Warning: Parameter 2 to SyndicationDataQueries::posts_search() expected to be a reference, value given in /home4/sattek/roguepolitics.com/wp-includes/class-wp-hook.php on line 298

Warning: Parameter 2 to SyndicationDataQueries::posts_where() expected to be a reference, value given in /home4/sattek/roguepolitics.com/wp-includes/class-wp-hook.php on line 298

Warning: Parameter 2 to SyndicationDataQueries::posts_fields() expected to be a reference, value given in /home4/sattek/roguepolitics.com/wp-includes/class-wp-hook.php on line 298

Warning: Parameter 2 to SyndicationDataQueries::posts_request() expected to be a reference, value given in /home4/sattek/roguepolitics.com/wp-includes/class-wp-hook.php on line 298
Obama and Israel « Rogue Politics


A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

The Paris ‘ Peace Conference’ Turns Into A Farce

 Pro -Israel protesters outside Paris Conference

The Paris peace conference designed to be another slap at Israel turned into a farce devoid of meaning.
it certainly didn’t have the kick Barack Obama and John Kerry intended.

Instead of strengthening the insidious UNSC 2334, it actually buried it and made it ridiculous.

UNSC 2334, as biased as it was, had reiterated the Security Council’s:

“vision of a region where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders,”

The final Paris communique threw away this “two democratic states solution” and changed it to:

“that a negotiated solution with two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security, is the only way to achieve enduring peace.”

They eliminated ‘democratic’ 9 times in the final communique. This seems self-evident because both the Palestinian Authority and Hamasistan are democratic in the least, but Paris not accepting the terms of the “two-state solution” proposed by the Security Council gives the lie to the whole enterprise and takes the mask off, weakening 2334’s clout.

it also reaffirmed that the only way to any settlement was direct negotiations between the parties rather than a UN diktat, which 2334 most assuredly did not do.

There’s also no followup, and no new demands of Israel.

The Paris statement did praise Saudi Arabia’s 2002 Arab Peace Initiative as “a comprehensive framework for the resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict, thus contributing to regional peace and security.” That’s to be expected. But since it was a diktat that mimics 2334 in re-dividing Jerusalem and gifting all of Judea and Samaria to ‘Palestine’ and the Israelis will never abide by that anyway, it’s meaningless…just like the entire conference.

Surprisingly, Britain refused to ratify the Paris statement, thus blocking the EU from signing on to it. Australia refused as well, as did most of the Eastern European EU members.

And even France’s lame duck president Hollande changed his tune, saying that only negotiations between the two parties would result in peace, which ‘cannot be dictated.’


What changed things? In part at least, Donald Trump:

In a recent interview with Bild and the Times of London, Trump said he hoped the UK would veto any anti-Israel resolution at the UN Security Council.

“The Brits read what Trump said and implemented it immediately,” an unnamed European diplomat who attended Monday’s EU meeting told Haaretz.

 Image result for Cartoons on Paris Peace conference 2017

Quite simply, Trump explained that Obama was on his way out in a week or so, and there was a new sheriff in town. It’s no coincidence that British PM Theresa May is now exulting over offers of  new trade deals outside the EU with America.

The Australians and the most of the  Eastern European countries were always on board with Israel anyway. Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop was fairly open about saying that the Turnball government didn’t think much of 2334 and even less of the Paris communique:

Without specifically mentioning the conference’s endorsement of resolution 2334, Ms Bishop noted the Coalition did not support “one-sided resolutions targeting Israel”.

“The most important priority must be a resumption of direct negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians for a two-state solution as soon as possible,” she said.

Australia became one of the few countries other than Israel to condemn the New Zealand-sponsored resolution 2334, with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull labeling it “one-sided” and “deeply unsettling”.

U,S, Secretary of State John Kerry phoned Israeli PM Netanyahu and promised that the U.S. would not support any further UN action at tomorrow’s UN Security Council Meeting, to which Netanyahu reportedly replied that Israel has already suffered enough damage thanks to the U.S. abstention on 2334.

It’s the part about Kerry promising something is what has me concerned…stay tuned.


Continue reading The Paris ‘ Peace Conference’ Turns Into A Farce

. . . → Read More: The Paris ‘ Peace Conference’ Turns Into A Farce

A Final Act Of Hatred – Obama Attacks Israel’s Legitimacy At The UN


Outgoing President Barack Hussein Obama devoted a chunk of his remaining time and attention in office to indulge in a spiteful, personal demonstration of his hatred for Israel.  It’s the final attack of the most anti-Israel administration in U.S. history. And it isn’t finished yet.

A reluctant Egypt had been prepared to present an incredibly biased anti-Israel UN Security Council resolution, a bigoted text that had been in the works for some time. But Egyptian President Asissi, after a conversations with president-elect Donald Trump  and Israeli prime Minister Netanyahu pulled the resolution indefinitely. As various diplomatic sources reported, Al Sissi decided that antagonizing the incoming president and straining his security arrangements with Israel weren’t worth a UN resolution he didn’t want to present anyway.

President Obama had been colluding on this all along with the Palestinians, even advising on wording. He contacted the anti-Israel countries of New Zealand, Venezuela, and the Muslim nations of Senegal and Malaysia to quickly co-sponsor the resolution and get in on the floor quickly for a vote. It passed 14-0, with the U.S. abstaining as planned.

In spite of the outright lies being told by the administrations lackeys, Resolution 2334 represents a major change in U.S. policy.

It demonizes Israel, yet again, as the ‘occupying power’ in disregard of all historical and legal norms. It refers to Judea, Samaria (AKA the West Bank) as well as east Jerusalem as ‘occupied Palestinian territory,’ a neat trick since there never was a Palestine and the 1994 peace treaty between Jordan and Israel didn’t even mention a Palestinian state.

It calls for Jerusalem, with the Old City, which contains all the Jewish holy sites including the Western Wall to be ceded to ‘Palestine.’ That means those sites will be desecrated as they were during the nineteen year Jordanian occupation, and will be closed to Jews forever. Yes, it is now the official position of the United States of America that the Western Wall and the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem, inhabited by Jews for thousands of years except for a 19-year hiatus between 1948-1967 when the Jews were ethnically cleansed from the area is now ‘occupied Palestinian territory’. This delegitimizes Israel and the Jewish people and concurs with the anti-semitic UNESCO resolution of October,2016 that nullified all Jewish and Christian ties and connections to Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria and referred to all of the Holy sites there by their Muslim names. Obama saw to it that United States voted against that UNESCO resolution, but there was an election going on then. That’s obviously why the Obama administration vetoed a similar resolution to 2334 in 2011 before his re-election run, but didn’t veto 2334. There’s no election going on now, and Barack Hussein Obama’s situation has obviously changed. Now he can take off the mask without any cost or consequences.

This new diktat creates the boundaries for ‘Palestine’ giving them all of Judea and Samaria as well as East Jerusalem. In other words, it legitimizes the creation of 580,000 Jewish refugees as well as totally unsafe borders for Israel. It also violates the Oslo Accords and the Road Map, agreements the U.S. was a signatory to that stated unequivocally that any settlement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority could only be achieved through direct negations between the two parties. And for the first time, it legitimizes Obama’s call for imposing a Palestinian state on the 1948 ceasefire lines, another total departure from previous U.S. policy.


It calls for member nations, “to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967” which legitimizes boycotts. And it calls for an immediate end to all Israeli construction In Judea, Samaria. According to this resolution, Israel isn’t even allowed to build a kindergarten or repair a road.

This again is an Obama policy, not something historic. Obama’s UN ambassador Samantha Power is noted for calling  for the U.S. to unilaterally invade the region, force Israel into indefensible borders, engage in ethnic cleansing by throwing every Jew out of Judea, Samaria, and East Jerusalem, turn those areas over to ‘Palestine’ and establish a U.S. peacekeeping force there to keep Israel from retaliating against the inevitable terrorist attacks on its civilians that would result from the new borders.

What this UN resolution calls for is pretty close to that, but Ambassador Power had the unmitigated gall to lie about it anyway. She defended the U.S. abstention as an act to save the so-called “two-state” solution, something she said Israeli ‘settlements activities’ are supposedly jeopardizing. She even had the nerve to quote President Ronald Reagan and deliberately take him out of context to justify the vote she just cast. In a 1982 statement, President Ronald Reagan did call for an end to “the use of any additional land for the purpose of settlements.” In that statement, quoted by Ambassador Power, President Reagan said that “the immediate adoption of a settlement freeze by Israel, more than any other action, could create the confidence needed for wider participation in these talks.”

The part she conveniently left out was that in his speech, President Reagan was referring to a freeze on new settlements during a “period of transition,” which would “begin after free elections for a self-governing Palestinian authority” and could prove that “Palestinian autonomy poses no threat to Israel’s security.” President Reagan also said that “the United States will not support the establishment of an independent state in the West Bank and Gaza,” but suggested instead “self-government by the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza in association with Jordan.”

Sounds like Ronaldus Maximus understood the true nature of the ‘Palestinians’ and why ‘statehood’ for them was a singularly bad idea. Even the Oslo Accords only referred to limited autonomy, not a separate Palestinian state.

You see, it’s not Israel’s communities in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem that have prevented a settlement.   As Mahmoud Abbas himself admitted, it was President Obama’s idea to make a building freeze a major issue when it wasn’t before, even to the point of creating a major diplomatic incident between the US and Israel over what was essentially a local zoning issue and then harshly criticizing Israel for rejecting an offer to resume the freeze that the US never made in the first place.

What’s prevented a solution is the continued refusal of the Arabs whom call themselves ‘Palestinians’ to negotiate anything. negotiating, of course means making concessions to thew other side, and Abbas has said repeatedly that he’s unwilling to make a single concession to Israel. And why should he, especially now?

President Obama started out his presidency letting anyone who was paying attention that he had  a major problem with America’s alliance with Israel and wanted to create lots of ‘daylight’ between the two countries.  

He was thoroughly schooled in his disdain for Israel by his mentors from his earliest days, Frank Marshall Davis, Edward Said, Louis Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright, Khalid al-Mansour, Bill Ayres and others. Abbas, as a trained Soviet apparatchnik recognized Obama’s training instantly and knew that all he had to do was hold out until Obama gifted him what Abbas, wanted, without any concessions whatsoever.

No one with a shred of intellectual honesty can separate this UN action from Jew hatred. This resolution not only meets Natan Sharansky’s famous ‘3D’ definition of anti-semitism, ( Demonization, Double Standards, Delegitimization) but actually conforms to the U.S. Department of State’s official working definition of it.

So, where does this go from here?

Reaction in the U.S. itself was mixed in some interesting ways.

President-elect Donald Trump was predictably outraged. Aside from his own warmth towards Israel and the Jewish people, this an attempt by a lame duck president to impose a policy on him as an incoming president was despicable, and Trump made no bones about saying so.

Trump apparently found out what was up, and had called for Obama to veto the resolution the day before it went tothe UN, saying, “As the United States has long maintained, peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians will only come through direct negotiations between the parties, and not through the imposition of terms by the United Nations,” the president-elect said in a statement Thursday.

“This puts Israel in a very poor negotiating position and is extremely unfair to all Israelis.”

And Trump warned the U.N. shortly after the vote via Twitter that “things will be different” after his inauguration.

Many members of congress also expressed outrage. As you can imagine, this was mainly the Republicans. Sen. James Lankford, (R-OK), a member of the Senate appropriations subcommittee responsible for making foreign aid funding decisions, tweeted, “U.N. funding should be up for discussion if the anti #Israel resolution is approved.”  Senators Lindsay Graham, Ted Cruz, Tom Cotton and others also voiced disgust at this and are calling for defunding the UN, unless this is repealed.

The Israelis,of course, are livid at this deliberate betrayal. But they should have expected it. This was always going to happen with Barack Hussein Obama in the White House, and I predicted it a long time ago. Needless to say, Israel isn’t going to abide by any of this.No country would, unless they were collectively suicidal.

Contrary to popular belief in some circles, Israel is not dependent on American military aid. They have their own thriving arms industry and the amount involved is a relatively small part of their defense budget, although it undoubtedly helps. Actually, as I’ve pointed out before, the U.S. gets far more in goods and services from Israel than we pay out, and Obama’s ‘ generous’ new aid package was actually a reduction,not an increase and came with some major strings attached.

The real reason Netanyahu accepted it was an attempt to mollify what he understood was an anti-Israel president, and to try to avoid losing the alliance’s real benefit for Israel…that of a trusted friend who would fend off what amounts to institutionalized Jew hatred in the sewer the UN has become. Frankly, after eight years of this president, he should have known better.

But with that benefit now gone, the Israelis have learned a vital and important lesson, one Obama didn’t intend. This blatant treachery united the vast majority of Israelis. It proved that Netanyahu and the Israeli Right were correct all along. They now know that there’s absolutely no benefit for them in making any concessions, or negotiating anything.Israel could reduce itself to an enclave around Tel Aviv and it would still be too much. And they would still be libeled as ‘the occupying power’ and face more demands no matter what.

