Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Obama's Hate For Israel

For anyone who ever harbored any doubt about the relationship between Obama and Netanyahu and by extension the United States and Israel, last week's exchange between French President Sarkozy and Obama should crush, extinguish, blow up that figment of doubt.  Obama does not like Israel and I feel he will do anything in his power to eliminate the country.
Now those are harsh words and had similar words been spoken or actions been taken by
Roosevelt  against Hitler, maybe 12 million or more souls  could have been saved. It is time that lovers of Israel demand that Obama fully support Israel. Unless actions are taken now at this pivotal point in time, it might be too late in the not so distant future. Do you want a major attack on Israel on your conscience because you did not act?
Here is more on the discussion between Sarkozy and Obama:




http://israel-commentary.org/?p=2087

By Yann Le GuernigouFrance's President Nicolas Sarkozy gestures towards President Obama during the G20 Summit of major world economies in Cannes, November 3, 2011. REUTERS/Chris Ratcliffe/Pool
PARIS | Tue Nov 8, 2011 3:25pm EST
(Reuters) – French President Nicolas Sarkozy branded Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “a liar” in a private conversation with U.S. President Barack Obama that was accidentally broadcast to journalists during last week’s G20 summit in Cannes.
“I cannot bear Netanyahu, he’s a liar,” Sarkozy told Obama, unaware that the microphones in their meeting room had been switched on, enabling reporters in a separate location to listen in to a simultaneous translation.
“You’re fed up with him, but I have to deal with him even more often than you,” Obama replied, according to the French interpreter.
The technical gaffe is likely to cause great embarrassment to all three leaders as they look to work together to intensify international pressure on Iran over its nuclear ambitions.
The conversation was not initially reported by the small group of journalists who overheard it because it was considered private and off-the-record. But the comments have since emerged on French websites and can be confirmed by Reuters.
White House press secretary Jay Carney declined to comment on the conversation when asked by reporters traveling with Obama to an event in Philadelphia.
Obama’s apparent failure to defend Netanyahu is likely to be leapt on by his Republican foes, who are looking to unseat him in next year’s presidential election and have portrayed him as hostile to Israel, Washington’s closest ally in the region.
Pushing Netanyahu risks alienating Israel’s strong base of support among the U.S. public and in Congress.
Netanyahu’s office declined to comment, but one of his deputies, Vice Premier Silvan Shalom, played down the episode.
“Everyone talks about everyone. Sometimes even good friends say things about each other, certainly in such competitive professions,” Shalom, a former foreign minister and rival of Netanyahu in the rightist Likud party, told Israel’s Army Radio.
“So you have to consider the main things. Is Obama a friend of Israel? Is Sarkozy a friend of Israel? Is their policy a consistent policy of support for Israel? The answer to all of these questions is affirmative and, as far as I’m concerned, that is what’s important.”
PALESTINIAN WORRIES
Obama and Netanyahu have had a rocky relationship as U.S. efforts to broker a Middle East peace deal have foundered, with the U.S. president openly criticizing Jewish settlement building in the occupied Palestinian territories.
It was unclear why exactly Sarkozy had criticized Netanyahu. However, European diplomats have largely blamed Israel for the breakdown in peace talks and have expressed anger over Netanyahu’s approval of large-scale settlement building.
During their bilateral meeting on November 3, on the sidelines of the Cannes summit, Obama criticized Sarkozy’s surprise decision to vote in favor of a Palestinian request for membership of the U.N. cultural heritage agency UNESCO.
“I didn’t appreciate your way of presenting things over the Palestinian membership of UNESCO. It weakened us. You should have consulted us, but that is now behind us,” Obama was quoted as saying.
The October 31 UNESCO vote marked a success for the Palestinians in their broader thrust for recognition as a sovereign state in the U.N. system — a unilateral initiative fiercely opposed by Israel and the United States.
As a result of the vote, Washington was compelled to halt its funding for UNESCO under a 1990s law that prohibits Washington from giving money to any U.N. body that grants membership to groups that do not have full, legal statehood.
Obama told Sarkozy that he was worried about the impact if Washington had to pull funding from other U.N. bodies such as the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization and the IAEA nuclear watchdog if the Palestinians gained membership there.
“You have to pass the message along to the Palestinians that they must stop this immediately,” Obama said.
The day the conversation took place, the Palestinians announced that they would not seek membership of any other U.N. agency.
Sarkozy confirmed that France would not take any unilateral decisions when the U.N. Security Council discusses a Palestinian membership request, a debate expected later this month.
“I am with you on that,” Obama replied.
(Writing by Crispian Balmer; Additional reporting by Dan Williams; Editing by Andrew Roche)
How can Israel trust any of these guys? They are all liars and speak in a language that has no meaning, no integrity, no legitimate translation. Israel must act and act now in their own self-interest and not depend upon so-called allies who in their heart of hearts could not possibly care less what happens to the Jews and the state of Israel. This has been proven by thousands of years of mindless hatred and relentless persecution. Wake up Jews. Wake up Israel.

