web analytics
January 22, 2017 / 24 Tevet, 5777

Posts Tagged ‘Obama’

Zionist Response to Obama: Jerusalem to Approve 5,600 Homes Across ‘Greenline’

Sunday, December 25th, 2016

The UN Security Council resolution will not slow down construction in the 1967 liberated parts of Jerusalem, according to the municipality’s Local Planning and Construction committee. In fact, on Wednesday, the committee plans to vote to approve thousands of new housing units in Jewish and mixed neighborhoods across the 1949 armistice line, a.k.a. the “greenline.”

The planning committee will approve 2,600 new housing units in the neighborhood of Gilo, another 2,600 units in Givat Hamatos, and 400 units in Ramat Shlomo – altogether 5,600 units in eastern Jerusalem.

Acting and Deputy Mayor of Jerusalem and Chairman of the Local Planning and Building committee Meir Turgeman, told the press he is “not intimidated by the UN or by any other entity trying to dictate to us what to do in Jerusalem. I hope the new US Administration will give us a push to continue replenishing the housing stock which was reduced during the eight years of the Obama Administration.”

David Israel

Obama Administration’s Dishonest/Cynical Defense of Anti-Israel UN Vote

Sunday, December 25th, 2016

{Originally posted to the author’s website, The Lid}

At 2:20PM Friday afternoon, the anti-Israel team of Barack Obama & John Kerry directed UN Ambassador Samantha Power to abstain rather than veto an anti-Israel resolution in the UN Security Council. Since the abstention allowed the resolution to pass, the Obama action had the same effect as an anti-Israel UN Vote.

Not only did the Obama directed action in the anti-Israel UN vote give the Palestinians a free pass to continue to avoid negotiations, and it locks Israel into the 1948 Armistice line and declares Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem occupied Palestinian land. As Security Council resolutions create international law, this means that the Jewish State’s presence in East Jerusalem, commonly known as the “Jewish Quarter” is illegal. This absurd action ignores the fact Jews have been living in the “Jewish Quarter” since the time of King David, except for the period of 1948-1967 when Jordan kicked out the Jews and destroyed many of the Jewish holy sites in the “Jewish Quarter.”

The resolution that passed thanks to Obama’s anti-Israel UN Vote also asks UN member states not to use Israeli products that were created in the disputed territories.

New Zealand, Malaysia, Venezuela and Senegal were co-sponsors of the draft resolution despite the fact that the original sponsor, Egypt requested the anti-Israel UN vote be delayed indefinitely.

Barack Obama who has proven to be the most anti-Israel president in American history allowed resolution to pass, rather than casting its veto. Then in a cynical move, UN Ambassador Samantha Power who once called for the militarily imposing a peace solution on Israel followed her abstention vote by railing against the United Nations for its anti-Israel bias. She also contended that opposition to the settlements was a bi-partisan position of American Presidents which is not really true.

After the vote, I participated in a conference call that included Ned Price the Spokesperson for the National Security Council, who was joined by Ben Rhodes (who made the claim that he fooled the press to sell-in the Iran deal, and Robert Malley who was made a career of trashing Israel and who’s dad was a close friend to Yasser Arafat.

Mr. Price said the contention in the press, made by an unnamed Israel source that Obama administration was “abandoning Israel” and that the United States was really behind the resolution was totally untrue. He added that no administration has been as supportive of Israel as the Obama administration (that statement was also not true).

Price reiterated Samantha Powers contention about the bi-partisan objection to any settlement building, including those in existing communities. He added that there was a significant up-tic in new housing units in existing and new communities.

The truth is objections to settlement activity has not always been bi-partisan as Mr. Price claims. In a 2009 Wall Street Journal commentary, written Elliot Abrams who served in the Bush #43 administration as deputy national security adviser for Global Democracy Strategy, Mr. Abrams said he negotiated a deal between the U.S. and Israel in which the Jewish State agreed not build any housing units outside the existing communities (no new settlement communities), and the U.S. would not object to the construction in existing communities.

Interestingly, it was only after the Obama administration refused to acknowledge agreement, that the up-tic in housing units began.

