Tuesday, April 24th | 9 Iyyar 5778


Be in the know!

Get our exclusive daily news briefing.

November 3, 2014 5:46 pm

Obama Officials’ Insults Are Vulgar, But Their Policies Are Far Worse

avatar by Moshe Phillips and Benyamin Korn

Email a copy of "Obama Officials’ Insults Are Vulgar, But Their Policies Are Far Worse" to a friend

U.S. President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Credit: Wikimedia Commons.

The Obama administration officials’ vulgar treatment of Israel’s prime minister is troubling. But the policies behind their vulgarity – and reckless – are far worse.

Two officials were involved: one who used the epithet to describe Israel’s leader, and a second who agreed with the obscene remark. The point they were both making is that they consider Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a “coward” because he won’t make the concessions that they believe might lead to peace.

What concessions, exactly? President Obama, Secretary of State Kerry, and other senior administration officials have said time and again that they want Israel to retreat to the 1967 armistice lines and permit the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. That would, of course, reduce Israel to just nine miles wide at its vulnerable mid-section, near Netanya. It would also almost certainly lead to a hostile Arab state — whether nationalist or Islamist — in Israel’s heartland.

What about Jerusalem? The White House and the State Department are very careful to refrain from saying explicitly that they want to redivide Jerusalem. They don’t say that out loud because they know it would infuriate millions of pro-Israel Christian and Jewish voters (not to mention almost all Israelis).

But “redivide Jerusalem” is exactly what the Obama administration is implying every time it condemns Israel for building apartments in so-called “East Jerusalem” and claims that such construction endangers peace. But the only peace it would endanger is one in which that part of Jerusalem is expected to be given to the Palestinians.

Otherwise, why would the White House be so upset if apartments are built in Ramat Shlomo, an Orthodox neighborhood in northern Jerusalem, or Gilo, a section of southern Jerusalem? The problem with Ramat Shlomo and Gilo is they are situated slightly beyond the old 1967 line.

Israelis naturally find the Obama administration’s characterization of such areas as “illegal settlements” laughable. Gilo is not a collection of trailers on some wind-swept hill. It is a modern, urban locale with more than 30,000 residents. Anyone who has driven in Jerusalem knows that Ramat Shlomo, Gilo, and the other neighborhoods denounced by the U.S. administration are physically indistinguishable from the rest of the city.

But the White House and State Department refuse to accept this reality. They are locked into a rigid ideological formula, according to which the 1967 line is sacrosanct and anything beyond it is “illegal” and “occupied.” And anything that is illegal and occupied, is expected to be surrendered.

There is, of course, nothing sacred about the 1967 armistice line. It was never an official border. It was simply the furthest point to which Jordanian troops managed to advance in the 1948 war. The Jordanian aggression in 1948 was illegal. The Jordanian occupation of the eastern part of Jerusalem, including the Old City, from 1948 to 1967 was illegal. The Jordanian destruction of 57 synagogues in the Old City during the 1950s and 1960s was illegal. Jordan’s use of tombstones from the Mount of Olives cemetery as latrines in Jordanian Army barracks was illegal (not to mention repulsive).

When Israel won the 1967 war and reunited Jerusalem, it was correcting an outrageous historical injustice. Decent people everywhere should celebrate that the city has, since 1967, been ruled by a democratic government that respects the rights of all religions and safeguards the holy sites of all faiths.

And, indeed, the United States Congress has recognized it since 1992, when the House of Representatives and the Senate unanimously adopted Senate Concurrent Resolution 113, celebrating “the reunification of Jerusalem.” That resolution asserted that Jerusalem “must remain an undivided city.”

Perhaps the Obama administration should be more frank about its true aim of re-dividing Jerusalem. Perhaps it should honestly acknowledge that it regards all construction beyond the 1967 line as illegal because it wants to Israel to give those areas to the Palestinians. xxx Perhaps they should say it plainly, and then see how it plays out among Israel’s voters, and America’s.

For here, in plain English, is what redividing Jerusalem would mean: The new capital of “Palestine” would include the Temple Mount, the Western Wall, the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, the Mount of Olives cemetery, and most or all of the following “new city” Jerusalem neighborhoods: Ramot, French Hill, Gilo, Neve Yaakov, Ramat Shlomo, Har Homa and Givat Hamatos.

And that would be truly obscene.

Moshe Phillips and Benyamin Korn are members of the board of the Religious Zionists of America.

The opinions presented by Algemeiner bloggers are solely theirs and do not represent those of The Algemeiner, its publishers or editors. If you would like to share your views with a blog post on The Algemeiner, please be in touch through our Contact page.

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter Email This Article

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner
  • josef zuares

    The West will not do much for justice for Jewish rights over their land,but as soon as the cards shall be turned by time,it will be the West itself to go back on its positions,forced by the impending risk of its own annihilation by the hands of those same people it has been defending. Arabs have a long history with Europe,nothing really to brag about I’d say,and only their oil has changed how they are viewed by the same civilization that fought them for centuries to preserve its Christian and Western character.Jews have time on their side,we survived for two thousand years away from our ancestral land.And we thrived regardless of the murderous attitude of our host countries;should we really worry if this conflict takes another hundred,two hundred years?For two thousand years we survived in the most horrible conditions,we can surely think we could continue to do so,and this time sitting proudly on our own land.The Arabs shall fall from their shaky throne and shall return to what they were before,a mass of human material capable only to bring pain and violence to our world.Jews know haw to be patient,let’s not forget that.