What President Obama and his creatures don’t understand is that instead of preserving the fallacy of the so-called two-state solution, this has killed it. In spite of a few indeterminate words about “all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation, incitement and destruction” Hamas and the Palestinian Authority have never taken anything like that seriously because they have never suffered any consequences at all for it from the UN,the U.S. or the ‘international community.’ The aid has kept coming in, and no matter what horrendous atrocities they commit against Israeli civilians or what gets taught in the Palestinian Authority’s mosques, schools and official media, no matter how well they reward the perpetrators, there’s no penalty for their actions. Just pro forma ‘condemnations of all violence against civilians’ and calls to ‘reduce tension’ as if Israel was equally at fault.

This resolution essentially legitimizes terrorist attacks on Israelis as ‘resistance’ and don’t think the ‘Palestinians’ won’t rev things up. The Israelis know that and will respond in a far more decisive way than before now that they fully understand that to the UN, nothing they do to defend themselves is legitimate. They have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Instead of a partner for peace or someone to negotiate with in good faith, Israel, for the first time since the Second Intifada is going to treat Hamas and the Palestinian Authority as exactly what they have always been in reality – a toxic, hostile enemy.

Israel will build in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria like never before. And they may very well annex Area C at the least. After all, if the UN calls the Western Wall inJerusalem and Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, some of which have existed since the 1920’s ‘occupied Palestinian territory,’ why not?

As for President Obama, his plan is to double down.

 US Secretary of State John Kerry delivers a speech on Middle East peace at the State Department in Washington, DC on December 28, 2016. (Zach Gibson/Getty Images/AFP)

Today, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry made a speech which basically defended 2334. He re-emphasized the lie that the U.S. has always opposed ‘settlements’ in Judea and Samaria and has always supported a two state solution on the 1948 cease fire lines or to use Kerry’s terminology, ‘the pre 1967 lines.’ The truth, of course is that no U.S. Administration ever called the Jewish communities in Judea,Samaria and Jerusalem ‘illegal’ before, or called for a two state solution on the 1948 cease fire lines. This is Obama’s policy and his alone.

He also trotted out the old line that ““It is the only way to ensure Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state living in peace and security with its neighbors.”

He seems to forget that Israel is already a Jewish, democratic state with 20% of its population consisting of Arabs, most of whom are fully integrated into Israeli society with the full protection of law. How many Jews live in Abbas’s ‘Palestine?’. Abbas has already said that no Jews will be allowed in his little reichlet. If anyone has a problem with remaining democratic, it isn’t Israel.But you’d never know that to listen to John Kerry. he also repeated the call for a divided Jerusalem and the de facto creation of 580,000 Jewish refugees.

As for peace and security, why would he or any sane person believe that the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinian have any intent of living in peace with Israel, no matter what? Kerry made a mention of their incitement to violence and glorification of terrorists, saying, “The murders of innocents are still glorified on Fatah websites.”

“Despite statements by President Abbas, too often they send a different message by failing to condemn specific attacks and by naming public squares, streets and schools after terrorists.”

Is Kerry really that blind and clueless to think that’s going to change, especially since there’s no consequences for it, and it’s being rewarded by the UN and the Obama Administration?

Kerry made a vague promise in his speech that the US would not seek further UN action. That doesn’t mean they won’t condone it, help plan and compose  it, and do their best to help push it through.

On January 16th, there’s a long planned French-sponsored conference that will focus exclusively  Israel and establishing a Palestinian state. Israel is not attending, but the U.S. will be there.

On January 17th, there’s yet another UN Security Council meeting  scheduled.  The UN normally moves quite slowly, but rest assured that both the Paris conference and the meeting have already been pretty much scripted. My guess is that another resolution arises out of it.

 President Barack Hussein Obama isn’t through attacking Israel yet.



Continue reading A Final Act Of Hatred – Obama Attacks Israel’s Legitimacy At The UN

. . . → Read More: A Final Act Of Hatred – Obama Attacks Israel’s Legitimacy At The UN

When It Comes to Jew Hatred, The Left Lives in Glass Houses


A friend of mine, no mean writer herself sent me some links from the likes of the New York Times and the New Yorker and flattered me by asking if I would write something about them. They could have been written by the same writer, had the same basic format and came out the same day as a number of other pieces by the usual suspects.

The topic? Sudden concern by the Left at the rise in anti-semitism caused by Donald Trump and carried on by his supporters on the alt-Right! Of course, they never had the intestinal fortitude to actually accuse Trump’s campaign of anti-semitism, but both quoted one of their fellow Democrat leftists as saying that it was Trump who enabled it. The Times piece quoted Trump hater and Hillary supporter John Podhoretz as saying that “The best analogy I can give is that the campaign turned over a rock and a lot of stuff began crawling out from under it.”

“There were these code words and dog whistles that let it appear that people who had been doing things in the shadows could now start marching forward.”

The main focus was on the awful things people write on Twitter. Heaven forbid they would blame Twitter, which has a history of banning and shadow banning Republicans and conservatives like Milo Yiannopoulos and Professor Glenn Reynolds for far less! But Twitter, of course, is down for the agenda.

So, after I stopped laughing out loud at this nonsense, I started thinking…why get into this meme now, with the election only a few weeks away? After all, these folks have accused Trump of everything else. But before we go there, let’s examine their central point, that Trump’s campaign is what has unleashed Jew hatred….hint hint, nudge wink.

Jew haters almost have a real disdain for candidates who have a history of being closely involved with Jewish causes, who openly embrace Israel as the true friend and ally of America it is, and who have close Jewish associates of long standing, who have Jewish family members like a beloved daughter (especially if that daughter converted), a close son-in-law and Jewish grandchildren.

So if some Jew haters support Donald Trump, the reason can’t be anti-semitism. And while it might be getting a pass by Twitter, it isn’t getting a pass by Trump or his supporters. You can find a few of these Jew hating trolls (frequently they’re Muslims, which we’ll talk more about shortly) on plenty of threads in conservative media, but the reaction from the thread in a place like PJ Media or Breitbart is always to call them out and bombard them mercilessly. I’ve run into a few of them myself and after I dispose of them with a few facts and some well-honed ridicule, I always get a fair amount of upvotes.

Yet there’s one thing that can’t can’t be shrugged off. Jew hatred in America has definitely increased and it was noticeable long before Donald Trump ran for president. So what caused it?

Starting with the first Bush administration, we saw much closer and intertwined relationships with the Saudis and the Emirates and with the last Clinton administration and that of George W. Bush, those relationships got even closer. We saw these countries financing the Muslim Brotherhood and taking over the mosques, we saw increased Muslim migration from countries where misogyny and Jew hatred were quite common and the virtual purchasing of Middle East Studies departments and foreign policy chairs in our major universities. In 2008, President Barack Hussein Obama was elected and he increased these trends on steroids. For the first time, America had a a president with major ties to the Saudis, the anti-semitic Nation of Islam and a ‘spiritual mentor’ who preached Jew hatred and anti-semitism from the pulpit.

While President Obama managed to cleverly finesse these issues with the help of a compliant media, once the votes were cast he reverted to type, announcing that he wanted to create ‘distance’ between America and Israel,  attacking its policies at every turn, protecting and enabling Islamists in America,  and actually rewarding and recognizing anti-semites……even partying with them as his intimates.


By 2012, President Obama had made a fair amount of progress towards making Israel a partisan issue in American politics. Remember how Obama saw to it that all the pro-Israel language from the 2008 platform was eliminated? And what happened at the convention afterwards when it didn’t poll well? And when at least half (and probably more) of the delegates on the floor refused to vote for changes to include convention tried to vote down changes to revert back to some of the former language. listen to the reaction when those changes were shoved through over the obvious wishes of the assembled delegates in spite of not getting the required two thirds majority after three futile tries:

Those people, by the way, are not Trump supporters of members of the so-called ‘alt-Right.’ They’re Democrats. And notice back then  that Obama, at election time, was once again fooling Jewish democrats by saying that Jerusalem was the capitol of Israel. Once the votes were cast, he ‘evolved’ again. Apparently our president isn’t sure which country he was in for the funeralof Shimon Peres.

The  members of the White House supported and Soros funded #Black Lives Matter movement are also Democrats on the Left. And anti-semites,  who have made it a litmus test for Jews wishing to be ‘part of the progressive movement’ to denounce Israel or become pariahs. Even many far Left ‘progressive’ Jews couldn’t cross the line when BLM labeled Israel an ‘apartheid state’ committing ‘genocide.’

The Jewish students being assaulted and intimidated on America’s campuses aren’t being attacked by members of the ‘alt-Right.’ They’re being attacked by members of the Islamist Muslim Students Association (MSA), Students For Justice in Palestine and similar BDS groups…Leftists all.

Hillary Clinton isn’t a Trump supporter either. But aside from having no problem with Jews bring denied access to their religious sites while Secretary of State, she was also happy to take the advice of her campaign guru John Podesta and her campaign manager Robbie Mook not to mention Israel at any of her events except appropriate fundraisers.

And if that isn’t enough, Mrs. Clinton has pledged to carry on President Obama’s policy and do something guaranteed not just to make things more dangerous for Jews and increase the attacks on them but to have the same effect on young women. She wants to increase the wholesale importation of unvetted Muslim men from the most anti-semitic and misogynist countries on earth, simply because she knows they’ll vote Democrat to keep the benefits and welfare payments coming in.

This is exactly what has happened in Europe. Do a search on rapes in Germany, Sweden, France, sex grooming in the UK and similar topics as well as the rise of attacks on Jews in Europe to see how that would work out in America if Mrs. Clinton gets her way.

If you’re a woman without rape fantasies, a Jew who wants to be able to walk around in relative safety or a homosexual, voting for Mrs. Clinton is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders or a trout voting to bring more fishermen to your lake.

And what do you know? Both the New York Times,The New Yorker and the other down for Hillery media support that agenda!

Which tells us where the real anti-semitism is coming from, doesn’t it? And it’s with the active aiding and abetting of the Left. Could these stories be coming out now because team Clinton has an inkling that some people are starting to figure this out?

The pitiful and disgraceful attempt to libel  the most philosemitic and pro-Israel ticket in years to cover for their own tacit endorsement of Jew hatred and the anti-semitic groups mentioned is beneath contempt.

When it comes to Jew hatred, the Left lives in very shoddy  glass houses. For them to throw any rocks at anyone else is the height of hypocrisy.


Continue reading When It Comes to Jew Hatred, The Left Lives in Glass Houses

. . . → Read More: When It Comes to Jew Hatred, The Left Lives in Glass Houses

For Israel, Signing Obama’s New Us-Israel Arms Deal Was A Mistake

After a long negotiation, Benyamin Netanyahu signed a new MOU with President Barack Hussein Obama on a military aid package for U.S. military aid to Israel over the next ten years.While it was touted as ‘an unprecedented increase it military aid’ to Is…

Continue reading For Israel, Signing Obama’s New Us-Israel Arms Deal Was A Mistake

. . . → Read More: For Israel, Signing Obama’s New Us-Israel Arms Deal Was A Mistake

Obama Judicial Appointees: ‘Murder Jews, No Harm, No Foul’

As the AP reported, a three judge panel for the U.S. 2nd District Court of Appeals tossed out a $654 million jury verdict for damages against the Palestinian Authority and the PLO today for terrorist attacks it coordinated and sponsored in Israel that killed or wounded Americans.

The court’s ruling was based on a very curious interpretation of the law involved, the U.S. Anti Terrorism Act, which allows American victims of foreign terrorist attacks to sue state sponsors of terrorism in U.S. courts for damages.

The original verdict was the result of a case called Sokolow v. PLO that was tried by jury in the Federal District Court in Manhattan and was brought by American victims and survivors of six terrorist attacks in Israel between 2001 and 2004. The evidence showed clearly that not only had the PLO under Yasser Arafat planned, financed, and executed the attacks but that it continued to pay generous stipends to the perpetrators and their families.

The 2nd Circuit refused to allow any of the evidence linking the Palestinian Authority and the PLO to the attacks and the attackers to be heard, although as a sop, they admitted the attacks occurred and were ‘horrendous’. What they based their ruling on is that Palestine is not a state and therefore, the Federal District Court lacked jurisdiction to rule against them!

Now, the PLO and the Palestinian authority have always said that they’re a sovereign state ever since Oslo and have always successfully insisted in being treated as one by the U.S. and other entities. They have their own flag, a national anthem, their own military, a presidential compound, a capitol, they belong to international organizations and institutions like UNESCO and the International Red Crescent whose rules prohibit non-states from joining, and they have what passes for a parliament, courts and laws.

