Obama’s losing streak and Israel

It's only fair to share...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s speech Sunday evening at Bar-Ilan University had one goal: To get US President Barack Obama off of Israel’s back.

 

 

Netanyahu’s speech was an eloquent, rational and at times impassioned defense of Israel. For Israeli ears, after years of former prime minister Ehud Olmert’s and former foreign minister Tzipi Livni’s continuous assaults on Israeli rights, and their strident defenses of capitulation to the Palestinians and the Syrians, Netanyahu’s address was a breath of fresh air. But it is hard to see how it could have possibly had any lasting impact on Obama or his advisers.

 

 

To be moved by rational argument, a person has to be open to rational discourse. And what we have witnessed over the past week with the Obama administration’s reactions to both North Korea’s nuclear brinksmanship and Iran’s sham elections is that its foreign policy is not informed by rationality but by the president’s morally relative, post-modern ideology. In this anti-intellectual and anti-rational climate, Netanyahu’s speech has little chance of making a lasting impact on the White House.

 

 

If rational thought was the basis for the administration’s policymaking on foreign affairs, North Korea’s decisions to test long range ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons, send two US citizens to long prison terms and then threaten nuclear war should have made the administration reconsider its current policy of seeking the approval and assistance of North Korea’s primary enabler – China – for any action it takes against Pyongyang. As Nicholas Eberstadt suggested in Friday’s Wall Street Journal, rather than spending its time passing UN Security Council resolutions with no enforcement mechanisms against North Korea, the administration would be working with a coalition of the willing to adopt measures aimed at lowering the threat North Korea constitutes to regional, US and global security through its nuclear and ballistic missile programs and its proliferation activities.

 

 

But the administration has done no such thing. Instead of working with and strengthening its allies, it has opted to work with North Korea’s allies China and Russia to forge a Security Council resolution harsh enough to convince North Korean leader Kim Jung Il to threaten nuclear war, but too weak to degrade his capacity to wage one.

 

 

Similar to Obama’s refusal to reassess his failed policy regarding North Korea, his nonreaction to the fraudulent Iranian election shows that he will not allow facts to interfere with his slavish devotion to his ideological canon that claims that no enemy is unappeasable and no ally deserves automatic support. Far from standing with the democratic dissidents now risking their lives to oppose Iran’s sham democracy, the administration has reportedly expressed concern that the current postelection protests will destabilize the regime. Obama has also refused to reconsider his decision to reach a grand bargain with the ayatollahs on Iran’s nuclear weapons program that would serve to legitimize their continued grip on power.

 

 

His refusal to make a moral distinction between the mullahs and their democratic opponents – like his refusal in Cairo to make a moral distinction between a nuclear-armed Iran and a nuclear-armed America – makes clear that he is not interested in forging a factually accurate or morally clear-sighted foreign policy.

 

 

ALL OF THIS brings us back to Israel – and Netanyahu’s speech about the nature and causes of the Palestinian conflict and the conditions that must be met if peace is ever to be achieved. His address aimed in two ways to lower US pressure while averting an open confrontation with a president whose approval ratings remain above 60 percent. First, Netanyahu demonstrated that through their consistent rejection of Israel’s right to exist as the Jewish state, the Palestinians – not us – are the side responsible for the absence of Middle East peace.

 

 

Second, Netanyahu tried to decrease US pressure on his government by conditionally accepting the idea of a Palestinian state. Clearly, it was Netanyahu’s acceptance of the idea of a Palestinian state – albeit a demilitarized one – that was supposed to do the most to fend off US pressure. After all, Obama and his advisers have made the swift establishment of a Palestinian state their primary foreign policy aim.

 

 

Irrespective of its impact on the Obama administration, Netanyahu’s speech was a positive contribution to the general discourse on the Middle East and Israel’s place in it. He made good use of his opportunity to address the nation above the heads of the uniformly leftist media to forge a new definition of the national consensus. Whereas his defeatist predecessors consistently spoke of the people’s willingness to make painful concessions for peace, and treated the establishment of a Jew-free Palestinian state as their primary duty as Zionists, Netanyahu recast the national consensus along patriotic lines.