In August 2009 Prime Minister Netanyahu announced a ten-month “settlement” freeze. It was approved by the cabinet and implemented on November 25, 2009 and was to run till September 25, 2010. Despite pressure from the United States, the Palestinians refused to join any talks the first 9+ months of the freeze; they did not come to the negotiation table till September 2010, three weeks before the freeze ended.

As the end of the construction halt approached, the US began to negotiate with the Israel to extend the freeze. Based on their experience with Clinton denying the deal negotiated by Elliot Abrams during the Bush Administration, Israel demanded that any proposal be presented in writing, as any they considered any oral deal with Clinton and the Obama administration was worth the paper on which is was printed on.

That written version of the offer never came because Clinton, the Secretary of State wasn’t negotiating in good faith. Instead Ms. Clinton working in conjunction with President Obama was playing “Bait and Switch.”

An Al-Jazeera report on Oct. 11, 2010 revealed that Netanyahu was willing to extend the ten-month settlement freeze he unilaterally implemented, if the Palestinian Authority would recognize Israel as the Jewish State. Netanyahu made a similar offer in May 2011, when he spoke before congress (Israel as the Jewish State was part of the original UN Partition resolution (UN Resolution 181) Both times Palestinian President Abbas rejected the offer outright.

Despite what seemed to be an opening to Obama’s goal of stopping construction, there did not seem to be an administration follow-up to either of Netanyahu offers. But if settlements were such an important issue to President Obama, why was there no follow-up?  And why were settlements such a big issue for this Administration anyway? During the Bush 43 reign there was construction and negotiation at the same time. Only after Obama made it an issue did it become an issue for the Palestinians.

It seems as if the Obama Administration has been trying to delegitimize the Jewish State for as long as it’s been in power; ignoring previous US/Israel deals,  publicly berating Israel at every opportunity,  leaving Israel’s Premier to sit and stew with the Israeli delegation in a White House conference room for an hour because they wouldn’t capitulate to the President’s demands, and even blaming Israel and American Jews for pushing the U.S. into the Iraq war while he was trying to sell-in the disastrous Iran Deal. While this president has criticized Russia for (in his opinion) trying to skew the American election toward Donald Trump, he sent some of his political advisers to Israel and allowed the State Department to spend money, all in an attempt to defeat Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu in Israel’s most recent election.

With all that in mind, why is anybody surprised that Obama who has proven to be anti-Semitic as well as anti-Israel during his White House tenure, abstained in this UN vote?

Certainly, not Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-WI), he strongly objected to Obama’s anti-Israel UN Vote:

“This is absolutely shameful. Today’s vote is a blow to peace that sets a dangerous precedent for further diplomatic efforts to isolate and demonize Israel. Our unified Republican government will work to reverse the damage done by this administration, and rebuild our alliance with Israel.”

In a very rare move, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) who will be the senate minority leader in January, making him the most powerful Democrat in the federal government voiced his displeasure of the action by the president of his own party, abstaining in the anti-Israel UN Vote

“It is extremely frustrating, disappointing and confounding that the Administration has failed to veto this resolution. Whatever one’s views are on settlements; the U.N. is the wrong forum to settle these issues. The U.N. has been a fervently anti-Israel body since the days of ‘Zionism is racism’ and, unfortunately, that fervor has never diminished. Knowing this, past Administrations – both Democrat and Republican have protected Israel from the vagaries of this biased institution. Unfortunately, this Administration has not followed in that path and its actions will move us further from peace in the Middle East.”

It is no surprise that this president abstained in this anti-Israel vote, allowing it to to be passed by the UN Security Council with less than a month left in his administration.  Like the Arctic Drilling ban announced earlier this week, Friday’s UN action is not easily un-done by the Trump administration. The only way to overturn a UN Security Council resolution is another UN Security Council resolution. Since Russia and China each have a veto, it is very unlikely that will happen.

Obama vetoed a similar Security Council resolution about a year ago. But there is a major difference between the two votes. This vote occurred after the Presidential election and almost two years before the mid-term elections.  Obama is cynically counting on the fact that the major Jewish donors to the Democratic Party, as well as the traditional Democratic voting bloc of Jewish voters will forget this action before the next election.

