Posts Tagged ‘Isreal’

In A Single Move Obama Abandons Israel And Preserves Iran’s Nuclear Machinery

“And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” Genesis 12:3

If you think that Barack Obama is a friend of Israel, you are clinically insane. If you think that America will do anything to stop Iran from creating a nuclear bomb, you are disconnected from reality. What you are watching is the United States turning its back on the nation of Israel in particular, and on Jews in general.

Mark it down. Unless Israel strikes, Iran will get their nukes, and they will use them.

From Independent UK: It marks a victory for the Shia in their growing conflict with the Sunni Muslim Middle East. It gives substantial hope to Bashar al-Assad that he will be left in power in Syria. It isolates Israel. And it infuriates Saudi Arabia and Qatar and Kuwait and other Sunni Gulf States which secretly hoped that a breakdown of the Geneva nuclear talks would humiliate Shia Iran and support their efforts to depose Assad, Iran’s only ally in the Arab world.
In the cruel politics of the Middle East, the partial nuclear agreement between Iran and the world’s six most important powers proves that the West will not go to war with Iran and has no intention – far into the future – of undertaking military action in the region. We already guessed that when – after branding Assad as yet another Middle Eastern Hitler – the US, Britain and France declined to assault Syria and bring down the regime. American and British people – those who had to pay the price for these monumental adventures, because political leaders no longer lead their men into battle – had no stomach for another Iraq or another Afghanistan.

Iran’s sudden offer to negotiate a high-speed end to this cancerous threat of further war was thus greeted with almost manic excitement by the US and the EU, along with theatrical enthusiasm by the man who realises that his own country has been further empowered in the Middle East: Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov. Assad’s continued tenure in Damascus is assured. Peace in our time. Be sure we’ll be hearing that Chamberlonian boast uttered in irony by the Israelis in the weeks to come.

But there’s no doubt that Geneva has called Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s bluff. He may huff and puff, but if he wants to bash Iran now – on the basis that Israel must remain the only nuclear nation in the Middle East – he’s going to be on his own when his planes take off to bomb Iran’s nuclear plants. The AIPAC attack dogs can be sent up to Congress again by that most infamous of Israeli-American lobby groups to harry Republicans in support of the Likudist cause, but to what purpose? Did Mr Netanyahu really think the Iranians were going to dismantle their whole nuclear boondoggle?

When he said yesterday that “the most dangerous regime in the world took a significant step towards obtaining the world’s most dangerous weapon”, many Arabs – and an awful lot of other people in the world, including the West – will have wondered whether Israel, which long ago obtained the world’s most dangerous weapon, is now – in rejecting the Geneva deal – the world’s most dangerous government. If Mr Netanyahu and his clique in the government decide to twit the world’s major powers amid their euphoria, he may bring about – as several Israeli writers have warned – the most profound change in Israel’s relations with the US since the foundation of the Israeli state. It would not be a change for Israel’s benefit.

But six months – the time it takes to solidify this most tangential of nuclear agreements – is a long time. In the coming days, Republicans in Washington and the right-wing enemies of President Rouhani will demand to know the real details of this febrile game at Geneva. The Americans insist that Iran does not have the “right to enrichment”. Iran insists that it does. The percentages of enrichment will have to be examined far more carefully than they were yesterday.

Mr Rouhani – or Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader whose dark wings hover over every elected Iranian leader – says that the fear of an Iranian nuclear weapon will be seen by future generations as a “historical joke”. Netanyahu says the whole shenanigans in Geneva will prove to be a “historic mistake”. The Sunni Saudis, always waiting to spot the winner before opening their mouths, have already sat down with their Sunni Qatari and Kuwaiti allies to commiserate with each other over Shia Iran’s new victory. In Damascus, I suspect, Bashar, himself an Alawite-Shia, will tuck the kids into bed and share a glass with wife Asma and sleep well in his bed tonight. source – Independent UK

‘Secret Obama plan’ forfeits Temple Mount to Palestinians

The Obama administration has quietly presented a plan in which the Palestinian Authority and Jordan will receive sovereignty over the Temple Mount while Israel will retain the land below the Western Wall, according to a senior PA negotiator speaking to WND.

The Temple Mount is the holiest site in Judaism.Isreal

The proposed plan is part of the basis for U.S.-brokered talks that are set to resume in Washington next week after Secretary of State John Kerry announced that both Israel and PA President Mahmoud Abbas have agreed to open negotiations aimed at creating a Palestinian state.

Israel has not agreed to the U.S. plan over the Temple Mount, with details still open for discussion, stated the PA negotiator.

The negotiator, who is one of the main Palestinian figures leading the Arab side of the talks, further divulged Kerry’s proposed outline for a Palestinian state as presented orally to Israel and the PA.
He said Jordan has been invited to play a key role in the discussions surrounding both the Temple Mount and Jerusalem while it will be the PA, with some Jordanian assistance, that would ultimately receive control of some of those areas.

WND was first to report in 2007 that Jordan had been quietly purchasing real estate surrounding the Temple Mount in Jerusalem hoping to gain more control over the area accessing the holy site, according to Palestinian and Israeli officials.

Meanwhile, regarding the rest of Jerusalem, Kerry’s plan is to rehash what is known as the Clinton parameters. That formula, pushed by President Bill Clinton during the Camp David talks in 2000, called for Jewish areas of Jerusalem to remain Israeli while the Palestinians would get sovereignty over neighborhoods that are largely Arab. Most Arab sections are located in eastern Jerusalem.

WND previously reported the Palestinians are building illegally in Jewish-owned areas of Jerusalem, resulting in Arab majorities in some neighborhoods.

For the strategic Jordan Valley, Obama’s proposal calls for international forces to maintain security control along with unarmed Palestinian police forces, the PA negotiator said. Israel will retain security posts in some strategic areas of the Jordan Valley, according to the leaked plan.

When it comes to the West Bank, which borders Jerusalem and is within rocket range of Israel’s main population centers, Israel is expected to evacuate about 90 percent of its Jewish communities currently located in the territory, as outlined in Kerry’s plan.

Israel would retain strategic security posts along with the West Bank’s main blocs, Maale Adumin, Ariel and Gush Etzion. In return, Obama is calling for an exchange of territory with the Palestinians in other locations inside Israel, with discussion being open for the Palestinians to possibly receive land in the Israeli Negev in the country’s south.

The PA negotiator further said Israel rejected a Palestinian request that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agree not to place the final peace plan up for referendum in the Knesset.

Indeed, Netanyahu announced today any plan must receive final approval in a national poll.

“I am committed to two objectives that must guide the result … if there will be a result. And if there will be a result, it will be put to a national referendum,” he said at the start of the cabinet meeting.

“Negotiations with the Palestinians will not be easy, but we are entering them with integrity, honesty and hope,” Netanyahu added.

The PA negotiator, meanwhile, said Netanyahu agreed that as a gesture to restart talks, Israel will enact a temporary freeze on all Jewish construction in the West Bank outside the main settlement blocs. According to Israeli sources, such a freeze has largely already been in place for several months now anyway.

The negotiator warned that one of the toughest issues centers on control of water, with Kerry already reaching out to Turkey about the prospect of selling water at a cheaper rate to a future Palestinian state.


Israel Through the Eyes of a Christian Sojourner – on The Glazov Gang

LelaThis week’s Glazov Gang had the honor of being joined by Lela Gilbert, author of Saturday People, Sunday People, actor Dwight Schultz ( and Ann-Marie Murrell, the National Director of

The Gang members gathered to discuss Israel Through the Eyes of a Christian Sojourner. The dialogue occurred in Part I and focused on Lela Gilbert’s book, Saturday People, Sunday People: Israel through the Eyes of a Christian Sojourner. Ms. Gilbert shared what brought her to Israel, the Israelis’ warm reception of her, and why, as Dr. Gabriel Barkay imparted to her, “Temple Denial is more dangerous and serious than Holocaust Denial.” The Gang therefore reflected on The Cultural Intifada and Temple Denial, a dialogue which dealt with Islamists’ gambit to de-Judaize the Jewish state.

Part II also mostly focused on Saturday People, Sunday People, shedding light on the dire lessons of Israel’s disengagement from Gaza in 2005, the trauma that Israeli citizens, including children, have suffered from Palestinian terror, Jimmy Carter’s Jew-Hate, and the world’s blind spot: the forgotten exodus of 900,000 Jews expelled from Arab and Muslim countries.

The segment ended on a reflection on Margaret Thatcher and the powerful way in which she shaped her era.

To watch both parts of the two-part series, see below:

Obama’s great gift to the Palestinians

By Wesley Pruden

Barack Obama to Israel: Drop dead

He announced Thursday that a Palestinian state, soon to be decreed by the United Nations General Assembly, must be drawn to 1967 borders. This tells the Palestinians and their Arab allies and enablers that events do not have to have consequences.

We’re not supposed to remember that the Arab states attacked Israel in 1967 (and again in 1973), betting they could crush the Jews and take the looted land. Instead they were themselves squashed like bugs. Their airmen were shot out of the skies and their soldiers, routed, threw away their shoes in the desert and ran in panic looking for somewhere to hide, like Mr. Lincoln’s army fleeing Manassas. The losers have been demanding a mulligan ever since, and now Barack Obama has offered them one.

Insult was added to injury when the president, in what the White House called “a major speech,” announced his betrayal of Israel on the eve of the arrival in Washington of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Until now Washington had insisted that Israel and the Palestinians should negotiate their borders. Mr. Obama has changed the rules, moved the goalpost and for good measure tilted the playing field against the Jews. Agreement first, then the negotiations.

Promoted as something like James Monroe declaring his doctrine, the speech showed contempt for Israel.

Mr. Obama chose the State Department to announce what he called “a new chapter in American diplomacy,” that “it will be the policy of the United States to promote reform, and support transitions to democracy.” America’s future, he said, will be bound to the Middle East by forces of economics, security, history and fate. He could have said, but didn’t because he dared not, that this could be a Middle East without Israel.

In the months ahead, he said, he would use American resources to encourage reform, beginning with forgiving a billion-dollar Egyptian debt; urge President Bashar al-Assad to lead Syrian transition to democracy “or get out of the way,” insist that the Iranian people deserve their universal rights and a government that does not smother their aspirations. He stopped short of promising to cure athlete’s foot.

What America and the international community can do is state frankly what everyone knows,” the president said, “that a lasting peace will involve two states for two peoples.” What some of the rest of us can do is state frankly what everyone also knows, that “the international community” is now joined openly—for the first time—by an American president who will try to force Israel to accept surrender on Palestinian terms. The Arabs would get what they want, a better stage to launch rockets and invasions, and give up only cheap promises that no one would expect them to keep.

Mr. Obama described the State Department as “a fitting venue” to announce this gift to the Palestinians, and he’s right about that. The State Department has been the locus of anti-Israel—and anti-Jewish—sentiment since long before Secretary of State George C. Marshall sulked and pouted through the Cabinet sessions leading up to the recognition of the Jewish state in 1948. Mr. Marshall threatened to resign if President Harry S Truman accorded recognition, finally agreeing, reluctantly, to stay in his job only as a courtesy to the president. The Foggy Bottom establishment has never quit sulking since, patiently waiting for the opportunity to exact revenge. Finally the Foggy Bottom wise men have a friendly president at their back.

Mr. Obama, reminding everyone of his bravery and efficiency at Abbottabad (with assistance from the Navy Seals), said that “by the time we found Bin Laden, al-Qaeda’s agenda had come to be seen by the vast majority of the region as a dead end, and the people of the Middle East and North Africa had taken their future in their own hands.” Of course that’s not true, either. If it were, there would be scant need for vast new outlays of American aid to secure an Islamic “future.”

Mr. Obama’s speech, promoted by the White House as something like James Monroe declaring his doctrine, or FDR declaring freedom from fear, will be remembered, if remembered at all, for Barack Obama’s finally laying bare his contempt for democracy’s only true friend in the Middle East. With confidence in his ability to mollify abandoned friends with the sound of his voice, he has scheduled a weekend of inexpensive rhetoric. After he meets for tea and talk with Mr. Netanyahu, he will address the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee on Sunday. But the deed, ‘tis done.



by Judith A. Klinghoffer (bio)
No sane watcher of US foreign relations can miss the dichotomy between the kid gloves treatment with which the Obama administration accorded Ahmadinejad and the brutal treatment accorded Mubarak. I am no fan of Mubarak but he is no Ahmadinejad. Mubarak is on his way out but the American behavior is bound to cause serious harm to US interest around the world. Already China and Russia are quick to exploit the American blunder. Chinese foreign Ministry’s spokesman Ma Zhaoxu Said “China holds that Egypt’’s affairs should be decided independently by the country without foreign interference.” Similarly, “We, in Russia, don’t want to give recommendations because we trust the wisdom of the Egyptian people and leaders as well as the government,”Russian deputy forein minister Soltanov said. “Egypt will eventually emerge from the current crisis in light of legitimate measures and dialogue.”

I am even more disheartened by a headline demonstrating that even the head of the CIA cannot be discreet – Panetta: Mubarak likely to cede power

It is a small wonder the Saudis are furious. They asked Obama not to humiliate Mubarak, Obama consistently dis doing just that. Consequently, Debka reports: Deep US-Saudi rift over Egypt: Abdullah stands by Mubarak, turns to Tehran. I am sure they worry , the 87 year old king may just be scared enough to cut a deal even that an Egypt in transition is bound to strengthenIran. If the Saudi king concludes that far unless they fear for the Saudi regime is in dangerbefore Iran acquires nuclear weapons. Obama’s US certainly does not inspire confidence as a reliable counter force.  At the very least, getting closer to China and Russia may seem an atractive conservative option.

The conversation between President Barack Obama and Saudi King Abdullah early Thursday, Feb. 10, was the most acerbic the US president has ever had with an Arab ruler, debkafile’s Middle East sources report. They had a serious falling-out on the Egyptian crisis which so enraged the king that some US and Middle East sources reported he suffered a sudden heart attack. Rumors that he had died rocked the world financial and oil markets that morning and were denied by an adviser to the ruling family. Some Gulf sources say he has had heart attacks in the past.Those sources disclose that the call which Obama put into Abdullah, who is recuperating from back surgery at his palace in Morocco, brought their relations into deep crisis and placed in jeopardythe entire edifice of US Iran and Middle East policies.

The king chastised the president for his treatment of Egypt and its president Hosni Muhbarak calling it a disaster that wold generate instability in the region and imperil all the moderate Arab rulers and regimes which had backed the United States until now. Abdullah took Obama to task for ditching America’s most faithful ally in the Arab world and vowed that if the US continues to try and get rid of Mubarak, the Saudi royal family would bend all its resources to undoing Washington’s plans for Egypt and nullifying their consequences.

According to British intelligence sources in London, the Saudi King pledged to make up the losses to Egypt if Washington cuts off military and economic aid to force Mubarak to resign. He would personally instruct the Saudi treasury to transfer to the embattled Egyptian ruler the exact amounts he needs for himself and his army to stand up to American pressure.

Through all the ups and downs of Saudi-US relations since the 1950s no Saudi ruler has ever threatened direct action against American policy.

A senior Saudi source told the London Times that “Mubarak and King Abdullah are not just allies, they are close friends, and the King is not about to see his friend cast aside and humiliated.”

Indeed, our sources add, the king at the age of 87 is fearful that in the event of a situation developing in Saudi Arabia like the uprising in Egypt, Washington would dump him just like Mubarak.

debkafile’s intelligence sources add that replacement aid for Egypt was not the only card in Abdullah’s deck. He informed Obama that without waiting for events in Egypt to play out or America’s response, he had ordered the process set in train for raising the level of Riyadh’s diplomatic and military ties with Tehran. Invitations had gone out from Riyadh for Iranian delegations to visit the main Saudi cities.

Abdullah stressed he had more than one bone to pick with Obama. The king accused the US president of turning his back not ly on Mubarak but on another beleaguered American ally, the former Lebanese Prime Minister Sa’ad Hariri, when he was toppled by Iran’s surrogate Hizballah.

Our sources in Washington report that all of President Obama’s efforts to pacify the Saudi king and explain his Egyptian policy fell on deaf ears.

Arab sources in London reported Tuesday, Feb. 8, that a special US presidential emissary was dispatched to Morocco with a message of explanation for the king. He was turned away. This is not confirmed by US or Saudi sources.

The initiation of dialogue between Riyadh and Tehran is the most dramatic fallout in the region from the crisis in Egypt. Its is a boon for the ayatollahs who are treated the sight of pro-Western regimes either fading under the weight of domestic uprisings, or turning away from the US as Saudi Arabia is doing now.




Obama and Soros are Anti-Israel!


Is The “Gog and Magog” Prophecy Upon Us? Watch This!




Americans Don’t Realize What They’ve Done

by Hillel Fendel

First Israeli politician to castigate Obama: Former Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer says Americans still don’t realize the catastrophe into which they have pushed the Middle East.

Binyamin Ben-Eliezer – a former army general, Labor Party Chairman and Cabinet minister – praises Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, whom he has known for many years, and has strong criticism for U.S. President Obama’s abandonment of him.

“When I watched his speech in which he said he would step down, ” Ben-Eliezer said on Wednesday about Mubarak, “it pained me to see his collapse. He stood by our side for 30 years, he was a strong leader, he kept proudly to Sadat’s commitments and followed in his path. He always emphasized the strategic importance of peace with Israel, and that this peace was the basis for stability in the Middle East.”

Israel’s Loss
Asked by an IDF Army Radiointerviewer if he thinks Mubarak will step down within days or will wait until the elections this coming autumn, Ben-Eliezer said, “I’m not a prophet. Look, the army is still behind him like an iron shield. The question is whether they will try to move out the masses with force… One thing is clear, that from our standpoint, it is a tremendous loss.”

Just Like in Iran and Gaza…
Ben-Eliezer does not agree that he is being too pessimistic: “We learn from history. We remember what was said when Carter proposed that the Shah of Iran give up nicely and allow Khomeini to take his place. In Gaza, too, when the Americans came in, they supervised the democratic elections [via which Hamas came into power]. If there are elections in Egypt the way the Americans want, I will be surprised if the Muslim Brotherhood does not win… This will be a new Middle East – radical, Islamic and extremist.”

“I think the Americans still don’t realize the extent of the catastrophe into which they have pushed the Middle East,” Ben-Eliezer said. “It’s still too early to judge, but this is not their first mistake. Unfortunately, they are also the godfathers of the construction freeze in the territories [Judea and Samaria], something that no American administration ever did before…”

As if unaware that the leaders of the Palestinian Authority might suffer the same fate as Mubarak, Ben-Eliezer concluded by saying, “There therefore had better be a quick diplomatic process [with the Palestinian Authority] before the American boss in Washington forces a solution upon us.” Other analysts concluded quite the opposite, proposing that Israel not rush into any agreement with leaders whose futures appear endangered.