 

 

He echoed the sentiments of the vast majority of Israelis when he refused to end building inside of Jewish communities located beyond the 1949 armistice lines; when he asserted that he would make no concessions on sovereignty over Jerusalem; would insist that we retain defensible borders; would refuse entrance of so-called Palestinian refugees to our territory; and demanded Palestinian recognition of our right to exist as the Jewish state.

 

 

He stridently and eloquently corrected Obama’s false characterization of this country as the product of the Holocaust during his speeches at Cairo and Buchenwald by recalling the 3,500 year old Jewish ties to the Land of Israel. And he made clear that the association Obama made between the Holocaust and this country’s founding was a precise inversion of the historical record. It is not Israel that owes its existence to the Holocaust. Rather, the Holocaust was only able to happen because there was no Israel.

 

 

NETANYAHU’S SPEECH was a much-needed strong defense. But it was not a perfect defense. It suffered from two flaws that may come back to haunt the premier in the years to come. First, his demand that the US lead the international community in guaranteeing that the Palestinian state is demilitarized provided the Obama administration with a new means to trick Israel into making suicidal concessions.

 

 

The only way to ensure that a Palestinian state is demilitarized is to send in forces to demilitarize it. Obviously the Americans won’t take such a step. In Gaza, a militarized Palestinian state already exists and the Americans have no intention of demilitarizing it for us. As for Judea and Samaria, today, the only thing the emerging Palestinian state has to show for itself is its US-built army.

 

 

The only force that would ensure a Palestinian state (or states) stays demilitarized is the IDF. But by appointing the US the guarantor of its demilitarized status, Netanyahu is inviting the US to lie and so make it impossible for us to take the steps necessary to ensure that the Palestinians lack the means to threaten the country.

 

 

In requesting that the US guarantee disarmament, Netanyahu repeated a mistake he made in his first term in office. In 1996 he conditioned his willingness to move forward with peace talks with the PLO on the terror group’s amendment of its charter calling for the destruction of Israel in line with its commitment under the initial Oslo agreement. Netanyahu empowered Bill Clinton to judge Palestinian compliance with this demand. In due course, Clinton travelled to Gaza and mendaciously announced that the PLO had in fact amended the charter. No such action had been taken, but Netanyahu was in no position to accuse Clinton of lying.

 

 

While his decision to appoint Obama arbiter of Palestinian demilitarization was ill-conceived, things could have been much worse.

 

 

Netanyahu ignored the so-called road map peace plan. That plan is one long list of Palestinian commitments that the US is empowered to judge compliance on. From terror fighting to ending
incitement, the road map places Israel in the position of being forced to take America’s word on issues paramount to its national security. By ignoring the road map, Netanyahu managed to avert the need to call Obama a liar directly.

 

 

The other problem with Netanyahu’s speech is that by accepting the idea of a Palestinian state, and embracing Obama’s fantasy that it is possible to reach a deal with the Palestinian Authority, Netanyahu blocked the possibility that Israel will be able to forge a new policy that will move it to a more advantageous status quo in the coming years. That is, Netanyahu’s conditional acceptance of Obama’s false and ideologically motivated two-state paradigm damns Israel to the position of foot dragger in relation to someone else’s policy rather than trailblazer for its own policy.

 

 

In fairness to Netanyahu, in light of Obama’s ideological commitment to the two-state paradigm which blames Israel for the absence of peace, it is far from clear that he has any choice other than to go along with the president and just play for time. Were Netanyahu to apply Israeli law to the large settlement blocs and the Jordan Valley or establish security zones along Gaza’s borders with Israel and Egypt, he would likely instigate a full breach of relations with Washington.