Sadly he is probably correct.

 

Jeff Dunetz

Trump Saves the Day on Obama-Backed Anti-Settlements UNSC Resolution

Friday, December 23rd, 2016

President-Elect Donald Trump engaged in his first act as leader of the free world on Thursday, when his tweet stopped the game clock on an Egyptian anti-settlements UN Security Council resolution.

It began Wednesday night, when the Egyptian UN mission distributed among the UNSC members an anti-settlements resolution, asking for a Thursday 1 PM NY time vote. This, according to an Ha’aretz report Friday morning, came as a complete surprise to the Netanyahu government, where the expectations had been that, one, the anticipated resolution would be Palestinian via the good services of New Zealand, and, two, that it won’t happen this week.

Jerusalem received no advance notice from the El-Sisi regime – Netanyahu received the alert only after the fact at 3 AM Thursday Israel time, evening time in NYC. That’s when he rushed to tweet: “The US should veto the anti-Israel resolution at the UN Security Council on Thursday.”

What ensued was a worldwide diplomatic race involving Israel’s Foreign Ministry, National Security Council (NSC), and Netanyahu himself, who deleted his entire agenda for Thursday to focus on blocking the UNSC resolution. The PM’s aim was to rouse pressure from Israel’s friends in Washington on President Obama to postpone the vote, or, if need be, follow decades of US administrations when it came to anti-Israeli UNSC resolutions and veto the damned thing. The working assumption at the time was that the Egyptians were in synch with the White House on the resolution, and that Obama was planning to abstain, assuring its passage. According to Ha’aretz, in Ramallah the PA were also convinced that the US would not vote against. Also, Secretary of State John Kerry scheduled a major speech on his vision for Israeli-Palestinian peace in our time just hours before the UNSC vote – was that a dead giveaway or what? The Israeli diplomatic effort was truly heroic: in addition to Netanyahu’s call on Obama to veto the resolution, a senior Israeli official briefed foreign correspondents that Israel expects the US to uphold its policy of many years, across administrations, that negotiations must be direct. An American failure to veto would be a breach of its commitment. It would mean the abandoning of a traditional position moments before the change of administrations. Israel also applied pressure on Egypt to rescind its resolution, suggesting the move would harm their good relationship with the Jewish State, including the security cooperation between the two countries. There’s a lot at stake there, most notably the fact that the Egyptian military presence in the Sinai, a vital component in El-Sisi’s war against his Islamist foes at home, depends on Israel’s consent, as per the 1978 Camp David agreement. Apparently, those efforts, intense and heroic as they may have been, did not result in either a postponement or an American promise to veto. At which point Israel’s ambassador to Washington Ron Dermer called up President-Elect Donald Trump’s circle of close advisors asking for help. And they, at last, delivered, establishing, perhaps for the first time in the history of US foreign policy, that a president-in-waiting was able to reverse a sitting president’s decision, through the good services of Twitter.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 22, 2016

“The resolution being considered at the United Nations Security Council regarding Israel should be vetoed…” Trump twitted, inviting his followers to read his full message on Facebook, said message going: “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. This puts Israel in a very poor negotiating position and is extremely unfair to all Israelis.”

At which point the Egyptians finally got the message, namely that they could face a hostile US Administration come January 20, should they defy Trump’s Tweet. The Egyptian mission quickly rescinded their proposal, saying they needed to discuss it with other members of the Arab League. This, according to Egyptian media, either followed or came just before a call Trump had with President El-Sisi. The latter’s spokesman then stated: “The presidents agreed on the importance of affording the new U.S. administration the full chance to deal with all dimensions of the Palestinian case with a view of achieving a full and final settlement.”

“The presidents agreed,” got it?

Netanyahu, for his part, had a heart to heart phone conversation with Sec. Kerry, who cancelled his vision speech.

Meanwhile, Reuters reported Thursday night that the US had, indeed, intended to allow the UNSC to approve a resolution demanding an end to Israeli settlement building, and that the resolution is far from being dead in the water. New Zealand, Venezuela, Malaysia and Senegal are now pushing Egypt to resubmit the resolution, threatening that “in the event that Egypt decides that it cannot proceed to call for a vote on 23 December or does not provide a response by the deadline, those delegations reserve the right to table the draft … and proceed to put it to vote ASAP.”