In America, they have diplomatic missions in New York and Washington and lobbyists working on their behalf, they have bank accounts in America, and they receive huge amounts of foreign aid from the Obama Administration both directly and through a UN entity, UNRWA. But Judge John G. Koeltl, the Obama appointee who wrote the opinion on the case said the panel found that Palestine, when it comes to being sued is not a state, that the attacks didn’t specifically target Americans and were ‘fortuitous’ (a very curious use of that word, by the way) and that according to the judges on this panel there was no link between the PLO’s activities in America and their activities in the Middle East even though Arafat ruled both groups and appointed and hired their representatives in America. Or as the judges put it, there’s no evidence showing the attacks “resulted from their actions that did occur in the United States.”

Apparently these judges also believe that if a customer is shot and killed during a bank robbery or a motorist is killed by a drunk driver’s negligence, the victim’s family have no right to a civil suit for damages. It was just ‘fortuitous.’

That judgment also ignored extensive evidence that shows that at least part of the funding for the attacks and stipends for convicted killers and their families came from money siphoned off from American aid obtained through the efforts of PLO, Palestinian personnel and lobbyists here in America…which the panel refused to hear.

Even more interesting, Judge Koeltl wrote in his decision: “The overwhelming evidence shows that the defendants are ‘at home’ in Palestine, where they govern. Palestine is the central seat of government for the PA and PLO. The PA’s authority is limited to the West Bank and Gaza, and it has no independently operated offices anywhere else. All PA governmental ministries, the Palestinian president, the Parliament, and the Palestinian security services reside in Palestine,” the ruling said.

Aside from the gaffe about the PLO having authority in Gaza (they don’t) doesn’t this sound like a description of a sovereign state to you? Don’t a country’s leader, its security forces and its parliament and its governing bodies normally reside in its own territory? And can you think of any government that has independently operated offices in any foreign country? Aren’t embassies and foreign offices abroad run by the sovereign state they represent?

So one one hand, the judges based their ruling on Palestine not being a state, which the PLO and PA obviously consider that it is on every occasion except being responsible for terrorism committed on its behalf. And on the other hand, they go out of their way to describe it exactly as one would describe a sovereign state!

Actually, this isn’t so hard to figure out if you dig a little. The panel consisted of Judges John G. Koeltl (Obama appointee), Pierre N. Leval (Clinton appointee), and and Christopher F. Droney (Obama appointee) all of them left wing Democrats. And the Obama Administration went out of its way here to do whatever they could to get the original verdict tossed and and protect Abbas and the PA from having to pay a dime to the Americans they murdered and maimed.

In the original trial, President Obama had his Justice Department lean successfully on the judge in the case, George B. Daniels, to substantially lower the bond the Palestinians would have to post in order to appeal, normally 111 per cent of the judgement in these cases. The Justice Department filed a ‘friend of the court’ brief that claimed that a high bond would negate millions of dollars spent to promote Democracy and a Two State solution, and the judge complied over the objections of the victim’s attorneys.

That same Obama Justice Department brief was allowed to be introduced as evidence by the defense, and given that there were two Obama appointees on the panel, there’s no doubt that it carried a great deal of weight in this skewed judgment.

The Anti-Terrorism Act which allows United States citizens who are the victims of international terrorism to sue in the federal courts was passed some years after the 1985 murder of Leon Klinghoffer in the Palestinian hijacking of the cruise ship Achille Lauro. It was designed to provide American citizens with redress and such judgments have already been made against state sponsors of terrorism against American like Syria and Iran, even though Iran has no offices or diplomats here in the U.S. Notably, such outstanding judgments were ignored by the Obama Administration during negotiations over the Iran deal and during the recent $400 million dollar ransom paid Iran for American hostages.

Kent A. Yalowitz, a lawyer for the families in the case, said in a statement that the law had been passed by Congress “to protect Americans wherever in the world they traveled.”

“The very terrorists who prompted the law have now hidden behind the U.S. Constitution to avoid responsibility for their crimes,” Mr. Yalowitz said. “This cruel decision must be corrected so that these families may receive justice.”

Mr.Yalowitz is entirely correct, and frankly, I think the fact that most if not all of the victims were American Jews who were attacked in Israel also plays into this. This president’s animus towards Israel is well known.


But aside from the possibility of an appeal to correct this, there’s a bright side.

If Palestine isn’t a state according to the Obama Administration, than the Israelis can declare Oslo and the Road Map null and void (the Palestinians already have) and proceed accordingly. They can cancel any and all agreements signed with the Palestinian Authority and the PLO since they were signed as agreements between two sovereign entities. Even the areas of sovereignty and control were clearly defined. But if Palestine isn’t a state, then the Obama administration has no moral or legal right to treat it as one at any time, not just when it’s convenient for the President’s agenda. That ‘non-state’ status applies across the board.

If Palestine isn’t a state, then Judea and Samaria (AKA The West Bank) belongs entirely to Israel, since the only state that ever physically controlled any part of it in recent times aside from Israel was Jordan, who illegally invaded it in 1948, were driven out in 1967 after they attacked Israel and have since relinquished all claims to the area. If Palestine isn’t a state,there is no ‘occupation’ (not that there ever was) and Israel can annex it as sovereign territory. Moreover, since many of the ‘Palestinians’ including Mohammad Abbas hold Jordanian citizenship and Israel and Jordan have no dual citizenship agreement, Israel can legally remove these non-Israeli citizens from its new borders and repatriate them to Jordan. Israel can also insist that all UNWRA camps in this region be located elsewhere.

Since Palestine isn’t a state, Israel can also avoid repatriating the tax monies it collects on the PLO’s behalf, deposit it in a fund, and allow Israelis and American Jews and their families to sue in Israeli courts and collect damages accordingly.

The Obama Administration and its minions can make the decision to treat Palestine as a state in every respect except the basic one of responsibility for its actions. That’s pretty much been the president’s policy since he took office, and not just when it comes to Palestine. Essentially, it’s an endorsement of the same old BDS horse manure that ‘resistance to occupation is not terrorism.’ At least when it comes to Israel, the Jew among nations.

But aside from being brutally immoral in terms of what America has always stood for, this action opens up a whole new door. If Palestine isn’t a state, then the Obama Administration doesn’t have a leg to stand on when talking about ‘Palestinian land,’ ‘occupation,’ or demanding further Israeli concessions.


Continue reading Obama Judicial Appointees: ‘Murder Jews, No Harm, No Foul’

. . . → Read More: Obama Judicial Appointees: ‘Murder Jews, No Harm, No Foul’

Hostages, Ransoms, Iran, and Israel – Obama Lies Again


It’s been revealed that American hostages held unjustly by Iran were released this January, but only after a sum of $400 million in cash sent by the U.S. was received by the Islamic Republic. This transaction was meant to be hidden, but now it’s come out, it has immediately raised questions. Was this a ransom? Why was this hidden from the American public?

US President Barack Obama speaks to the media in Arlington, Virginia, on August 4, 2016. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images/AFP)

The totally misnamed Josh Earnest, Obama’s spokeshole was quick to say that no ransom was paid, and Hillary Clinton said – it seems to be her trademark -that this was old news and ‘no one cares about it anymore.’ Well, it worked for Benghazi and her illegal private e-mails and server, so why not?

But it was left for Barack Obama to pull off the biggest, most shameless lies of the bunch. He gave a press conference and asserted the following:

  • That it was U.S. policy never to pay ransom for hostages, ever.

  • That the money arriving at the same time was just a coincidence and was a payment on an old claim by Iran on a missing arms deal to the Shah that we never delivered. And that America’s own lawyers advised paying this settlement because Iran had pursued litigation in court and by settling, ‘we saved America billions of dollars.’

  • That this was old news, that the Iran deal was working and that even Israel admitted it. Obama also said those who had been most critical of the deal should admit they were wrong:

    “What I’m interested in is if there’s some news to be made, why not have some of these folks who were predicting disaster come out and say, ‘This thing actually worked.’ Now that would be a shock,” he said.“That would be impressive. If some of these folks who said the sky is falling suddenly said, ‘You know what? We were wrong and we are glad that Iran no longer has the capacity to break out in short term and develop a nuclear weapon.’ But that wasn’t going to happen.”

    “The Israeli military and security community … acknowledges this has been a game changer,” he said. “The country that was most opposed to the deal.”

Well, let’s examine these claims. First of all have we paid ransom before for hostages during Obama’s term in office?

Remember these?

In 2011, the Obama Administration paid $1 million dollars to Iran
as ‘bail money’ to get them to release two hikers, Josh Fattal and Shane Bauer who accidentally wandered over the Iranian border two years before and were being held in Tehran’s notorious Evin Prison. An additional $500,000 in ‘bail’ was paid earlier for the release of Sarah Shourd, Bauer’s girl friend when she became seriously ill in Evin. So, a total of $1.5 million in ransom money.

In 2012, the Obama Administration used USAid as a conduit to pay $4.6 million to the Egyptian Government for the release of 43 NGO operatives…including Sam LaHood, the son of the then Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood.

Then there was deserter Bowie Bergdahl. Remember him? Not only were 5 extremely skilled and dangerous Taliban commanders sent back to Afghanistan, but there a great deal of evidence that the Obama Administration also paid a ransom of something like $5 million to the Taliban for his release.

Even if Bergdahl’s ransom consisted of just the five Taliban commanders alone, those of you with loved ones serving in AfPak can thank the Obama Administration and Mrs. Clinton, then Secretary of State for making things far more dangerous and life threatening for them.

These are just a few instances that come readily to mind, and I’m certain there are other instances. So contrary to what the president said, yes, his administration does pay ransoms for hostages. And if I remember, he mentioned that countries that do that see the price go up. That’s certainly been the case for the United States!


Let’s look at the president’s next claim, that the cash payment of $400 million wasn’t a ransom, it was a claims settlement for an arms deal that the Iranians were already pursuing via litigation. And the money just arrived there at the exact same time as the hostages were being released just by coincidence.

Now anyone who’s ever paid a court judgment knows this is sheer fantasy. Settlements of this kind involve legal documents including one called a satisfaction of judgement filed by the litigant at the same time payment is made. And the president’s nonsense – that’s the most benign word I can use here – about the fact that it needed to be all cash ‘because we don’t have a banking arrangement with Iran’ is a blatant falsehood. There absolutely no reason the U.S. couldn’t have deposited the funds in a Swiss bank by check for the Iranians to have wired to wherever they wanted in any currency they desired.

There’s a name for what the Obama Administration chose to do instead. It’s called money laundering and it’s a felony offense. No wonder even some of the officials in Obama’s serially lawless Justice Department were concerned about this one.

The Iranians wanted cash for a simple reason – to humiliate the Great Satan and show the money off to prove it actually was a ransom. Which is exactly what they’ve done.

One of the the hostages has recounted that even though the plane to take them home was ready for takeoff, the Iranians told them that they were waiting for the plane with the money and they weren’t going to be released until it arrived.

Another falsehood the president told us is that this was supposedly an arms contract that was never fulfilled. I know a little bit about arms dealing and how it’s legitimately conducted. The normal procedure is that the contracts are signed and the consignee (the purchasing country) goes to a large bank and obtains a Letter of Credit in the amount required. A Letter of Credit is a guarantee from a bank on behalf of one of its customers (in this case, Iran) to the seller’s bank that the seller (in this case, the U.S.) will be paid in full to the amount of the Letter of Credit as long as the contracted goods and services are delivered.

To restate this more simply, the buyer’s bank guarantees payment (normally they have the funds on hold) to the seller’s bank when the buyer receive what they ordered.

Since, as President Obama told us, the arms were never shipped to the Ayatollahs the money was never released to America either.

So yes, that $400,000,000, was ransom money. And our president lied once again, without being challenged by a servile press.

Finally, let’s look at his claim that the Israelis are on board and just love the Iran deal.

Now, there are a few Israeli members of the military and security establishment that agree with the president, but what’s notable is that they’re all ex-members and almost all associated with the left wing Zionist Union (AKA Labor) party that the president tried and failed to put into power with substantial injections of cash and paid activists when he interfered with Israel’s elections. They’re the people whose mindset and opinions the Israeli electorate overwhelmingly rejected.

And the people who they elected and who have actual responsibility for Israel’s security?

Avigdor Liberman, Israel’s defense minister compared the Iran deal to Munich in 1938.

“The Munich Agreement didn’t prevent the Second World War and the Holocaust precisely because its basis, according to which Nazi Germany could be a partner for some sort of agreement, was flawed, and because the leaders of the world then ignored the explicit statements of [Adolf] Hitler and the rest of Nazi Germany’s leaders,” the ministry said.

“These things are also true about Iran, which also clearly states openly that its aim is to destroy the state of Israel,” it said, pointing to a recent State Department report that determined that Iran is the number one state sponsor of terrorism worldwide.

Yitzhak “Tzachi” Hanegbi, currently Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office in charge of National Security and Foreign Affairs has a long history as part of Israel’s security and defense establishment and who until recently chaired the Knesset’s powerful Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. He said, “I don’t know to which Israelis he (Obama) spoke recently. But I can promise you that the position of the prime minister, the defense minister and of most senior officials in the defense establishment has not changed.”