 

 

At this point, it is up to the public and our representatives in the Knesset to pave the way for a better policy in the future. This we can do by rejecting the two-state paradigm and conducting a public discourse relevant to our national interests. For Netanyahu, however, buying time with a hostile administration may be the best he can aspire to during his current term in office.

 

 

Of course, buying time in and of itself is no great accomplishment. The voters did not elect Netanyahu to lead us simply to buy time. We elected him to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. If his speech succeeded in blunting US pressure on Israel – even temporarily – on the Palestinian front, and in light of the results of the Iranian presidential race, Netanyahu has gained the opportunity to act on the Iranian front. If during his current term he prevents Iran from becoming a nuclear power and makes no concessions in Judea, Samaria, Jerusalem or the Golan Heights, he will be remembered as one of our greatest leaders and his speech will be remembered for posterity as a pivotal event.

 

 

On the other hand, if Netanyahu sits on his laurels, he will be surprised to see how quickly Obama – desperate for a foreign policy achievement after being laughed out of Teheran and Pyongyang – forgets his happiness at Netanyahu’s address. In no time flat, Obama will try to force Israel make him look like he knows what he is doing. At that point, an open confrontation with the White House will become unavoidable.

 

 

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.

 

It's only fair to share...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+

21 Comments

  • Marcel 06/15/2009 at 16:46

    Buying time ? there is no more to buy.
    Like Netanyahu you are fearful of dealing with the obvious problem and only want to push it aside for later when it will be more painful and costly.
    He would likely instigate a full breach of relations with Washington if he did what a good leader should do and so instead he compromises with a little more polish than the lemmings before him.
    The Marxist Muslim in the White House can smell the fear that causes Netanyahu to heel as so can many others can.
    They KNOW they can chip away little by little with the Pander Minister of Israel.
    Fearful of a showdown that should have happened over a decade ago and so the weak Jewish recipie of appeasing big brother continues.
    Fearful people are easliy led and manipulated.
    Netanyahu has not changed and has learned nothing from his mistakes.
    He talks but has proven incapable of any real action.
    His speech reveals a good talker but a weak leader ,he’s a lacky a panderer.
    The weak leader has proven he can’t stand up to even minimal U.S. pressure.
    We have a militarized Palestinan state in Gaza already and Israel has proven incapable of changing this as you pointe out.
    What you didn’t point out is thatNetanyahu has only strengthened it since he has been in power.
    In fact under pressure from Israel’s friends, Israel builds up,feeds,supports and keeps the Hamas terrorist regime in Gaza healthy.
    Netanyahu has taken down needed security roadblocks in Judea and Samaria which endanger Israeli lives to please his owners in Washington and continues to allow the U.S. to train and supply an enemy army facing Israel and has not once stood up to the trampling of Israel’s sovereignty by this bully who masquerades as an ally.
    Netanyahu has an impeccable record of always easily bending to miminal U.S. pressure and rewarding Israel’s avowed enemies with more and more concessions for nothing in return.
    He has no record of ever standing up to this enemy except in lofty speeches,but he has proven willing ot make his brothers suffer for lies of peace.
    He does have a good record of lying to his supporters with a straight face.
    So until Netanyahu can change his timid words into hard action he dosn’t fool me for one second.

    Reply
  • Arius 06/15/2009 at 17:46

    It’s probably too late for Israel to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Israel needs to start thinking about announcing a MAD strategy for the Middle East, such that a single nuclear attack on Israel will result in retaliation against all major Muslim cities in the ME including Mecca and Media. Make the stakes so high that Muslims start to fear that Iran will lead them all to utter destruction, driving a wedge into the Muslim ME.

    Reply
  • Ron Grandinetti 06/15/2009 at 21:16

    Caroline I honestly believe PM Netanyahu put the onus on the Arabs and Washington.
    Gave them what they wanted subject to meeting certain conditions that will never see the light of day.
    Hussein Obama was thrown a bone with no meat on it.
    Hussein Obama presently has more on his plate than he can handle and his staff is likewise clueless and the likes of Iran and N. Korea know this and feel free to do whatever they want without inference from the US.
    When it comes to his foreign policy there is no policy at all and he certainly is in no position to lose any ally, especially a trusted one in Israel.
    Israel should step up its defense posture, continue building the settlements and begin to force all Israel Arabs connected to terrorist to leave Israel.
    Hussein Obama is trying to play tough guy with a trusted ally while acting like a wimp with a timid approach towards both Iran and N. Korea.
    The real problem he is overly impressed with himself and is on an ego trip.
    Check his speeches and it’s all about “I” and not America.

    Reply
  • Marc Handelsman, USA 06/15/2009 at 22:33

    Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech was a tactical victory for Israel because it showed how absurd it would be for Israel to be a peace partner with the PLO. The PLO and the Arab world will not accept Mr. Netanyahu’s conditions for a two-state solution. However, setting up a DMZ in a farcical Palestine will not happen, because Arabs won’t give up their weapons without military intervention. Finally, President Obama wants to end his first term with two achievements: a Nobel Prize for “Peace in Our Time” and a second term in the White House.

    Reply
  • Baruch 06/15/2009 at 23:26

    First, I would like to thank Ron Grandinetti for his kind remarks on an earlier article regarding the Likud and its historic rise to power since Labor’s losses following the disastrous 1973 Yom Kippur war and its successful Israeli foreign policy, which engages pro-Israel American Jews.
    That being said, it is factually correct to assume that Obama being the media fascination that he is, is nevertheless unfit for the job in which he finds himself. If this sounds eerily reminiscent of Jimmy Carter, then you are correct. Thus, the winning policy of Israel and the Likud will be to engage Iran militarily, which of course means air strikes.
    There will be public outrage at first, however on balance support from Arab states will be tacitly supportive, and given their private apprehension of Obama gives rise to the phenomenon of the enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend theory.
    The time for action regarding Iran’s killing machine has arrived. The Iranian diaspora is hungry for action by Israel. They bet on Obama, and he is not delivering for them. Heaven forbid if Israel should succumb to the paper tiger response of its once and former ally, America.
    Thank you very much for the ability to voice my views, and may God continue to bless Israel and its people with peace.

    Reply
  • Marcel 06/16/2009 at 10:32

    Some of us understand the ever growing price Israel pays because Wimps like Netanyahu fail to confront the U.S. HEAD ON because of fear and no faith in the God of Israel.
    The time of loyal,begging lap dogs ruling Israel will eventually end.
    I would only hope that it would be sooner than later.
    ‘The Palestinian Authority has received signs from the U.S. that it should not take seriously Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent major address, according to a top PA official speaking to WND.
    Nimer Hamad, senior political adviser to PA President Mahmoud Abbas, also said the PA is not concerned about Netanyahu’s policies since Abbas relies on American support for key Palestinian demands.
    During Netanyahu’s speech Sunday, the Israeli leader called for a demilitarized Palestinian state and said Jerusalem would always be united under Jewish sovereignty.
    Hamad countered: “No matter what is the position of the Israeli government and no matter what are the statements of Netanyahu, what counts is what was promised to us by Obama, which is totally the opposite [of Netanyahu’s positions].”
    “We received encouraging signs from the Americans that we should not take seriously into consideration Netanyahu’s speech,” Hamad said.
    Hamad said the Obama administration holds views that strongly differ from Netanyahu’s.’
    (Aron Klein reporting for WND today)

    Reply
  • Philip Safran 06/16/2009 at 12:51

    Two big problems with the speech.
    One by agreeing now to a Palestinian State when there is no peaceful Palestine on the horizon, he showed that American pressure worked. If he had just said it was out of the picture and there were other approaches needed for the issue the US might have complained but would have eventually moved on to another issue. It is like trying to appease sharks by putting some blood in the water.
    Two AT some point Americans will announce a demilitarized state and who will disagree even when it is clear they are armed to the teeth. In 02 we were all excited when Bush said no dealings with Arafat because he was a terrorist. Easy answer, bring in Abbas and define him as not a terrorist even though the Al Asqa Martyrs who kill more Jews than Hamas are on his payroll (not to mention his background).

    Reply
  • Marcel 06/16/2009 at 20:08

    Obama repeated Tuesday at a news conference his “deep concerns” about the disputed balloting. He said he believes the ayatollah’s decision to order an investigation “indicates he understands the Iranian people have deep concerns.”
    But at the same time, Obama said it would not be helpful if the United States was seen by the world as “meddling” in the issue as Israel was the only nation where this was acceptable.
    The Israeli’s were adapted to U.S. meddling and had no resistance to it.
    It makes more sense to push Jews around than Moslems he chirped.
    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D98RSCDG4&show_article=1

    Reply
  • Turbeaux 06/17/2009 at 0:51

    When you add up everything that the Obama administration has done with respect to Israel and the Middle East since taking office and in particular in the past few days with respect to the controversial Iranian elections and the ongoing riots that have emerged, it is becoming clearer and clearer to me that the Bush administration must have cut some sort of secret deal, per the Iraqi Surrender Group’s recommendations, with the Iranians and the Syrians that Obama inherited and is also now complying with whereby both Iran and Syria have agreed to lay off fomenting violence inside Iraq until after the USA pulls out.
    Obviously, what Bush must have gave up to entice Iran and Syria to agree to a secret deal was not only a promise not to destroy Iran’s nuclear weapons program, but also a promise to prevent Israel from attacking Iran’s nuclear weapons program as well. I would also guess trying to secure the Golan Heights back for Syria is also part of the deal as well, which also explains Obama’s actions since coming to power with respect to Israel.
    Meanwhile, as soon as the USA pull out of Iraq or otherwise as soon as Iran acquires nuclear weapons, Iraq will inevitably become a new province of Iran and an integral part of the Iranian Shi’a crescent. Indeed, anyone who sees the Iraqi surge as a victory instead of what it really actually is, a camouflaged defeat for the USA, and General Petraeus as a war hero and genius is very gullible as for as I’m concerned.
    And now those losers are repeating all their foolish mistakes in Afghanistan! Today we have the blind leading the blind!
    GWB is more than giving Jimmy Carter the peanut farmer a run for his money for being the worse president ever in American history and Obama is anxious to surpass both of them for that ignominious honor.

    Reply
  • Ron Grandinetti 06/17/2009 at 6:28

    Turbeaux | June 17, 2009 12:51 AM
    I guess it’s easy when you don’t like a particular president you can get carried away with the conspiracy theory and the blame game.
    Unless you have actual proof of any special deals or wrong doings and “obviously and must have “just doesn’t do it.
    Comparing Pres. G. W. Bush with Jimmy Carter is more than outrages.
    Here we find J Carter asking the president to remove Hamas from the list of terrorist.
    Old cliché “figures don’t lie, liars figure”.
    I won’t mention any names but, there is a character posting daily with various conspiracy theories and is anti-everything and tops it off with “nobody has it right” mind set, all while incorporating scripture, that being bungled.
    Has all the answers and remedies with the exception of seeking professional help for himself.

    Reply
  • Pete 06/17/2009 at 6:40

    Binyamin’s speech should have been. “When America hands Osama Bin Laden the keys to the White House that is when Israel will allow the creation of a Palestinian State”.
    On second thought’s not a good idea!
    America already has.

    Reply
  • Ron Grandinetti 06/17/2009 at 7:37

    Pete
    Super idea.
    Where were you before PM Netanyahu gave the speech.
    Netanyahu could have inserted your suggestion as a significant condition with the stipulation it had to be Osama Bin Laden and not a replica or facsimile.