The State Department would not comment on the reports of its plan to abstain. It’s going to be a busy weekend for Israeli diplomats everywhere – and there may be another tweet from the President-Elect.

JNi.Media

Netanyahu to Obama: Veto Anti-Israel UNSC Resolution Thursday

Thursday, December 22nd, 2016

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday night twitted: “The US should veto the anti-Israel resolution at the UN Security Council on Thursday.” The vote has been the focal point of the Israeli PM’s thinking and anxiety since the Nov. 8 elections in the US, guiding his moves and statements, especially concerning the crisis he’s faced at home regarding the approaching eviction date for the Amona community in Samaria.

As of Wednesday night, the UNSC resolution draft text says Israel’s establishment of Jewish towns and villages in the liberated areas of Judea and Samaria bears “no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law.” It suggests that the fact that there are Jews living in those areas “dangerously imperiling the viability of the two-state solution,” because, naturally, while Arabs can live freely alongside Jews in 1949-borders Israel, having Jews anywhere inside the envisioned Palestinian state would be unthinkable.

The text decrees that freezing the Jewish settlement enterprise is “essential for salvaging the two-state solution,” calling for “affirmative steps to be taken immediately to reverse the negative trends on the ground (See Israe’s Supreme Court ruling on the expulsion of the Jews of Amona).”

According to Al Jazeera, UN diplomats see Thursday’s vote as the final chance for council action on getting the Jews out of the liberated territories before President-elect Donald Trump takes over from President Barack Obama on January 20. Hence the Netanyahu twit, advising the US to veto, as it has done over the past eight years under the same president.

Last July, the UN and its diplomatic partners, the so-called Middle East Quartet – comprising the UN, Russia, the United States and the European Union – submitted a report that essentially calls for the strictest implementation of the Oslo accords, spelling an eventual end to the Jewish presence in the 1967 liberated territories. The Diplomatic Quartet’s recommendations, which are the basis for Thursday’s vote were:

1. Both sides should work to de-escalate tensions by exercising restraint and refraining from provocative actions and rhetoric.

2. The Palestinian Authority should act decisively and take all steps within its capacity to cease incitement to violence and strengthen ongoing efforts to combat terrorism, including by clearly condemning all acts of terrorism.

With that lip service to the need to curb daily, ongoing Arab violence, the document gets to the real meat of the recommendations, namely, eliminating Israel’s right to rule over Area C:

3. Israel should cease the policy of settlement construction and expansion, designating land for exclusive Israeli use, and denying Palestinian development.

4. Israel should implement positive and significant policy shifts, including transferring powers and responsibilities in Area C, consistent with the transition to greater Palestinian civil authority contemplated by prior agreements. Progress in the areas of housing, water, energy, communications, agriculture, and natural resources, along with significantly easing Palestinian movement restrictions, can be made while respecting Israel’s legitimate security needs.

And, having stated the essence of their demands, the Quarter returned to empty recommendations:

5. The Palestinian leadership should continue their efforts to strengthen institutions, improve governance, and develop a sustainable economy. Israel should take all necessary steps to enable this process, in line with the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee recommendations.

6. All sides must continue to respect the ceasefire in Gaza, and the illicit arms buildup and militant activities must be terminated.

The Thursday UNSC vote is the moment of truth between Obama and Netanyahu. A US abstention would not suffice in this case. The US has to actually vote against the resolution in order to kill it. A US vote in favor would give the resolution a powerful – albeit symbolic – stand. In reality, Netanyahu can defy it and, at least for the next four years under President Trump, suffer no real consequences. But once the resolution is on the books, it would take a unanimous vote of the five senior members to remove it – and that would be a rare thing indeed.

David Israel

Who’s the Fluke? Trump or Obama?