“The opposite is the case. The time that has elapsed since the deal was signed proved all our worries that, regrettably, we were justified before the deal was made.”

And Prime Minister Netanyahu? Netanyahu merely issued a statement that Israel “has no greater ally than the United States” but made plain nonetheless that Israel’s position on the Iran nuclear deal “remains unchanged.”

While he felt the need to be somewhat more diplomatic than Liberman, it’s worth noting that Netanyahu used the example of Munich himself previously. And it’s a correct one, with a weak leader seeking to appease a vicious, aggressive enemy and buy time at an ally’s expense.  Czechoslovakia, which had a strong military, strong defenses on the German border and a world class armaments manufacturer in Skoda munitions. If Chamberlain had not sold out his ally, Hitler might never have felt secure enough on his Eastern front to invade Poland and engage Germany in a two front war.

There should be no question in anyone’s mind that  President Barack Hussein Obama sees Israel as eminently disposable, just like Chamberlain saw the Czechs.


At any rate, another outright lie from this president.

And there was not a single question or followup at his press conference challenging any of these gross fabrications.

Which is exactly why he keeps doing it. Because the press is his enabler, and covers for him. And thus  reinforces President Obama’s gigantic ego in believing that he really is smarter than everyone else.


Continue reading Hostages, Ransoms, Iran, and Israel – Obama Lies Again

. . . → Read More: Hostages, Ransoms, Iran, and Israel – Obama Lies Again

Why Obama Backed Herzog – The Secret Plan To Betray Israel


It’s already well known that the Obama administration sent its top political operatives  like Jeremy Bird, national field director for Obama’s 2012 campaign and  and loads of cash via a front group called  “One Voice International” in an effort to influence Israel’s elections. Obama’s goal was to  unseat Israeli PM Benyamin Netanyahu and Likud in favor of Yitzhak Herzog and the far Left marriage of Labor and Tzipi Livni’s Hatnua party, known as the ‘Zionist Union.’

While President Obama’s hatred for Netanyahu is also well known, the real reason for his touting of Buji* and the Zionist Union went far beyond that. And the full story has just surfaced now.

 Opposition leader Isaac Herzog meets with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in the West Bank city of Ramallah. December 1, 2013. (Issam Rimawi/Flash90/File)

As confirmed by a report yesterday by Israel’s Channel 10,  Ephraim Sneh, one of Herzog’s advisers admitted that Buji had a private and secret agreement with Palestinian strong man Mahmoud Abbas that he was prepared to put into place if he had been elected Prime Minister. This largely mirrored what The Obama Administration was trying to force on Israel. They  not only were aware of it and approved it, but financed it and sent their political muscle to try and make sure it happened.

As Buji admitted when confronted on this yesterday, here’s what this ‘deal’ consisted of:

  • A full withdrawal by Israel to the pre-1967 lines and the removal of every Jew living in Judea and Samaria. East Jerusalem was to be ceded to the Palestinian Authority as its capitol. There was a provision for land swaps on 4% or so of the territory to allow for Jewish communities like Gush Etzion, but cut off from Israel by Palestinian East Jerusalem in front of them and surrounded by ‘Palestinian’ territory in the rear, I’ll leave it to your imagination how long those communities would last.
  • Buji also agreed to the right of return for Palestinian ‘refugees’ and financial compensation for those whom chose not to return. No mention, of course, of any compensation  for the almost 1 million Jewish refugees resettled in Israel whom were ethnically cleansed from the Arab world after everything they owned was plundered.
  • Another part of the agreement Buji signed on to was a ‘symbolic presence’ of Israeli security forces in the strategic Jordan Valley, with most of the security forces being composed of Jordanian and Palestinian forces. Again, I’ll leave it to your imagination how long that would last before the unlucky IDF soldiers serving in the Jordan Valley were murdered or taken hostage, with any whom escaped being faced with a retreat through miles of hostile territory.

In other words, rather than a deal, it was a surrender to Mahmoud Abbas’s wildest dreams.


When asked about it by Channel 10, here was Buji’s reply:

“During the talks with the Palestinian Authority president in 2014, I made efforts aimed at reaching understandings that would have prevented the wave of terror that I anticipated, just like the efforts I am now making so that the abandonment of the initiative for a regional conference by the extreme right-wing government won’t lead us to another war.”

Can you imagine how much worse the casualties would have been if this servile snake had gotten his way? With the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians controlling the high ground in Samaria and the Shomron as well as East Jerusalem?

And that initiative for a ‘regional conference’ which will not include Israel? What  Herzog is pimping for amounts to a diktat in favor of Abbas and ‘Palestine’ sponsored by France, the Arab League and the EU, rather than the mandatory bilateral negotiations both Israel and the Palestinians agreed to as part of Oslo and the Road Map. That alone should give you an idea of what treaties with the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians are worth if the casualty list since the devil’s bargain with Arafat was made doesn’t.

Fortunately, in spite of all the efforts and all the money spent to push it through, Buji and Obama’s evil plan failed, more proof indeed if it was needed that G-d does indeed protect Israel.

What this amounts to, aside from a lack of basic common sense is collaboration with Israel’s enemies. In America, part of U.S. law still on the books is the Logan Act, which prohibits  private American citizens from making agreements with foreign powers. I’m unaware if Israeli law contains similar provisions, but if it doesn’t it should.

As for Herzog, this alone should be an excellent reason to end his career in Israeli politics forever. His father, Chaim Herzog must be rolling in his grave with shame.

* In Hebrew, ‘Buji’ is slang for a little doll or toy. In an interview with MK Herzog’s mother, she unfortunately revealed that this was her pet name for him as a child and in view of his extremely diminutive stature, Yitzhak Herzog has been stuck with it ever since. It is not considered a term of endearment by most Israelis whom use it to refer to MK Herzog.


Continue reading Why Obama Backed Herzog – The Secret Plan To Betray Israel

. . . → Read More: Why Obama Backed Herzog – The Secret Plan To Betray Israel

Israeli Gov Shake Up! Liberman,Israel Beiteinu Join Coalition!

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (right) and Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman announce the formation of a united Likud and Yisrael Beytenu list for the upcoming elections, October 2012. (photo credit: Miriam Alster/Flash90)

There had been a fair amount of talk about Israeli PM Benyamin Netanyahu bringing the leftist Zionist Union Party, the shotgun wedding between Labor and Tzipi Livni’s fractional Hatnua faction into Netanyahu’s center right coalition in a unity government. Netanyahu and ZU leader Yitzhak Herzog were reportedly engaged in negotiations to do just that.

But today, a political thunderbolt hit, with Netanyahu instead bringing a party on the right, Israeli Beiteinu and its leader Avigdor Liberman into the coalition instead, increasing Netanyahu’s Knesset majority from an unstable 61 seats to a much more solid 67 seats.

Liberman will reportedly replace General Moshe ‘Boogie’ Ya’alon as defense minister and the announcement could come as soon as tomorrow.

The back story here is fascinating.

Yitzhak Herzog, or ‘Buji’ as he’s referred to by many Israelis is head of a steadily decreasing Leftist faction since the last election when Zionist Union was decisively beaten by Likud and other parties on the right. As a consequence, Herzog, whose party received substantial money and assistance from Obama Administration functionaries during the election was seen as ineffectual and a loser.

For Buji, going into the coalition was seen as a lifeline to make ZU politically relevant again, and he had support from US Secretary of State John Kerry, former British PM and Quartet envoy Tony Blair and socialist French PM Hollande among others who were trying to push Netanyahu into putting together a more ‘centrist’ government.

However, Herzog had a major problem – his Zionist Union colleagues mostly hated the idea like poison, and a lot of them were already no huge fans of Buji.

Tzipi Livni said she would take her Hatnua faction and its six seats out of Zionist Union rather than join the government, and Herzog’s far left rival for party leadership Shelly Yachimovich threatened a revolt.

So Herzog’s solution was to up the price for joining tothe point where even the most reluctant members of ZU would go along. He reportedly demanded control of Israel’s Foreign ministry and a veto on anything concerning Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem. Not only did he price himself out of the market, but the fracas from ZU made Netanyahu doubt Herzog could bring his party along with him.

So Netanyahu reached out to Avigdor Liberman, with whom he had a long standing feud that dated back to a joint list agreement between Likud and Yisrael Beiteinu which Liberman felt was unfair in its application as well as disagreements on policy.

The two men have apparently patched up their differences or at least put them aside for now and agreed to work together, with a formal announcement reportedly to be issued shortly.

While General Ya’alon has an honorable record as a soldier, he has been a fairly controversial Defense Minister. The most recent incident was his decision to prosecute an IDF soldier with a superb record whom shot a terrorist whom was already wounded and on the ground in the course of an attack on Israeli civilians. The soldier’s defense is that he had no idea whether the wounded attacker had a bomb belt on or a firearm in his pockets, and Ya’alon’s insistence that he be prosecuted has been extremely controversial in Israel. Other problems like leaks and statements critical of the government coming from Ya’alon and some of his subordinates have also been a problem.

Liberman, while he lacks Ya’alon’s military experience ( he served as a corporal in the IDF) has a very different view of things like prosecuting a soldier for killing a terrorist.

His take on the matter? “It’s better to have a soldier who made a mistake and lived than one who hesitated and had a terrorist kill him.”

That kind of attitude will probably resonate a lot better from a common sense standpoint with the Israeli public whose loved ones serve in the IDF.

There are also some signs that Liberman has gotten some control over his tendency to shoot from the lip, but we’ll see.

I have also heard a strong rumor from another source that Naftali Bennett from Jewish Home will be moving from education minister to head the Foreign Ministry. We’ll see how that develops.

But in any event, the government on the Right Israelis voted for looks likely to be preserved, ZU is out in the cold where they belong and Yitzhak Herzog will not be embedded in position to be a willing tool to
pressure Netanyahu and the Israeli government to make ridiculous concessions for a few promises and a worthless piece of paper.


Continue reading Israeli Gov Shake Up! Liberman,Israel Beiteinu Join Coalition!

. . . → Read More: Israeli Gov Shake Up! Liberman,Israel Beiteinu Join Coalition!

Why So Many Jews Support The Left – And WhyThey’re So Anti- Israel

 A good friend of mine forwarded me some questions from someone she knows whom is absolutely baffled. He’s certainly no anti-semite. But in his contacts with Jews, he finds that many of them while quite intelligent engage in behavior he finds both…

Continue reading Why So Many Jews Support The Left – And WhyThey’re So Anti- Israel

. . . → Read More: Why So Many Jews Support The Left – And WhyThey’re So Anti- Israel

Breaking – US Arming Hezbollah With State-Of-The-Art Missiles


The U.S. delivered part of an $8.6 million military aid package to Lebanon today including laser-guided artillery shells and Hellfire air-to-surface missiles. This amounts to a doubling of military aid to Lebanon.

The story from the Obama Administration is that these munitions are to help Lebanon’s military defend the country’s eastern border from what the State Department referred to as “violent extremists.”

Just one thing…speaking of violent extremists, there’s a peculiar thing about Lebanon’s Army. Like the rest of Lebanon’s military, it is now  totally integrated with Hezbollah. And it has been for years.

The armaments the Obama Administration is giving Lebanon will thus be freely available to  Hezbollah and used against Israel when the time comes.That’s why the Israelis made a formal announcement  that if they were attacked from Lebanon again, unlike the last time they would consider it an attack on Israel by Lebanon, not just Hezbollah.

And it even gets worse than  that.

Those extremists the Obama Administration  is blathering about?A reasonable person might think that would include Jaish al-Fatah, the Army of Conquest. These are the so-called  ‘moderates’ funded, armed and trained by President Obama in conjunction with Turkey, Qatar and the Saudis. Jaish al-Fatah is primarily composed of ‘moderates’ like Ahrar ash-Sham, an officially designated terrorist group and  the al-Qaeda offshoot al-Nusrah.And they’re right on Lebanon’s border in Idlib province.


These are the same wonderful folks the Obama administration is complaining about Vladimir Putin conducting air strikes on:

“Greater than 90 percent of the strikes that we’ve seen them take to date have not been against ISIL or al Qaeda-affiliated terrorists,” said State Department spokesman John Kirby.

“They’ve been largely against opposition groups that want a better future for Syria and don’t want to see the Assad regime stay in power.
Al-Nusrah isn’t affiliated with al-Qaedah? That’s certainly not what they say. Read up on al-Nusrah and Ahrar ash-Sham. You’ll quickly find out what kind of future these hard line Islamists want for Syria, and their differences with ISIS could basically be summed up by the phrase ‘Who’s going to be king of the mountain ?’

This is material aid to terrorism, something that is clearly against U.S. law except when President Obama does it. Even more, we’re aiding both sides in this conflict who, whatever their differences hate us and have plenty of American blood on their hands.

At least Russia’s Vladimir Putin seems to know whose side he’s on. And he seems to be actually taking on those ‘Sunni extremists’ and ‘al-Qada affiliated terrorists’ John Kirby was talking about.

As for me, I have to confess something. When my tax dollars are going to a government that funds  groups that would happily murder me and my family let alone my friends in Israel,  it is definitely food for thought.


Continue reading Breaking – US Arming Hezbollah With State-Of-The-Art Missiles

. . . → Read More: Breaking – US Arming Hezbollah With State-Of-The-Art Missiles

Breaking – US Arming Hezbollah With State-Of-The-Art Missiles


The U.S. delivered part of an $8.6 million military aid package to Lebanon today including laser-guided artillery shells and Hellfire air-to-surface missiles. This amounts to a doubling of military aid to Lebanon.

The story from the Obama Administration is that these munitions are to help Lebanon’s military defend the country’s eastern border from what the State Department referred to as “violent extremists.”

Just one thing…speaking of violent extremists, there’s a peculiar thing about Lebanon’s Army. Like the rest of Lebanon’s military, it is now  totally integrated with Hezbollah. And it has been for years.

The armaments the Obama Administration is giving Lebanon will thus be freely available to  Hezbollah and used against Israel when the time comes.That’s why the Israelis made a formal announcement  that if they were attacked from Lebanon again, unlike the last time they would consider it an attack on Israel by Lebanon, not just Hezbollah.

And it even gets worse than  that.

Those extremists the Obama Administration  is blathering about?A reasonable person might think that would include Jaish al-Fatah, the Army of Conquest. These are the so-called  ‘moderates’ funded, armed and trained by President Obama in conjunction with Turkey, Qatar and the Saudis. Jaish al-Fatah is primarily composed of ‘moderates’ like Ahrar ash-Sham, an officially designated terrorist group and  the al-Qaeda offshoot al-Nusrah.And they’re right on Lebanon’s border in Idlib province.


These are the same wonderful folks the Obama administration is complaining about Vladimir Putin conducting air strikes on:

“Greater than 90 percent of the strikes that we’ve seen them take to date have not been against ISIL or al Qaeda-affiliated terrorists,” said State Department spokesman John Kirby.

“They’ve been largely against opposition groups that want a better future for Syria and don’t want to see the Assad regime stay in power.
Al-Nusrah isn’t affiliated with al-Qaedah? That’s certainly not what they say. Read up on al-Nusrah and Ahrar ash-Sham. You’ll quickly find out what kind of future these hard line Islamists want for Syria, and their differences with ISIS could basically be summed up by the phrase ‘Who’s going to be king of the mountain ?’

This is material aid to terrorism, something that is clearly against U.S. law except when President Obama does it. Even more, we’re aiding both sides in this conflict who, whatever their differences hate us and have plenty of American blood on their hands.

At least Russia’s Vladimir Putin seems to know whose side he’s on. And he seems to be actually taking on those ‘Sunni extremists’ and ‘al-Qada affiliated terrorists’ John Kirby was talking about.

As for me, I have to confess something. When my tax dollars are going to a government that funds  groups that would happily murder me and my family let alone my friends in Israel,  it is definitely food for thought.


Continue reading Breaking – US Arming Hezbollah With State-Of-The-Art Missiles

. . . → Read More: Breaking – US Arming Hezbollah With State-Of-The-Art Missiles

Yet Another Reason Israel Can’t Rely on Agreements With The Obama Regime

Because agreements with this president and his team rarely mean anything, especially when it comes to Israel.A little over two decades ago, Israel signed a piece of paper called the Oslo Accords with terrorist Yasser Arafat and gave the PLO control of …

Continue reading Yet Another Reason Israel Can’t Rely on Agreements With The Obama Regime

. . . → Read More: Yet Another Reason Israel Can’t Rely on Agreements With The Obama Regime

Obama’s Cynical Synagogue Speech


by David Gerstman

President Obama’s speech a week and a half ago at Washington D.C. synagogue Adas Israel was alternatively promoted as both an opportunity to address the scourge of anti-semitism, and a chance to reach out to American Jews. The speech did nothing to advance either goal and was tone-deaf to any Jews, or Americans for that matter, who don’t buy into the president’s foreign policy.
As far as his reaching out, the president simply rehashed all of his administration’s arguments about closing off Iran’s paths to a nuclear weapon. He offered nothing new. Of course, he said that the deal he’s trying to make with Iran will make Israel safer. He made a point of saying that he shares the goal with Israel of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons; but he said it with no real conviction. He was just repeating a talking point. Repeating all of his talking points isn’t going to convince someone who doesn’t already agree with him.

Notably, he repeated his 2012 line about having Israel’s back. But with Israel’s political establishment – Isaac Herzog is no less skeptical of the emerging deal than Benjamin Netanyahu is – doubting the efficacy of the ongoing diplomacy, that claim hardly seems credible. He says that he welcomes debate, but the night before Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to Congress, Obama gave an interview to Reuters attempting to undercut Netanyahu’s arguments.

Instead of addressing reservations with the deal, Obama simply repeated his own arguments. Again that’s not how you convince doubters.

The same dynamic was at work when he discussed the peace process.

And it is precisely because I care so deeply about the state of Israel — it’s precisely because, yes, I have high expectations for Israel the same way I have high expectations for the United States of America — that I feel a responsibility to speak out honestly about what I think will lead to long-term security and to the preservation of a true democracy in the Jewish homeland. (Applause.) And I believe that’s two states for two peoples, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security. (Applause.) Just as Israelis built a state in their homeland, Palestinians have a right to be a free people on their land, as well. (Applause.)

Now, I want to emphasize — that’s not easy. The Palestinians are not the easiest of partners. (Laughter.) The neighborhood is dangerous. And we cannot expect Israel to take existential risks with their security so that any deal that takes place has to take into account the genuine dangers of terrorism and hostility.

But what’s been noticeable about President Obama’s approach to the peace process since he’s been president is that because he has such “high expectations” of Israel, he only expects efforts from Israel. He’s asked nothing of the Palestinians. (This conceit prompted Eli Lake to ask why Obama couldn’t care a little bit less about Israel.)

Last year Israel’s former peace negotiator Tzipi Livni told an interviewer that last year’s American-sponsored peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians were torpedoed by Mahmoud Abbas, who refused to accept an American-sponsored framework that Netanyahu reluctantly accepted. When that happened there were no administration leaks about how Abbas was missing a historic opportunity or questions about his commitment to peace. And there was certainly no public haranguing of the Palestinian leader. Is there any reason to expect that when President Obama decides its time to start a new peace process he won’t demand some upfront concessions by Netanyahu to convince the Palestinians to negotiate?

In other words, whether addressing Iran or the Israeli-Palestinian issue, Obama offered no reason for a skeptic to change his mind. So his purpose was clearly not outreach.

And what about anti-semitism? Obama’s mentions of anti-semitism were general. He spoke of it as a “scourge,” but didn’t address a single specific instance of official anti-semitism. Why not? In an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg earlier in the week Goldberg asked him about the official anti-semitism of Iran, so it isn’t like Obama could claim ignorance of the issue. Robert Wistrich, perhaps the world’s top authority on anti-semitism, passed away a few days before Obama spoke, but Obama didn’t mention his name.

Neither of the purported reasons for Obama’s talk were addressed (seriously) by the president. As Michael Doran noted, in A Letter to My  Liberal Jewish Friends, published last week in Mosaic Magazine, Obama was speaking specifically to the “liberal Jewish community.” You could say he was preaching to the choir, making sure that one of his most loyal constituencies doesn’t stray. The pre-speech PR was misdirection, to make the president appear conciliatory and magnanimous. The speech itself was motivated by cynical self-interest.

Doran goes through the various reasons the president chose to speak as he did at the synagogue, but in the end he comes down to what was Obama’s likely calculation.

The president’s sophistry demonstrates a simple but profound truth: his commitment to the progressive values of tikkun olam is governed by its own “red lines,” and is entirely utilitarian. Which again raises the question: what was his purpose in stressing this shared progressive commitment in his address to you, and what was his purpose in subtly reminding you of the costs of failing to abide by its terms?

The answer, I hope, is obvious. On June 30, Obama will likely conclude a nuclear deal with Iran. This will spark a faceoff with Congress, which has already declared its opposition to the deal. Congress will inevitably pass a vote of disapproval, which Obama will inevitably veto. In order to defend that veto from a congressional override, however, he must line up 34 Senators—all Democrats. This calls in turn for a preemptive ideological campaign to foster liberal solidarity—for which your support is key. If the president can convince the liberal Jewish community, on the basis of “shared values,” to shun any suspicion of alignment with congressional Republicans or Benjamin Netanyahu, he will have an easier time batting down Congress’s opposition to the deal with Iran.

I think Doran is correct. Obama knows that a deal with Iran is not popular. He also knows that despite the limits that Corker-Menendez puts on him, it still means that a future nuclear deal with Iran will stand if the Senate cannot override his veto, even if Congress is not convinced that he made a good deal and initially votes the deal down.

As more news stories like Tuesday’s that Iran has increased its enriched uranium by 20% since the Joint Plan of Action was agreed even as Obama and his administration insist that Iran has abided by its terms, skepticism of the deal will only increase.

So as Doran pointed out, President Obama was asking his hardest core supporters to stand by him and ensure that minority who will support his bad deal with Iran will be a big enough minority to ensure that the deal stands.

crossposted at Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion


Continue reading Obama’s Cynical Synagogue Speech

. . . → Read More: Obama’s Cynical Synagogue Speech

Munich II

 (photo credit: AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

President Barack Hussein Obama announced yesterday that a deal – ooops, a ‘framework for a deal’ had been achieved with Iran on its illegal nuclear program.

Here’s what the president said the components of this unwritten, unsigned framework were.

First of all, he claimed that the reactor at Iran’s heavy water facility at Arak will be dismantled so the Iranians cannot produce plutonium, a second route to nuclear weapons.He also claimed that nuclear material from Arak would be shipped out of Iran, that Iran would not build a new heavy water reactor and that Iran will not reprocess fuel from its existing reactors ever.

Second, he claimed that the Iranians agreed that its centrifuges would be reduced by two thirds, and that Iran will not enrich uranium with its advanced centrifuges for at least the next 10 years. He also said that Iran would no longer enrich uranium at its top secret military facility at Fordow. and that there would be severe limits on Iran’s stockpiling of the materials needed to build a nuclear weapon.

He said there would be limits on Iran’s nuclear program, research and development for a decade and that Iran would never be allowed to build a nuclear weapon.

He also claimed that current sanctions would be gradually phased out in accordance with Iranian compliance, that Iran would face intense inspections and scrutiny, and that if if was found cheating, the UN would slap massive sanctions back on Iran.

There’s not a single statement in the above four paragraphs that’s true, and that comes from no less than Iran’s own Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, who supposedly agreed to all this in the last minute negotiations at Lausanne:

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif accused the Obama administration of misleading the American people and Congress in a fact sheet it released following the culmination of negotiations with the Islamic Republic.

Zarif bragged in an earlier press conference with reporters that the United States had tentatively agreed to let it continue the enrichment of uranium, the key component in a nuclear bomb, as well as key nuclear research.

Zarif additionally said Iran would have all nuclear-related sanctions lifted once a final deal is signed and that the country would not be forced to shut down any of its currently operating nuclear installations. […]

Zarif, echoing previous comments, said the United States has promised an immediate termination of sanctions.

“Iran/5+1 Statement: ‘US will cease the application of ALL nuclear-related secondary economic and financial sanctions.’ Is this gradual?” he wrote on Twitter.

He then suggested a correction: “Iran/P5+1 Statement: ‘The EU will TERMINATE the implementation of ALL nuclear-related economic and financial sanctions’. How about this?”

On Thursday evening, Zarif told reporters the latest agreement allows Iran to keep operating its nuclear program.

“None of those measures” that will move to scale back Iran’s program “include closing any of our facilities,” Zarif said. “We will continue enriching; we will continue research and development.”
“Our heavy water reactor will be modernized and we will continue the Fordow facility,” Zarif said. “We will have centrifuges installed in Fordow, but not enriching.”

The move to allow Iran to keep centrifuges at Fordow, a controversial onetime military site, has elicited concern that Tehran could ramp up its nuclear work with ease.

The scrutiny and inspections, of course, can be relied on to tell us everything we need to know about Iran’s nuclear program, right? Because the Iranians would never try to hide that sort of thing from us, and can be relied on not to cheat

As for the president’s threat of renewed sanctions, just like his promises on ObamaCare he is knowingly lying to the American people. It took two years to put together the sanctions regimen in the UN. Now that Obama has essentially dismantled it, it isn’t going to happen again, certainly not in time to be of any use. Russia will see to that.

And here perhaps is the most chilling statement Zarif made:

Zarif also revealed that Iran will be allowed to sell “enriched uranium” in the international market place and will be “hopefully making some money” from it.

Can you imagine whom a regime that is the major supporter of Islamist terrorism like Iran is likely to sell nuclear materials and know how to? Iran itself obtained quite a bit from Pakistan’s notorious AQ Khan when he was running what amounted to a cash and carry supermarket for this sort of merchandise. What Iran is obviously planning will make what Khan did look minor.

President Obama claims that this ‘framework’ agreement is a good deal. In reality, all it does is give Iran another three which gives Iran another three months to work on its nuclear weapons technology in exchange for…absolutely nothing specific. Instead of leading to reduced nuclear proliferation, it will increase it, since countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia are under no illusions as to what this means.

This goes beyond mere appeasement. President Obama and John Kerry are enabling a nuclear armed Iran.

All other things aside, this president and his team are allowing a murderous regime that has sworn to destroy Israel on numerous occasions the tools to attempt a second Holocaust. And there’s no question in my mind that this is deliberate.

The moron prog think tank response to this is that the Iranians are rational actors whom would never do this, because of the risk of retaliation by Israel. Let’s see what the founder of the regime, the Ayatollah Khomeini had to say about that:

“We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land [Iran] burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world.”

The Iranians have continued to promise to destroy Israel since 1978 when Khomeini took over. That goal has never changed.

Neither has their goal of destroying America. In fact, during the Lausanne negotiations, Iran’s Supreme Leader the Ayatollah Khamenei once again led crowds in the old chant,”death to America.”

He means it, and so does Iran. For those of you whom think this is just Israel’s problem and you couldn’t care less, guess again. Once the Iranians attack what they refer to as the Little Satan, the Great Satan is next on the list.

These things only start with the Jews. They don’t end there.

Barack Obama and John Kerry were so desperate for a deal that they were willing to take a position of strength and turn it into a position of weakness.  In fact, they became the Iranians’ community organizers lobbying the other P5+1 countries to accept more and more concessions. Kerry at one point said, “Simply demanding that Iran  capitulate makes a nice sound bite,but [a sound bite] is not a policy, it is not a realistic plan.”

Actually, giving Iran a choice between having its nuclear weapons program and having an economy  was an extremely realistic plan. So was telling the Iranians that if negotiations failed, they wouldn’t even have a nuclear program any longer, because we would seek other means to solve the problem.

Instead, Barack Obama and John Kerry capitulated on virtually every major point the Iranians wanted, while rewarding them with  billions in badly needed funds simply for continuing the process. It was like two hookers paying a john for deigning to partake of their services rather than the other way around.

President Obama wanted some kind of deal with Iran at whatever cost.And he’ll get it any way he can.

The cost, of course will be paid by America, by Israel and by anyone else the Iranians target in ways we can’t even begin to imagine, just as the French and British couldn’t imagine the aftermath of Munich in 1938.

This is Munich II, and it will be far worse than the original in terms of destruction and lives lost unless this foul, craven sell out is stopped cold. It will be an unmitigated defeat for the West, and knowing whom was responsible and cursing their names in the annals of history will be cold comfort in the aftermath of what will come afterwards.


Continue reading Munich II

. . . → Read More: Munich II

U.S. East Jerusalem Consulate Creating Own Private Palestinian Terrorist Militia


As some of you may know, The White House refused to locate its embassy in Israel capitol, Jerusalem. Instead, it has two consular facilities, an embassy in Tel Aviv and a consulate in East Jerusalem that openly sees itself according to its own web page “as the embassy of the United States of America in Palestine.”

There is a small consular office in West Jerusalem but it is pretty much limited to tasks like turning in absentee ballots. If Jews living or traveling in Israel need to have a passport issued, obtain a visa for the US, register for social security or register children as American citizens, they either have to use the ‘East Jerusalem’ consulate or travel to Tel Aviv to use the American embassy.

The American diplomats whom work there live in West Jerusalem but commute, and are noted for their pro-Palestinian sympathies, and the East Jerusalem consulate is staffed mostly by those Arabs whom identify themselves as Palestinians whose hostility to Jews is an open secret. There is one exception to this..or there was until now.

Under a 2011 agreement with the U.S., only IDF combat veterans would be authorized to carry arms as consulate guards. Also, those arms were limited to 100 handguns.

The Hebrew daily Yedioth Ahronoth has reported that this agreement has now been blatantly violated. The consulate’s new security director, Dan Cronin has hired 35 Palestinian security guards, many of whom have criminal records.

Three Israeli security guards who worked at the US consulate resigned in the wake of a plan to hire 35 Palestinians from East Jerusalem as armed security guards who are currently undergoing training in Yericho (Jericho). One of them has gone so far as to accuse the consulate of creating “an armed Palestinian militia.”

According to the report in Yediot Aharonot, the plan is to employ the Palestinians mainly to escort convoys of American diplomats in Judea-Samaria.

The report said that the change in the consulate Israelis began months ago, with the appointment of consulate security officer Dan Cronin. Employees say that since they started working there seven Israeli security guards were fired, compared with one Palestinian guard.

The three Israeli guards who recently resigned in protest at his behavior, say he is training the Palestinian security guards at the American facility in Jericho, where Palestinian security forces are training. Some of the guards were even flown to the US for training.

“The law in Israel is only a recommendation for him,” one employee fired. “Cronin does whatever he wants.”

According to them, some of the Palestinian security guards employed at the consulate were arrested in the past for throwing rocks or have relatives who were convicted of hostile terrorist activities.

“The Consulate head’s behavior tends toward the Palestinians, and Cronin actually established a Palestinian armed militia for the Consulate,” an employee said. “He is training them with weapons, combat and tactical exercises. There is a lack of responsibility here – who ensures that such weapons, once given over to Palestinian guards, won’t make their way to terror groups?”

The answer to that question is certainly easy. Any weapons, materials and trained personnel given to ‘Palestine’ have always ended up being used against Israeli civilians, whether it was the cement for ‘construction’ given to Hamas by UNRWA and USAid used to create the terror attack tunnels or the M-16s given to Arafat’s security thugs prior to the Second Intifada.

The anti-Israeli character of the consulate today is clear, according to the report: the most senior adviser is a Palestinian Arab, Ibrahim Delalsh, who sat in Israeli prison for belonging to Fatah-linked terror groups. Another advisor is a relative of one of the leaders of Hamas in Jerusalem, Muhammad Hassan Abu Tir, who has been in and out of Israeli prisons many times.

But wait, there’s more.

Yediot is also reporting that the consulate also keeps an arsenal of machine guns and rifles on the premises,a further violation of the 2011 agreement.

The U.S. consulate refused to allow reporters to speak directly to Cronin or to address any of the allegations in the article directly,but merely issued a blanket statement saying that “The US Consulate General in Jerusalem has full confidence in the professionalism of its staff.”

“We do not discuss the security of our diplomatic missions, but note there are many inaccuracies in the story.”

“In addition,” he said, “we coordinate fully and regularly with local authorities.”

Needless to say, the statement didn’t point out any ‘inaccuracies.’ And there was very obviously no co-ordination with the Israeli government or the Israeli police…although I’m sure Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah security thugs knew all about it.

What the Obama Administration is doing is creating a trained cadre of terrorists and a private arms depot where weaponry can be smuggled under diplomatic cover to Area A, the part of Judea and Samaria where the Palestinian Authority is in charge.

This overtly hostile action is similar to the two fully armed combat brigades the Obama Administration created for Fatah trained by General Keith Dayton with our tax dollars. Since these units are not going to take on the IDF directly, they’re designed to conduct guerilla war against Israel’s civilians and that’s what they’re going to be used for eventually.



Their innocent blood will be on our hands…we paid for it.

So much for President Obama’s horse manure about Israel’s security.And people wonder why the relationship between America and Israel has been damaged so badly?

When Israel gets demonized for being intransigent or hardline for failing to follow the Obama Administration’s diktats or for not clearing its security actions with America, remember this nonsense.


Continue reading U.S. East Jerusalem Consulate Creating Own Private Palestinian Terrorist Militia

. . . → Read More: U.S. East Jerusalem Consulate Creating Own Private Palestinian Terrorist Militia

‘Palestine’ Fails At The UN – And The Real Story Behind It

Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority finally submitted their resolution to the UN Security Council last night and it came up for a vote today.

Before we look at how it turned out and why, let’s examine what led up to this.

Mahmoud Abbas originally presented this December 17th  as a unilateral attempt to get the UN behind defining ‘Palestine’ as the areas the PLO wants for a state…essentially the pre ’67 boundaries, or as former Israeli diplomat Abba Eban aptly referred to them, the Auschwitz Lines. Of course, this violated both the Oslo Accords and the Road Map the PLO had signed, but then they never lived up to those agreements anyway.

Since the unity agreement with Hamas, Abbas has seen his credibility fade even farther than it already had. Hamas had shown no signs of giving up sovereignty in Gaza to Abbas and Fatah, and with Abbas now in year ten of what was originally supposed to be a four year term, Hamas  was pressing him to put together elections. Abbas attempted to compete with Hamas for the support of the Palestinian ‘street’ by ramping up the Third Intifada with attacks against Israel’s civilians and a speech in the UN accusing Israel of genocide, which hardened a lot of attitudes in Israel. But he was still in a position where he needed to appear to take the lead. So he went to the UN, ranting that if the UNSC failed to vote to pass his resolution, he would ‘cut off all dealing with Israel (what ‘dealings’?) and sue Israel via the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes.

The original draft called for a complete Israeli ‘withdrawal’ to the pre-’67 lines by 2017, Jerusalem as a ‘shared capitol’ whatever that means, and a ‘just solution’ for the refugees of 1948..the Arab ones, that is, not the Jews. The French had come up with an alternative draft, so the Jordanian ambassador and the PLO representatives got together with the French and came up with a second draft. As Abbas said, they took certain parts of it and “added Palestinian  observations.”

The French draft originally called for recognition of Israel as the Jewish State. Abbas and Saeb Erekat got that removed, and hardened the language considerably. Now, East Jerusalem was to be the capitol of Palestine exclusively, Arab refugees were to be allowed a Right of Return, and all of the Palestinian terrorists in Israel’s jails were to be released. It also calls for Israeli occupation forces to be replaced by “a third-party presence.” Or in other words, a force to shield Fatah and Hamas terrorists from Israeli retaliation and give them a base where they can train, recruit and launch attacks from with impunity.

But wait, there’s more. Check out this language:

Affirms the urgent need to attain, no later than 12 months after the adoption of this resolution, a just, lasting and comprehensive peaceful solution that brings an end to the Israeli occupation since 1967 and fulfills the vision of two independent, democratic and prosperous states, Israel and a sovereign, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security within mutually and internationally recognized borders.

Since the Arab-occupied parts of Judea, Samaria and Gaza have never been ‘democratic’ in
the way normal people conceive of the word,that simply means there would be at least one election if this were to go through..the one Hamas wins,just as they won the last one. Not only that,but note the use of the word ‘contiguous.’


If ‘Palestine’ is contiguous, obviously Israel will not be. So along with swamping Israel with homicidal ‘refugees’ , releasing the current crop of experienced terrorists from Israel jails and forcing Israel back to indefensible borders, this resolution calls for a further split in Israeli territory between Gaza and the proposed Abbasistan in Judea and Samaria.

Even if the UNSC had voted for this travesty, Israel had already made it known they weren’t going to abide by it.No sane country would.

What happened next is of interest.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry got involved at that point, asking Abbas not to present the current draft resolution to the UNSC. His reasons had nothing to do with it being unfair or in violation of two treaties the U.S. was a signatory to as well as the Palestinian Authority. What he asked Abbas to do was to wait until after the Israeli elections in March because putting this out now would strengthen the Israeli right.

But Abbas presented it anyway, via Jordan, the Arab representative on the UNSC.

What happened next was even  more curious. Walk with me a moment and I’ll explain.

The UN Security Council is composed of five permanent members and ten rotating ones. The five permanent members – America, Russia China, France and Britain- are a remnant of what the victors looked like after WWII and are the ones with a veto.The rest of the UN membership is divided into regional groups  and the rotating members are chosen by a vote in their particular group. Israel, by the way,  has never been a member of the Security Council and never will be because Israel is  lumped in with the Arab nations, which is why a marginal country like Jordan is that group’s representative rather than the most powerful and economically advanced country in that group.

The rotating members serve for two years, and the current members include Argentina, Australia,  Chad, Chile, Jordan, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Nigeria, South Korea and Rwanda.

Argentina, Australia, Luxemburg, Korea and Rwanda have their terms ending in 2014, and they’re going to be replaced in 2015 by  Angola, Malaysia, New Zealand, Spain, and Venezuela. Or to put it another way, three pro-Israel members ( Australia, South Korea and Rwanda) are going to be replaced 5 countries that definitely aren’t, including one Muslim nation that doesn’t even recognize Israel’s existence and another one (Spain) whose parliament has already voted to recognize ‘Palestine.’

While the draft resolution was presented yesterday, Abbas and Jordan had full control over when it was voted on. Common sense would indicate that they would wait until the new year for a vote, when they were almost certain to get the nine votes it would take to pass.