    Reply
  • Marcel 06/17/2009 at 8:12

    Turbeaux ,You hit the nail on the head.
    How dare you speak the truth,hail the delusion ,keep the lie alive is what Ron is trying to say.
    The kool aid drinkers are always offended when their leader is exposed for the charlatan he is.
    The fake supporter of Israel says he is enlightening his fellow Catholics to stand with Israel but this is a big lie.
    He can offer us no real proof of this ,maybe this wolf in sheeps costume will give us some doctored evidence ?
    His same tired, broken record of Jews rising up in America which we all know is never going to happen because they have been neutered like they have in Israel.
    Caroline,
    My first thought after reading Martin’s article is that you have lost your edge.
    You need to get it back and might start by kicking Netanyahu hard in the shins or butkus.
    In the final analysis Netanyahu chose surrender over resistance, and in so doing he put in grave danger not only his country and his people but the very rationale of Zionism itself.
    http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1244371115669&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

    Reply
  • Ron Grandinetti 06/17/2009 at 9:00

    Marcel
    Delusion, delusion, Marcel are you joking?
    If anyone fits this category, just look in the mirror.
    Good grief, by chance do you actually read your garbage?
    You scribble everything and anything that comes in that warped mind of yours and paste here and only God knows where else.
    I can handle your hate for Catholics since you were previously one (by your own admission) and must have had a bad experience by a nun or priest years ago similar to Madeleine O’Hare who took revenge against not only the Catholic church but all Christians. She was so over whelmed by this passion; she began to believe her lies.
    Is there anything or anyone you don’t hate?
    Listen the Israelis don’t need your support they have enough enemies to deal with.
    Delusion, you’re a complete joke.

    Reply
  • Ron Grandinetti 06/17/2009 at 9:00

    Marcel
    Delusion, delusion, Marcel are you joking?
    If anyone fits this category, just look in the mirror.
    Good grief, by chance do you actually read your garbage?
    You scribble everything and anything that comes in that warped mind of yours and paste here and only God knows where else.
    I can handle your hate for Catholics since you were previously one (by your own admission) and must have had a bad experience by a nun or priest years ago similar to Madeleine O’Hare who took revenge against not only the Catholic church but all Christians. She was so over whelmed by this passion; she began to believe her lies.
    Is there anything or anyone you don’t hate?
    Listen the Israelis don’t need your support they have enough enemies to deal with.
    Delusion, you’re a complete joke.

    Reply
  • Marcel 06/17/2009 at 9:21

    Dear Ron the con,
    There is only one Person right in all of this and He is ignored.
    Forgive me for pointing the only way which almost everyone ignores and it’s not your phony solutions.
    I make it clear to Israel that their only help is with the Holy one of Israel and not the phony U.S. or any number of Jews rising up to go and talk some sens to Obama.
    For this faith in God instead of your dead ends you smear me.
    I understand why ,you don’t fool me for a second, Con the Ron.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tga2FX9Ai9c&feature=channel_page

    Reply
  • Turbeaux 06/17/2009 at 17:44

    To Ron Grandinetti:
    I guess it’s easy when you don’t like a particular president you can get carried away with the conspiracy theory and the blame game.
    Actually, you are wrong, it saddened me to a very great extent that GWB turned out to be a hopeless political correct multicultural bleeding heart and big government liberal. I let the cards fall where they may, then I call them the way I see them. Sorry if you don’t like it.
    Comparing Pres. G. W. Bush with Jimmy Carter is more than outrageous.
    Maybe in your mental calculus but not in my mental calculus! Besides betraying Israel the same way Carter betrayed the Shah of Iran, GWB is also responsible for the two biggest strategic blunders in American history.
    Not to mention that he also more than doubled the size of the federal government and federal spending during his tenure in office. GWB may have been socially conservative, but when it came to everything else, Bush was as true blue a liberal as liberal gets.

    Reply
  • Ron Grandinetti 06/17/2009 at 18:15

    Turbeaux
    Listen I can understand where you are coming from.
    This is not a personal thing.
    We can have a difference of opinions with respects to who did what and whatever.
    Having said that, even as a conservative I didn’t approve of all the GWB did and I agree the government grew and I wasn’t happy about that and was outspoken about it.
    Unfortunately I find the liberals on the other hand refuse to disagree with the actions of the liberals (mostly democrats).
    They stand party pat and won’t budge at all. They are the real Kool-Aid drinkers.
    I do believe GWB was sincere and he did protect our nation from further terrorist attacks.
    I also don’t have to prove to anyone why I support Israel.
    I can’t find a reason not to.

    Reply
  • Joyce 06/18/2009 at 0:44

    Dear Caroline:
    I am so proud of you. My only regret is I do not have your knowledge so my words and defense of Israel’s right to exist and more than that, that IT IS NOT an Arab country but a Jewish State, is totally biblically based and spiritually discerned.
    Unfortunately, as our history shows, only a remnant remained faithful to Gd and never compromised. When the Jewish people see that they made the US a Gd to them and a savior, will they understand to repent and turn back to the only true Gd, the Gd of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob who can truly save Israel and judge all those who have stepped on His promises to them.
    Woe to the US for they have crossed the line. There are thousands upon thousands of us that believe that. I truly believe the the US is going to continue downhill and become a third world country which has been predicted by Gerald Celente of Trends and many other economists. I believe, this is he beginning of Gd’s judgement on the US and all nations who curse Israel.
    Oba 1:15 For the day of Jehovah is near upon all the nations: as thou hast done (to Israel), it shall be done unto thee; thy dealing shall return upon thine own head.
    Gen 12:3 I will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”
    Sincerely,
    Joyce Kuras

    Reply
  • Marcel 06/18/2009 at 7:25

    America, broken and falling.
    The meddleing U.S. assumes to play God as it interferes in His agenda.
    I have no doubt that He will send this arrogant, failure of a player to the bench for good.
    If Israel can not even stand up to the punk Obama and the witch Hitlery than Israel is truly not an independant nation.
    Lieberman and Clinton met face-to-face for about half an hour
    The secretary of state noted that Israel had several prime ministers – including Ehud Olmert and Ariel Sharon – who changed their views over the years. The State Department was later expected to announce the renewal of the strategic dialogue between Israel and the US.
    Meeting between foreign minister, US secretary of state manifests deep disagreement between Obama administration, Netanyahu’s government. Clinton demands stop to settlements, Lieberman says Israel reached understandings with Bush administration
    Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton fractured her right elbow during a fall Wednesday, her chief of staff said.
    Clinton was on her way to the White House when she fell and injured her elbow, chief of staff Cheryl Mills said in a statement released late Wednesday.
    Another sign.
    Soon we will hear across the world about the U.S.
    Fallen ,fallen is Bayblon.
    Jeremiah 50,51, Obadiah, Isaiah 47,Revelation 18.

    Reply
  • Marcel 06/18/2009 at 18:21

    This is what the loyal lap dog Benji is doing to please his Mistress Hillary and Mr. Prez Hussein.
    Killing Jews to please his masters because for sure more will die because of this disgusting Jewish leadership.
    The never again generation has become the goodwill in exchange for more dead Jews generation.
    An IDF checkpoint south of Jericho was removed on Wednesday. The IDF Spokesman’s Office said that this facilitated the free passage of vehicles and pedestrians between the Palestinian Authority-controlled city and the rest of the Jordan Valley. The decision to eliminate the Vered Jericho checkpoint was “a Civil Administration proposal as a part of the goodwill measures authorized by the Minister of Defense,” the IDF statement explained. It was, however, carried out according to security assessments by the IDF Central Command.

    Reply

Leave a Comment