want to hear how this country is racist, guilty, flawed, corrupt, unfair, mean, nasty, sexist, and has a crappy constitution, Obama is your guy.  If you want to play golf, attend fundraisers, and do talk shows, Obama is your guy.  But if you want to communicate with deadly radical jihadists in the only language they understand, the language of force, I’d recommend anyone other than Barack Hussein Obama, and that includes my Labradoodle.  

So let’s prepare ourselves here and do everything we can to ensure the jihadists can't hurt us.   Beyond that, let's do nothing until we have a competent president.  Will there be chaos and mass casualties?  Perhaps.  But going to war with an incompetent commander would be like having open heart surgery performed by a comedian -- better to do nothing, pray, eat healthy, and get to the gym.