Tuesday, December 20th, 2016

{Originally posted to the Commentary Magazine website}

As the Clinton camp and much of the rank and file continue to bemoan the Trump victory, engage in ritual scapegoating of the culprits (Russia, the FBI, Hillary, and her Brooklyn-based campaign high command) and offer futile prayers that the Electoral College will make the bad dream go away, a few Democrats are starting to plan for what they hope will be revenge on Trump in 2020.

Among the obvious possibilities are Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Cory Booker, who are, as Politico noted, seeking to polish their resumes with committee assignments (armed services and foreign relations, respectively) to broaden their appeal. Others in the mix are Vice President Joe Biden and Senator Bernie Sanders, even though they will be 78 and 79 on inauguration day 2021. The real question facing Democrats isn’t which of these retreads or relatively fresh options to choose next time. Rather, their dilemma lies in deciding whether to double down on Hillary Clinton’s 2016 identity-politics strategy or to take a page out of Donald Trump’s book and start paying attention to the white working class voters in rust belt states that won him the presidency. As the New York Times reported, the debate about whether to take the 2016 results to heart or to ignore them is the argument that may well be the focal point of debate for the next three years as well as the rationale for some of the potential candidates. The argument against the Trump example is articulated by former Obama staffer Dan Pfeiffer, who says the demographics Democrats counted on shouldn’t be discounted. If, as he says, the Electoral College is trending in their favor as the number of potential minority voters grows while the percentage of the white electorate shrinks, it makes no sense to switch tactics and divert resources to pursue Trump backers. After all, Hillary Clinton did win the popular vote, and a shift of 77,000 votes in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania would have handed her the election. Better tactics (show up in Wisconsin next time) and a better candidate will guarantee victory for them. To this way of thinking, Trump’s win is just a fluke that can’t be repeated, perhaps not even by the billionaire in four years.

Other Democrats aren’t so sure. They view the GOP’s victory in states that seemed to be safely tucked away in the blue column as a wake-up call. A party that is prepared to write off white workers as well as rural voters—a group that Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack points out is as numerous as African-Americans—is one that is boxing itself into a tight box on the two coasts in which their fate will be determined by groups with historically low turnout rates that cost Clinton the election.

Those inclined to agree with him are looking to Biden as someone who fits the mold of a traditional Democrat that can speak to working class voters. The Sanders wing, whether led by the Vermont senator or Warren, also talks about the working class in their revolt against the Democratic establishment. But it’s not clear that left-wingers can motivate rust belt voters or farmers.

What many liberals haven’t considered is that the real fluke may turn out to have been Obama’s 2008 and 2012 victories. Though Democrats may spend the next generation chasing after a formula that will enable them to reconstruct his winning coalition of minority and young voters, what they may ultimately learn is that he was the only candidate who could motivate those groups to come out in the kinds of numbers they need to offset the Democrats’ growing deficit among whites. Unless they can clone Obama, those on the left who think they can win on left-wing ideology and identity politics alone may be guaranteeing themselves a long stay in the opposition.

Jonathan S. Tobin

The Tamar Yonah Show – Obama, Trump, and the Messiah [audio]

Thursday, December 15th, 2016

Are we entering the Messianic Age? Dov Bar-Leib, an ‘End of Days’ blogger joins Tamar and tells her that if Obama goes to the UN in order to ‘abstain’ on a UN Sec Council resolution recognizing and establishing a Palestine state, and he does this during the Hebrew month of Tevet (Dec/Jan) it could start the 9 month count-down to the war of Gog & Magog, and the arrival of the Moshaich (Messiah). He gives interesting possible links to past Biblical charachters that he think could link to today’s Obama & Trump.
Check out Dov’s blog here: yearsofawe.blogspot.co.il/

The Tamar Yonah Show 13DEC2016 – PODCAST

Israel News Talk Radio

Phantom Nation – Obama’s Final Menace [audio]

Thursday, December 15th, 2016

Israel must walk on eggshells until BHO is gone, and Trump’s outreach to Russia… Find out more on the show.

Phantom Nation 12DEC2016 – PODCAST

Israel News Talk Radio

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/multimedia/israel-news-talk-radio/phantom-nation/phantom-nation-obamas-final-menace-audio/2016/12/15/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: