Author Topic: Jewish Leader: Obama May Be 'Most Hostile President to Israel’  (Read 624 times)

SAMSON123

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8670
Israhell has not seen hostility yet...just wait..

Jewish Leader: Obama May Be 'Most Hostile President to Israel’

Monday, June 22, 2009 11:53 AM

By: Ronald Kessler   

President Barack Obama’s refusal to take a stand on protests in Iran stands in sharp contrast to demands he has made on Israel, Morton Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America, says in a Newsmax interview.

“I think he should take a strong stand to support the protesters in Iran who want to transform that society into one that promotes democracy and human rights,” Klein says. ”But while meddling in Israel’s affairs and making specific demands, he explicitly states he refuses to meddle in Iran’s policies and has said almost nothing.”

Klein says leaders of Jewish organizations are rethinking their support of Obama in light of his attitude toward Israel.

“There are many leaders in the organized Jewish world who have privately discussed this issue with me, and say they are deeply concerned about Obama’s actions and policies toward Israel, and now they’re rethinking their support for Obama during the campaign and the election,” says Klein, whose organization of 30,000 members is the oldest pro-Israel group in the country.

Based on the president’s speech in Cairo on June 4 and many of his foreign policy appointments, Klein thinks Obama “may become the most hostile president to Israel ever.”

Obama’s speech was “inimical to Israel and supportive of the stream of false Palestinian Arab claims concerning Israel,” Klein says. “He is relentlessly pressuring Israel while applying virtually almost no pressure on the Palestinian Authority to fulfill its written obligations.”

As a child of survivors of the Holocaust, Klein says he was particularly offended by Obama’s comparison of the suffering of Palestinians with the Nazis’ murder of 6 million Jews during the Holocaust.

“I found this to be an abominable, odious, and ridiculously false analogy,” he says.

While Klein’s parents’ survived, his father lost his eight brothers and sisters and all his aunts and uncles in Nazi concentration camps. Klein’s mother lost half her family.

In his speech, Klein says, Obama said that “the treatment of Palestinian Arabs by Israel is equivalent to the treatment of South African blacks during apartheid and of enslaved blacks before the Civil War, more than implying that Israel is an oppressor. He falsely claimed that Palestinian Arabs were displaced by Israel in 1948, when in fact, if six Arab nations hadn’t invaded Israel to destroy it, there wouldn’t be a single Palestinian Arab who left that area.”

Klein disputes Obama’s reference to Palestinian Arabs trying to establish a state for 60 years.

“They could have had a state in 1937,” he says. “They turned it down. They could have had a state in 1948. From 1948 to 1967, when they controlled all of Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem, they never attempted to establish a state. In 2000, they were offered a state on almost all the disputed territories. They turned it down. So this is a completely false claim that they’ve been trying to establish a state for 60 years.”

By claiming that America has 7 million Muslims, Obama showed a willingness to use phony figures to support a tilt toward Muslims, Klein says.

“Every major survey shows there’s between 1.5 million and 2.5 million Muslims in America,” Klein says. “Where does he get the number 7 million? This is the number that the Arab propagandists promote. There’s no legitimate survey that shows a number of that nature.”

Klein says it is premature to focus on the establishment of a Palestinian state as long as Palestinians promote violence and hatred against Israel.

“To promote a Palestinian state at a time when Hamas, the terrorist group, controls Gaza, and Fatah, which also promotes terror, controls the West Bank, is absurd,” Klein observes. The Palestinians “continue to promote hatred and violence against Jews and Americans in their schools, media and speeches,” Klein notes. “They refuse to arrest a single anti-Israel terrorist, zero. They refuse to outlaw terrorist groups, which is required under the agreements they’ve signed. They continue to name schools, streets, and sports teams after terrorists, glorifying murder.”

Moreover, Klein says, “control of the Palestinian territories is split between Hamas and Fatah, so there is no one regime to negotiate with.”

If the Palestinians “fulfilled all their written obligations for a significant period of time, clearly an overwhelming majority of Israelis, Americans, and the world would support a Palestinian state,” Klein says.

As Klein sees it, while Obama is “ignoring the anti-peace, pro-terror actions of the Hamas-Fatah regime,” he is “rushing headlong into establishing yet another terrorist state in the Middle East, as opposed to working to ensure that we end the existence of terrorist states in general,” Klein says.

Some of the views of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jr., Obama’s minister, friend, and mentor, are apparent in Obama’s remarks, Klein says.

“If you look at Rev. Wright’s speeches and sermons as I have, many of the themes, like comparing the Palestinian Arabs to the South Africans and the illegality of the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, show up in Obama’s talks and actions,” he says.

During the 2008 election campaign, “I would give speeches and write articles expressing concern about his close friendship with Rev. Wright,” Klein says. “I was repeatedly told that’s not fair; those are Wright’s views, not necessarily his, and that it’s guilt by association.”

In response, Klein would say, “If a Jew was a member of a synagogue where the rabbi preached hatred of blacks, it would be clear that that Jew would be comfortable with anti-black racism. I couldn’t remain for a week at a synagogue where a rabbi made a hateful speech toward blacks. I’d quit immediately.”

Yet, he says, Jews “didn’t apply that normal, appropriate standard to Barack Obama,” Klein says. “Obama gave $27,500 in 2005 and 2006 to Rev. Wright’s church. He called Rev. Wright a great man and his mentor. You can’t be so close to someone you call a great man and a mentor if you don’t agree with what he has to say.”

[Editor's Note: Also See "Jews Very Concerned about Israel, Jewish Leader Says" - Go Here Now]

[Ronald Kessler is chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com.
C

PTB

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 308
  • Getbig!
Re: Jewish Leader: Obama May Be 'Most Hostile President to Israel’
« Reply #1 on: June 24, 2009, 12:48:56 PM »
Hostile = not kissing Israel's butt, then sure I guess he is.

Anti-Semite, it used to be someone who didn't like Jews.  Now it appears that it means someone Jews dislike.

SAMSON123

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8670
Re: Jewish Leader: Obama May Be 'Most Hostile President to Israel’
« Reply #2 on: June 24, 2009, 01:04:45 PM »
Hostile = not kissing Israel's butt, then sure I guess he is.

Anti-Semite, it used to be someone who didn't like Jews.  Now it appears that it means someone Jews dislike.

This is PRICELESS... Now if ever truth has been spoken to the claim of supposed anti-semitism and why it is screamed all the time...THIS IS IT.
C

the_steevo_uk

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 787
  • Getbig!
Re: Jewish Leader: Obama May Be 'Most Hostile President to Israel’
« Reply #3 on: June 24, 2009, 01:04:56 PM »
Morton Kelin is the biggest asspipe in the Jewish Community, anyone with half a brain knows the guy has a hard right wing agenda from which he has never waivered....the amount of dumb shit he comes up with never ceases to amaze me.

Benny B

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 12405
  • Ron = 'Princess L' & many other gimmicks - FACT!
Re: Jewish Leader: Obama May Be 'Most Hostile President to Israel’
« Reply #4 on: June 25, 2009, 08:06:29 AM »
Anti-Semite, it used to be someone who didn't like Jews.  Now it appears that it means someone Jews dislike.
This is actually pretty spot-on in many instances.

Of course, there are still plenty of people who have an irrational hatred of Jews.
!

SAMSON123

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8670
Re: Jewish Leader: Obama May Be 'Most Hostile President to Israel’
« Reply #5 on: June 25, 2009, 09:56:58 AM »
This is actually pretty spot-on in many instances.

Of course, there are still plenty of people who have an irrational hatred of Jews.

Those people are the ones who have equated the corruption with the people who commit it.... and aren't afraid to speak up about it..
C

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24454
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: Jewish Leader: Obama May Be 'Most Hostile President to Israel’
« Reply #6 on: July 01, 2009, 02:42:35 AM »
Israhell has not seen hostility yet...just wait..

Jewish Leader: Obama May Be 'Most Hostile President to Israel’

Monday, June 22, 2009 11:53 AM

By: Ronald Kessler   

President Barack Obama’s refusal to take a stand on protests in Iran stands in sharp contrast to demands he has made on Israel, Morton Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America, says in a Newsmax interview.


How To Lean On Israel
by Jacob Weisberg

Since the first stirrings of the Arab-Israeli peace process after the Yom Kippur war, America's relations with Israel have been characterized by a paradox. Those presidents regarded as the least friendly to the Jewish state have done it the most good. Its strong allies have proven much less helpful.

This history begins with Jimmy Carter, who threatened a cutoff of American aid to pressure Menachem Begin into returning all of Sinai to Egypt, which made possible the 1979 Camp David agreement. The other most meaningful U.S. contribution to Mideast peace came under the first President George Bush at the 1991 Madrid Conference. When the Israelis refused to participate, Secretary of State James Baker withheld loan guarantees and said that Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir should call him when he got interested in peace. At one point, Baker actually banned Benjamin Netanyahu, who was representing Shamir in Washington, from the State Department Building. Madrid led to a peace treaty with Jordan, the recognition of Israel by many other countries, and the first real face-to-face negotiations with Palestinians.