7 comments:

  1. You write, "Obama does not like Israel and I feel he will do anything in his power to eliminate the country."

    When is he going to start? To wit:

    The United States blocked Palestine in the Security Council when they tried to gain U.N. recognition as an independent state. That was a huge blow to their cause.

    The United States has just sold bunker-buster bombs to Israel, which could be used to attack Iran's nuclear plants.

    The United States just voted against Palestine becoming a member of UNESCO, and Obama criticized Sarkozy for voting with Palestine.

    I basically agree with the statement in your article from Netanyahu's Vice Premier Silvan Shalom.

    --David

    ReplyDelete
  2. David, Obama had no choice in blocking Palestinian UN membership and UNESCO due to legislation passed by Congress. He had no choice. As far as the bombs, they were promised by the Bush Administration. As usual, Obama has not done anything.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What law requires the United States to always vote on the side of Israel against Palestine in the United Nations? Tell me, and I will fact-check it.

    Under 22 U.S.C. 2778, the delivery of bombs to Israel requires authorization from the president of of the United States. That would be Obama, not George Bush. Each president exercises his own authority under the statute. Think about it. Suppose Bush orders sale of weapons to Iraq to happen in 2009 or 2010, and then the day after Obama is sworn into office, Iraq joins Iran in declaring war on Israel. Are you telling me, under those circumstances, Obams cannot block the shipment of these weapons? No way….

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/09/25/obama-arms-israel.html

    --David

    ReplyDelete
  4. David--1) No law except the law of decency and respect for the only ally in the Middle East requires the US to vote with Israel. Israeli interests and American interests are very much in line.

    2) Of course Obams can block the sale of military items to anyone he wants. This is exactly what scares me about his very public dispute with Israel. Should Israel be involved in a shooting war like 1973, I do not believe Obams can be counted upon to supply the necessary weaponry to repel an attack.

    3) the article you quote makes a very good point. I have included it below:
    On the one hand, there is deep and increasing military support from Obama to Israel. On the other hand, despite all the military and intelligence cooperation between the two countries, political distrust lingers. Perhaps at bottom it stems from Obama’s public rebukes of the building of Israeli homes in East Jerusalem. No matter what his gifts to the leadership, he is still seen as no friend of Israel’s

    ReplyDelete
  5. So, you now acknowledge that voting against Palestine on statehood, voting against Palestine on UNESCO membership, and shipping bombs to Israel were all Obama's presidential decisions.

    He is politically distrusted in some circles because he put pressure on Netanyahu to suspend settlements to create an atmosphere for negotiating the two-state solution. At the same time, he has backed Israel militarily and internationally at every turn, including lobbying with Arab states to corroborate with Israel.

    Or, this… "Israel, U.S. to embark on largest joint exercise in allies' history"

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israel-u-s-to-embark-on-largest-joint-exercise-in-allies-history-1.393878

    Every U.S. president, including Obama, has loyally supported Israel. Always have, always will. Israel has one of the most effective lobby organizations in Washington, D.C., and most Jews vote Democratic. You've got nothing to worry about here, but I know you will anyway (hehe).

    --David

    ReplyDelete
  6. David, I disagree with your assumption that Obama will support Israel. Time will tell who is right. I hope you are right. However, until that time, I will continue to be skeptical!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Obama has supported Israel very consistently in all the cases I showed you, and has never sided with Palestine or any other country against them. He has aggressively pushed for sanctions against Iran, and only the Russians and Chinese are limiting his options. In short, I can see no rational basis for your skepticism, but you are certainly entitled to it.

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for commenting. Your comments are needed for helping to improve the discussion.