Instead, the resolution was brought to the Council today by Jordanian Ambassador Dina Kawar for consideration today, with the present membership. Eight countries voted in favor of the motion – China, France, Russia, Argentina, Chad, Chile, Jordan, Luxembourg. Two countries voted against it, Australia and The United States. The other five, South Korea, Britain, Nigeria, Rwanda and Lithuania abstained.

I want to  point out something here. While this particular resolution would have been ignored by Israel even if it had passed, every country that voted for this voted in principal for the ethnic cleansing of 500,00 Jews, the barring of Jews permanently from their holiest religious sites, and for an Israel helpless against terrorist assaults.

And they also voted to dignify with statehood an autocratic  ‘government’ composed of vicious, and corrupt kleptocrats on the one hand and genocidal murderers on the other.

US State Department spokesman Jeff Rathke said that the resolution “sets arbitrary deadlines for reaching a peace agreement and for Israel’s withdrawal from the West Bank, and those are more likely to curtail useful negotiations than to bring them to a successful conclusion.”

“Further, we think that the resolution fails to account for Israel’s legitimate security needs, and the satisfaction of those needs, of course, integral to a sustainable settlement, ” he said.

So…what’s going on here? There are two possibilities, and the game that’s actually being played here will be revealed by what ‘Palestine’ does next.

You’ll remember that in his earlier remarks,  Secretary Kerry didn’t tell Abbas that the U.S. didn’t support the resolution per se. He asked Abbas to wait until after the Israeli elections. The Obama Administration, like the Clinton Administration before them wants Netanyahu out and a Left wing government headed by Labor’s  easily manipulated Yitzhak Herzog and the ever flexible Tzipi Livni in.

The U.S. also didn’t want to have to use its veto and risk upsetting Arab allies now involved in a coalition against IS. So tonight’s  exercise could very easily have been kabuki theater in which everyone got what they wanted – Abbas gained some street cred for going to the UN, The U.S. didn’t need to use its veto, and Britain got out of having to vote against the resolution, which would have inflamed the large part of its population that loathes Israel. Since Australia, Rwanda and South Korea would have  voted no anyway if it came down to it, all they needed was one more abstention. Netanyahu did part of the work by convincing his friend, the pro-Israel Jonathan Goodluck to have Nigeria abstain.

If the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians avoid going back to the UNSC after this, concentrate  on the ICC and other channels and reintroduce this after March, when the Obama Administration will know whether its efforts to oust Netanyahu succeeded, we’ll know what happened today backstage, especially if the U.S. abstains or votes yes after Israel’s elections for substantially the same resolution.

This, by the way, is the scenario I lean towards.

The other possibility is that the Palestinians simply miscalculated. The resolution only failed to pass by one vote,and it would have almost certainly passed had the vote been scheduled in 2015, barring a U.S. veto. I personally doubt the second scenario since the Palestinians could simply have waited and been ensured of it passing.

If Abbas submits this again shortly after the new UNSC members take their seats, then we’ll know that this was indeed a simple miscalculation and that today’s events are going to be repeated, but probably with a different outcome – unless the U.S. vetoes it. W’ll see if they do.


Continue reading ‘Palestine’ Fails At The UN – And The Real Story Behind It

. . . → Read More: ‘Palestine’ Fails At The UN – And The Real Story Behind It

‘How Obama Can Show He Has Israel’s Back’..Wha-aat?


William McGurn at the New York Daily News has an interesting piece up entitled ‘Embassy row: How Obama can show he has Israel’s back.’

McGurn’s proposition? That the president issue an executive order recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capitol.

He attempts to make the case that this would actually benefit the president by improving his relationship with congress by doing something it wants done,and that it would “show that this president is committed to the connection of the Jewish people to the heart of the Jewish homeland.”

He writes that it would give President Obama more credibility in opposing Israeli PM Netanyahu’s policies,that it might actually improve the climate for negotiations for a Palestinian state, and that it might preempt congressional action on the matter with the new Republican dominated congress.

Now, all this is an admirable sentiment,and some of the benefits Mr. McGurn spells out here actually are real and tangible.But can anyone even imagine President Obama caring about that for a moment? Are you kidding?

Aside from the fact he could care less about having a good working relationship with congress, let’s not forget that he has done nothing since he was quite young but hang out and be influenced by anti-semites and Israel bashers, including Frank Marshall Davis, Jeremiah Wright, Al Sharpton, Edward Said, Rashid Khalidi et al. An animus against Israel is practically wired into his DNA.If congress passed legislation recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capitol, he would veto it without a second thought, even if his fellow Democrats begged him not to.

He came into office in 2009 pledging to create ‘daylight’ between America and Israel. His feelings about Israel are so innate as to be unchangeable. In fact, that’s one reason Former defense Secretary Hagel got the axe..After getting to know the Israelis better, Hagel had changed his views quite a bit. Remember Obama’s reaction during the Gaza War when he found out the Pentagon was following its normal policy and shipping Israel arms it had already paid for? He held up the shipments of things like Hellfire missiles for ‘State Department review’ in the middle of a war, and Israel didn’t receive them until well after the war was over. That has never happened before, not since the US first began selling Israel arms during the Nixon administration.

I have good sources in Israel, and I can assure you that while some parts continue to work (such as long standing cooperation between the two militaries)this president and his team have severely damaged America’s relationship with one of our most important allies to the point that it is going to take a lot of time and a huge amount of work to repair it. The Israelis themselves never imagined an anti-Israel president in the White House, and the shock was deep. The Israelis are not even certain at this point about one of the key benefits for them in the relationship, America using its Security Council veto to shut down blatantly anti-Israel resolutions in the anti-semitic fun house the UN has become.

President Obama is probably less likely to do anything that shows ‘he has Israel’s back’ than a pig would be to suddenly start singing Broadway show tunes. It would simply be an unnatural act for him.

In fairness, Mr. McGurn seems to realize this, although perhaps not how deep seated the reasons for it are.

But if he realizes that it’s something President Barack Hussein Obama would never do, I can’t quite see the point of the article either. And rest assured, this by itself would not reassure the Israelis or give the president any added credibility with them given President Obama’s track record. Instead, they would immediately be worrying what dagerous concessions he forced Netanyahu to agree to in exchange.


Continue reading ‘How Obama Can Show He Has Israel’s Back’..Wha-aat?

. . . → Read More: ‘How Obama Can Show He Has Israel’s Back’..Wha-aat?

The Blood Of Zion Cries Out


Early this morning, four Jews at morning prayers were murdered in a synagogue in Jerusalem after two Palestinian broke in and assaulted the worshipers with gunfire and meat cleavers.

Many others were wounded and four are in critical condition.

The terrorist attack took place in Har Hof a predominantly Orthodox neighborhood at the at the Kehilat Yaakov synagogue on Agasi Street.

The Murder victims were identified as Rabbi Moshe Twersky, the head of the Torat Moshe yeshiva, 59; 40-year-old  Rabbi Aryeh Kupinsky; 50-year-old Rabbi Kalman Levine; and 68-year-old Rabbi Avraham Shmuel Goldberg(HY”D) . Rabbi Kupinsky, Rabbi Levine and Rabbi Twersky were all American citizens, while Rabbi Goldberg was a British subject. A Druze policeman subsequently died of his wounds as well, and Israel will mourn and honor him.

The killers stormed the synagogue at 7 AM local time. There was no warning and no way for the victims to defend themselves.The rabbis were murdered during the sacred prayer of Shimoneh Esrei, with siddurim ( prayer books) in their hands and their tefillum on.

Eye witness Ya’akov Amos said: ‘The terrorist moved to within a metre of me then started shooting. One, two, three, bang, bang, bang. I immediately hit the ground and tried to protect myself with a prayer stand. He kept screaming ‘Allah hu’Akbar’.


There was blood everywhere, so much that one of the medical workers slipped in it and broke his leg.

The international reaction was interesting. Even U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry seemed shocked, with his voice quavering. He even used the “T” word and called for an end to incitement against Jews.

Phillip Hammond, Britain’s Foreign Secretary contented himself with a bloodless statement that ‘both sides’ should seek to ‘reduce tension.’ President Obama, of course, said much the same thing.

Israel’s economics minister Naftali Bennett was interviewed by the BBC today, and provides us with another indication of exactly how sick and depraved Britain has become when it comes to Israel and the Jews.

(just a hint – when Bennett mentions Abu Mazen, he is using Mahmoud Abbas’s nom de guerre, the terrorist name he used as Arafat’s second-in-command.)

Notice how the interviewer doesn’t even address the issue of Abbas inciting terrorism, but pulls the case of an Arab bus driver who died yesterday, as though that made the savage murder of four Jews at prayer legitimate. That Arab driver, by the way, had a full investigation and an autopsy done on him and there is no doubt he committed suicide. Unlike the Palestinian Authority, Israel jails murderers no matter who they are.

I really felt like saying ‘Kol Hakavod’ when Bennett held up a picture of one of the victims, which the interviewer hastily told him to put down lest he upset the gentle sensibilities of her viewers. I think it is absolutely essential to do just that – to let the British public see what their government is funding and supporting. And I hope it upsets them to the point of utter shame.

At the end of the interview, Bennett says that Britain is going to have to make a choice of whether they support the Free World or not. As I’m sure Bennett knows, the British Government has already made that choice.Which is why, perhaps, they feel compelled to put up with soldiers being beheaded in broad daylight and no go areas for police and non-Muslims in London and other large British cities.

The murderers were both killed in a shootout with police at the scene. They were Ghassan and Oday Abu Jamal from the Jabal Mukaber neighborhood in east Jerusalem. Needless to say, they were acclaimed as heroes and martyrs by all the factions of the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians.

A Palestinian woman scatters sweets as she celebrates with others an attack on a Jerusalem synagogue

Palestinian supporters of The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, (PFLP), a small militant group, dance while waving their flags, after they heard the news of the shooting 

 “We responded with shouts of joy when we received the news about their deaths,” Ala’a Abu Jamal said of his cousins Ghassan and Uday Abu Jamal to Yedioth Aharonoth. “People here distributed candies to guests who visited us, and there was joy for the martyrs.”

In a message published on its official new website Al-Resalah, Hamas said the attack was “a quality development in fighting the occupation. We highly value the heroism of its operatives.” Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri praised the attack on Qatari news channel Al-Jazeera as “heroic,” calling for more attacks of the same kind.

 Hamas MP Mushir Al-Masri happily wrote on Twitter that “Jerusalem has nothing but men who love martyrdom. The heroes of the knife are in Jerusalem. The heroes of the run-over [car attacks] are in Jerusalem. In Jerusalem men take revenge.”

And he posted this on his Facebook page:

A cartoon posted on the Facebook page of Hamas MP Mushir Al-Masri has perpetrators of the Jerusalem attack dressed in religious Jewish garb asking 'where are they?' (photo credit: Facebook)
The Arab killer is asking ‘Where are they hiding?” Needless to say, in spite of what this cartoon shows none of the worshipers were armed.

And Fatah? Mahmoud Abbas, AKA Abu Mazen issued a ‘condemnation’ that wasn’t one. In a statement (in English, not Arabic)it said that “The Palestinian presidency” condemns violence “from whatever source” and “demands an end to the invasions of Al-Aqsa Mosque and the provocations of the Settlers.”

In other words, ‘So sorry, but unless you surrender Jerusalem to us expect more of the same.’

This is the same Mahmoud Abbas who accused Jews of “contaminating” Al-Aqsa Mosque last week, who just a few days ago was telling his people, in Arabic, to ‘defend Jerusalem’ by any means necessary. This is the same Mahmoud Abbas who said nothing when Fatah published cartoons and Facebook posts encouraging terrorist attacks on Jews and “days of rage” to defend the ‘threatened’ Al-Aqsa.

Tawfik Tirawi, former chief of the Palestinian General Security in the West Bank and a member of Fatah’s Central Committee made it even plainer, and in Arabic. Today he told a radio station in Hebron that the attack was “nothing but a reaction to the recent crimes of the occupation and the settlers in occupied Jerusalem and across the nation. The threats of the occupation against our people and the Palestinian leadership, represented by the president, will only increase our efforts in safeguarding our rights.”

His remarks were reprinted on Fatah’s official Facebook page.

I should make something clear here. This is not the fault of Abbas, or Hamas, or any of the Arabs who identify themselves as Palestinians.

It is the fault of the Israeli government.

A significant number of the Palestinians are simply acting as they have always acted since the 1920’s, and these tendencies were unleashed even further once Arafat and the PLO were allowed in to take over after Oslo.


Israeli governments since Oslo have always allowed themselves to be pressured to ignore these instances of sheer horror…to release  convicted murderers, to make concessions to the terrorist entities on Israel’s borders, and most of all to avoid  finishing them off entirely when their violence and bloodshed mandated a response. This has been especially true since Barack Obama, who styles himself as the Palestinian’s very own community organizer entered the White House.