By contrast, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush, all trusted friends, have often encouraged Israel's worst tendencies. Reagan looked benignly on Biblically-based claims of ownership over the West Bank, Israel's occupation of Lebanon, and its refusal to talk to the PLO. Under Clinton, "we never had a tough or honest conversation with the Israelis on settlement activity," former peace negotiator Aaron David Miller writes in his memoir The Much Too Promised Land. George W. Bush continued to ignore the obscene settlements policy, neglected the peace process, and condoned Israel's military misjudgments in the West Bank, Lebanon, and Gaza. These presidents steadily built up Arab resentment while fostering Israeli illusions that there might be an alternative to trading land for peace.

Happily, President Obama seems poised to defy this old dichotomy. That he means well for Israel there's little doubt. "I haven't just talked the talk, I've walked the walk when it comes to Israel's security," Obama told a Jewish group during the campaign. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Special Envoy George Mitchell, and Vice President Joe Biden can make the same claim. Special Envoy Dennis Ross is an observant Jew, an experienced Mideast negotiator, and a longstanding friend to Israel. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has an Israeli father and once served as a civilian volunteer for the Israeli army. That this crew is serious about pressuring Israel is equally apparent. In his Cairo speech, Obama demanded that Israel freeze its settlements in the West Bank and enter peace negotiations with the Palestinians based on the principle of two states, two peoples. Hillary Clinton followed up by specifying what a freeze means: no "natural growth" or other wiggle room, regardless of what Bush representatives might have said to Israeli officials privately.

This is a gutsy step forward. Being a good friend to Israel today means leaning harder on the Jews and the Arabs to get serious about a deal. And even if they don't produce a peace agreement, Obama's personal commitment and evenhanded reframing of the conflict could have large benefits. The perception that the United States is pushing its ally Israel as well as the Palestinians should help America's standing in the Middle East enormously. But to carry off this coup, Obama will have to do the nearly impossible several times over.

First, he needs to force either a change in Netanyahu himself or a change in the Knesset. In Israeli politics, Bibi has always stood for the proposition that the Palestinians will settle only for the destruction of the Zionist state. After a decade out of power, his hostility to an independent Palestine clearly hasn't changed, and it has been compounded by a dangerous fixation on striking militarily against Iran's nuclear capability. But Netanyahu is also a cunning politician who knows he can't survive mismanaging his country's most important relationship. Obama's gamble is that the Israeli public, if not Bibi himself, will take the threat of diminished American support seriously. (See this excellent piece in Foreign Policy about the way settlement expansion undermines prospects for peace.)

At the same time, the president needs to assuage nervous American Jews. If this were any other ally, the next diplomatic steps would be fairly simple. You want us to keep supplying nearly 20 percent of your defense budget? Selling you our most advanced weapons? Sticking up for you at the U.N.? Enough with the settlements. But too overt a use of leverage would court a dangerous backlash from Christians as well as Jews who suspect the president of clandestine Muslim tendencies. Conservatives are keen to encourage those doubts.

So far, Team Obama has gone at the problem in a canny way: by lining up Israel's allies in Congress in support of his tough-love policy. After Netanyahu received his scolding at the White House last month, he visited Capitol Hill, where he was surprised to discover that many of Israel's strongest backers were on Obama's side. AIPAC, which doesn't love the settlements, either, has so far only urged the administration to "work closely and privately" with Israel on areas of disagreement. But there has been some agita among the most pro-Israel Democrats in the House. To convince American Jews that he is leaning on Israel for Israel's sake will take all of Obama's rhetorical powers.

Finally, Obama needs to avoid over-investing in the peace process. To broker a comprehensive settlement to the Arab-Israeli conflict has been the fantasy of every president since Nixon and the achievement of none of them. Even as he presses for peace, our supremely confident president should bear in mind that the odds overwhelmingly favor failure.

Jacob Weisberg is chairman and editor-in-chief of the Slate Group and author of The Bush Tragedy.
w

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19464
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: Jewish Leader: Obama May Be 'Most Hostile President to Israel’
« Reply #7 on: July 01, 2009, 05:15:38 AM »
Samson, aren't you usually hating on that Uncle Tom Obama for sucking "Israhell" cock? ::)

How about make a decision - are USA pro or against Israel right now?
As empty as paradise

the_steevo_uk

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 787
  • Getbig!
Re: Jewish Leader: Obama May Be 'Most Hostile President to Israel’
« Reply #8 on: July 01, 2009, 06:29:50 AM »
Samson, aren't you usually hating on that Uncle Tom Obama for sucking "Israhell" cock? ::)

How about make a decision - are USA pro or against Israel right now?

The USA is never against Israel, no matter what some (especially in Israel) might think. Getting tough on the settlement issue is the right thing to do.