Is it any wonder that this sort of thing continues to happen? Is it really so puzzling that after allowing Hamas to continue in Gaza and maintaining any kind of relationship with Abbas and the PLO once they allied themselves openly with Hamas that they would resort back to Arafat’s tactics?

Yasser Arafat himself outlined for his followers what this war was really about. On Jordanian TV, right after signing the Oslo Accords he was criticized for signing a peace agreement with the Jews. He responded by reminding his audience of the Peace of Hubidiyeh, a treaty Mohammed made with the Quraysh tribe that he violated as soon as he was strong enough to massacre them, a story every Muslim knows. And then he outlined exactly what this war was about, saying that “either the Jews will push us into the sea or we will push them into the sea.”

Arafat, the leaders of Hamas and numerous members of Fatah have sung the same songs for years. Is it their fault that Israeli governments for years have refused to take them seriously?


It is time they did.

The violence in Jerusalem can be curtailed, not by more security patrols and not by putting guards in front of every synagogue and public building but by teaching the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians that there are real world consequences for their actions.

As you may have noticed, no matter how much innocent Jewish blood is spilled, it is always Israel who is advised to ‘reduce tensions’ and ‘avoid provocation.’  It is always Israel who is castigated for building homes for its people, in spite of over an estimated 40,000 illegal Arab-built structures in East Jerusalem, and an entire city  being constructed from scratch with EU and US Aid money that encroaches on Israeli communities in Area C of Judea.

This is the first time I have ever heard John Kerry mention the constant hatred being spewed by the mosques, media and schools in both Gaza and in the PLO occupied areas of Judea and Samaria as something counterproductive to any real peace. And even his condemnation of this horror as well as the other ones from the UN and EU that will no doubt be voiced are maddeningly hollow..because they still fund and support this evil.

As Naftali Bennett said, they are going to have to choose sides, and that particularly applies to the United States.But Israel has some choices to make as well.

Are they going to settle for the status quo and a war of attrition that favors Israel’s enemies? Or are they are they going to do what’s necessary to end it and win the right to live peacefully?

I’ve always favored Israel simply delineating its own borders and annexing that land,along with a transfer of populations to the respective sides of those borders. But at the very least Israel should answer every terrorist attack with the outright annexation of more land in Judea and Samaria, showing the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians that they are there to stay, and that attacks on Israel cost them dearly. Build on the land, and call the EU’s bluff. In the unlikely event that they follow through on their threats to indulge in sanctions,they have a lot more to lose than Israel does right now economically.

When there are violent riots, as there were in Jabal Mukaber today, simply arrest the perpetrators,take away their Israeli ID cards and expel them to Gaza or to Area A for Abbas to deal with.Aside from providing real world consequences, it will also separate those Arabs who like the good life in Israel and are willing to live in peace (and there are more of them them you think) from those whom want to poison the well with violence.

Make the disarmament of Hamas an iron clad condition for any further reconstruction aid, especially since Hamas is already diverting money and materials to remaking its terrorist infrastructure. Both the EU and Secretary of State Kerry have given lip service to the importance of disarming Hamas for peace. Hold them to it.

If the Muslim Waqf that is in charge of the al-Aqsa Mosque continues to incite riots and stone throwing on the Temple Mount and refuses to allow Jews to enjoy it peacefully, simply explain to them that the next time it happens the police will respond in force, the Waqf’s control of al-Aqsa and the Mount will be ended, the members of the Waqf expelled from Israel and the mosque shut down.

And allow Israelis to sue the PLO and Hamas in Israelis courts for damages to property and person, taking the judgments out of the tax monies Israel collects for the PLO.

These are the sort of steps that are ultimately going to defeat the Third Intifada. It’s long past time to treat Hamas/Fatah like the hostile entity it is.

I am tired of seeing headlines like I saw today, tired of seeing the Arabs whom identify themselves as Palestinians celebrating each new atrocity, tired of seeing world leaders being complicit with this evil.

And I am especially tired of Israel accepting this hypocrisy. I am sick to death of it. It is one thing to be the Jew among nations, but something else entirely to live on your knees and internalize it.



Continue reading The Blood Of Zion Cries Out

. . . → Read More: The Blood Of Zion Cries Out

Obama State Department Stops Israeli From Playing In The NBA

In yet another case of the Obama Administration enforcing special rules on Israel and Israelis that don’t apply to any other country, an Israeli basketball player is being prevented from playing in the NBA.

The Indiana Pacers have been hit with severe injuries, and the NBA allowed them a hardship exemption that allowed them to sign a 16th player through last ‎Thursday.

The Dallas Mavericks had waived Israeli Gal Mekel to the Pacers, who was desperately needed because four of the Pacer’s five guards are injured and they only have 9 active duty players on their roster.

But the U.S. State Department then did something unheard of:

The NBA granted the injury-depleted Pacers a hardship exemption that allowed them to sign a 16th player through last ‎Thursday. When the State Department refused to move up the expiration date on Mekel’s visa even by one day, the Pacers, who had only 9 players on their active roster, backed out of the deal to sign another player before their waiver lapsed.

Normally, visas for foreign-born players in the NBA are automatically transferable with the players to whom they are issued. More than 100 foreign-born players are currently in the NBA. This is the first instance many basketball analysts can recall where a foreign-born player was prevented from signing with a new NBA team because a visa could not be transferred.

Indiana wanted the 26-year-old Israeli shooting guard after his impressive start in Dallas, which included 19 points and 9 assists against the Pacers in Indianapolis on October 18.

This is part of a general practice of denying Israelis visas to come to America, especially if they serve or have served in the IDF. So because of this ‘special treatment’ the Pacers won’t get the player they wanted, and Mekel’s career gets stalled.

Yes, special rules for Israel and Israelis since President Obama and his friends came to town..

Does any one want to bet that the visa would have been extended if Mekel was African and came from Nigeria or Ghana?

(h/t, Carl)


Continue reading Obama State Department Stops Israeli From Playing In The NBA

. . . → Read More: Obama State Department Stops Israeli From Playing In The NBA

The U.S. State Department Is At War…With Israel


When it comes to hatred and hypocrisy it’s business as usual where Israel’s concerned when it comes to the U.S. State Department, which has become a willing tool of the Obama Administration to discredit and demonize Israel.And that was clearly demonstrated today in the exchanges below.


Last Week, U.S Chief of Staff General Martin Donovan made a speech about Israel and the Gaza War that went pretty far off the Obama Regime’s reservation. He not only praised the IDF for their efforts to avoid civilian casualties,saying that Israel had gone to “extraordinary lengths” in Gaza, but revealed that the U.S. Armed Forces had sent a delegation to learn about the IDF’s policies to help Americans to improve their own record in wartime.

This directly contradicted the State Department and the White House, whose stated position was to attack Israel at every opportunity for not doing enough to avoid civilian casualties.

When former Obama campaign flack turned State Department Spokesperson Jen Psaki was questioned about this by Matt Lee at the AP of all places, the exchange revealed quite a bit:

MATT LEE, ASSOCIATED PRESS: Yesterday, the ICC made its decision that there was no case to prosecute for war crimes in Gaza. But also yesterday – and you spoke about that very briefly here. But also yesterday, General Dempsey, who is no slouch when it comes to military things, told an audience in New York that the Israelis went to extraordinary lengths to limit collateral damage during the Gaza war. And I’m puzzled, because I thought it was the position of the Administration – or maybe it was just the position of the State Department and the White House – that Israel was not doing enough to live up to its – what you called its own high standards. Back on August 3rd, there was the statement you put out after the UNRWA school incident, saying that the U.S. “is appalled by today’s disgraceful shelling.” And that was some pretty fierce criticism. How do you reconcile these two apparent divergent points of view? When this statement came out, the United States was appalled? Did that just mean the State Department was appalled?

JEN PSAKI, STATE DEPARTMENT: No, that is the position of the Administration; it remains the position of the Administration. As we made clear throughout the summer’s conflict, we supported Israel’s right to self-defense and strongly condemned Hamas’s rocket attacks that deliberately targeted civilians, and the use of tunnels, of course, of attacks into Israel. However, we also expressed deep concern and heartbreak for the civilian death toll in Gaza and made clear, as you noted in the statement you pointed to, that we believed that Israel could have done more to prevent civilian casualties, and it was important that they held their selves to a high standard. So that remains our view and position about this summer’s events.

LEE: Okay. But I’m still confused as to how you can reconcile the fact that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff – who knows a bit about how military operations work, I would venture to guess; I don’t know him, but I assume that he wouldn’t be chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff if he was – if he didn’t –

MS. PSAKI: Correct.

LEE: — says that the Israelis essentially did the best that they could and lived up to – by extension lived up to their high standards by taking – by going to, quote, “extraordinary lengths” to limit the collateral damage.

MS. PSAKI: Well, I would point you to the chairman’s team for his – more specifics on his comments. But it remains the broad view of the entire Administration that they could have done more and they should have taken more – all feasible precautions to prevent civilian casualties.

It gets even worse.

There were two terrorist murders in Israel today, one by an Arab who entered the country illegally and attacked and knifed to death a young airman, Almog Shiloni, 20,(HY”D) as he was waiting at the Haganah train station in south Tel Aviv and a second one by an Islamic Jihad operative whom Israel had freed as a ‘gesture to Mahmoud Abbas.’ His victim was Dalia Lemkus, 26 (HY”D), who was first run over as she waited at a bus stop in Alon Shvut near Gush Etzion in Judea and then deliberately stabbed to death when her murderer got out of his car to make sure he finished the job.

 Dalia Lemkus (photo: Facebook)

Jen Psaki’s remarks on this? She referred to them as “unfortunately a couple of events.”

Just, you know, the kind of tragedies that happen some time. Here’s the rest of her statement:

“We strongly condemn the stabbings – the stabbing today in the West Bank and we deeply regret the loss of life. Our condolences go out to the victim’s family. It is absolutely critical that parties take every possible measure to protect civilians and de-escalate tensions,” Psaki said.

Protect civilians? Does she even listen to what comes out of her mouth? These were deliberate terrorist attacks aimed at killing civilians. And the Palestinian Authority and Hamas are encouraging them.



And of course, being Jen Psaki, she had to find something to say to show some kind of  equivalence between Israel and the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians…

“We are also seeking additional information surrounding the incident of the Israeli Arab who was shot with – who was shot as well with a live bullet. We’re looking for information surrounding this incident. We’re in touch – close touch with the Ministry of Justice. And of course, we urge all parties to exercise restraint.”

The Arab whom she’s perhaps talking about, Khayr al-Din al-Hamdan had attacked a police car with a knife and attempted to attack the police inside. Or perhaps she means Dalia Lemkus’s murderer Maher Hamdi al-Hashalmoun from Hebron, who was shot by police as he ran away on foot after a 59-year-old Israeli stopped his car, got out and took the killer on with his bare hands

A reporter asked her, “If you’re standing at a bus stop or something and someone runs a car into you or comes up and stabs you, I don’t know how – I mean, those people aren’t – don’t need to exercise restraint, do they?”

Her reply? “I think I’m referring to the fact that we know that there have been – there’s been rising tensions in the region that has led to some of these incidents. I think we all are aware of that.”

“Obviously, there have been a range of issues and events that have led to the rising tensions in the region that both sides need to do more to fix.”

These exchanges reveal a lot. They tell us that the constant hammering on Israel by the Obama Administration is all about President Obama’s attitude towards Israel and towards Benyamin Netanyahu, not anything about how Israel defends itself.

This president and his minions don’t consider the attacks against Israeli civilians to be terrorism, but ‘legitimate’ resistance by ‘freedom fighters.’ That’s exactly why they never use the ‘T’ word to describe them.

It’s always Israel’s fault. And if that isn’t supported in the least by facts, that doesn’t stop Psaki and others of her ilk from being the mouthpieces used to demonize Israel and its security forces as they defend the country. It’s to try and force Israel back to indefensible borders that would result in even worse violence than exists now.

The president and his team don’t consider Israel an ally. They see Israel as a problem he needs to neutralize and create distance from, just as he said openly in 2009. It’s what he wanted from the very beginning, and it’s much more to his taste than actually fighting Islamists or seeing to it that Iran is stopped from getting nuclear weapons

Also, the callous dismissal of what Dempsey had to say is just one more example of exactly how much respect this president and his team have for our military and their advice and opinions.

And Jen Psaki?

I know, it’s just a well paid job that involves equating Israel with the likes of Hamas/Fatah and whitewashing the Obama regime’s despicable stance by blaming ‘both sides’, as if the victims brought it on themselves just by being there. But then, there are limits in what most people with any decency will do for money …unless they’re true believers. Ms. Psaki obviously is one, and is thus enabling what I’d call more than the usual level of evil.

There’s always a price for that in the end.


Continue reading The U.S. State Department Is At War…With Israel

. . . → Read More: The U.S. State Department Is At War…With Israel