  • Linda Rivera

    In Judea, Samaria, Jerusalem, all Israel and whatever non-Muslim country muslims migrate to, muslims make never-ending demands on non-muslims. Muslims are always on the offensive. Always. It is time we non-muslims go on the offensive. Israel, go on the offensive. Don’t allow anyone to put you on the defensive. Make demands. Make more demands than the muslims. NO SURRENDER, EVER!

    Jewish Refugees Must be Compensated in Land & Finances!
    Around, and after 1948, one million Jews suffered violent religious Jew cleansing from Arab countries. Arab governments seized the land, farms, homes, hospitals, schools, businesses and bank accounts of the Jews.

    Most Jewish refugees fled to Israel where the religious terror war against Jews never stops.

    Cruel global war is fought to subjugate all humanity under merciless Islamic sharia law where defenseless non-Muslims have no human rights. It is unacceptable to Muslims for Jews to have self-rule in tiny Israel.

    The 1948 Jewish refugees and their descendants who make up about half of Israel’s Jewish citizens MUST be compensated in land and finances!

  • Linda Rivera

    There Never was an Arab country of Palestine. Jerusalem was Never the capital of any Arab or Muslim entity. Jerusalem is mentioned several hundred times in the Bible, not once in the Koran.

    The inalienable rights of Jews to the Biblical homeland must not be violated! No one is demanding Muslims surrender THEIR top religious areas of Mecca and Medina!

    In 1948, Egypt invaded Gaza, ethnically cleansing all Jews and in 1948, Jordan invaded Judea, Samaria and east Jerusalem, ethnically cleansing all Jews.

    In violent opposition to G-D, Muslim Jordan destroyed 58 synagogues in Jerusalem. The jihad is against the Holy One.

    When Israel won the Arab Muslim war of aggression in 1967, Jews returned to the areas of their ancestral homeland they had been ethnically cleansed from for 19 years. Anti-Israel propaganda deceitfully calls Jews’ legitimate return “occupation”.

    Jews have had a continuous presence in physical and spiritual homeland Israel for 4,000 years.

    All Land and Property Stolen from Jews in the 1948 Islamic Invasion Must be Returned!

  • Linda Rivera

    Arabs first started calling themselves “Palestinians” in 1967. Global terrorist, Egyptian Arafat was the first leader of this new people. Partner with Arafat for over 40 years; immorally respected by the US/EU-Holocaust denier, Abbas, financed the massacre of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympic Games.

    Before 1948, Jews were known as the Palestinians.
    The Jewish newspaper, the Jerusalem Post was called the Palestine Post. The Jewish-founded electric company was Palestine Electric. The Palestinian Symphony Orchestra was all Jewish. During World War II, the British army had a Palestinian Brigade made up entirely of Jewish volunteers.

    After Jews migrated to Palestine in significant numbers in the late 1800s and miraculously transformed desert and swamps into rich, agricultural land, Arabs came in large numbers from Arab countries for jobs from Jews.

    The fact that the overwhelming majority of Arabs resided only briefly in Palestine is attested to by a one-time special UN decree: that any Arab who had resided in Palestine for only two years before 1948, and then left, would be considered a refugee and so would his descendants!

    Throughout history, people were never regarded as refugees if they had resided in a country for only two years because they were clearly citizens of other countries!

  • Ivan Gur-Arie

    Vote REpublican and make Obama’s life miserable for the next two years. BRing this man down to reality.

  • Alex R-

    And, Obama tacitly accepts Russia’s annexation of Crimea.

  • Joel Farber

    I think you meant “1949 armistice lines,” not “1967.” There were indeed cease-fire lines drawn (in practice) in 1967, but they were on the Suez Canal and the Jordan River.

  • Bernard Ross

    a low class childish, inexperienced administration of incompetents; the price os US Jews voting for democrats

  • Emanuel

    IF that happens we should redivide the continental US and annex D.C. leaving the disgusting clowns and their bankrupt policies to rule their own land as we can handle our OWN. THIS country and her policies don’t belong to the fool in the oval office; he is just temporarily borrowing them and when this embarrassing chapter in history is over everyone will know exactly who the piece of crap is.

  • Now Israel is under the pressure that many of us US Citizens have been under from this administration for 5 years. Let join forces and get rid of it.
    Jerry Frankeny

  • Efram

    And make Obama as happy as he can be, at least until jihad succeeds worldwide.

  • Bill

    Maybe The US should give back Texas to Mexico Hawaii to who ever was there first, the Black Hills to the Chyenne etc. .This is not including the approximately 1000 military bases it has around the world. I’m sure you get the idea. They could do this and rectify a wrong that is if they consider Israel present situation to be wrong. They could do this and never worry about being threatened by attacks or invasion. PS please read War is Racket by Smedly Butler(American military history).


    The Bible teaches that God gave to the Jewish people the land of Israel. This is repeated many times throughout the Bible. God’s viewpoint on this matter is what ultimately matters since He will at some point in the future implement His will. If God says something then that settles it, that decree will surely come to pass. However, it is interesting to note that international law is and has always been on the side of the reestablishment of the modern state of Israel. Furthermore, the law also supports the claim that Jerusalem belongs to the Jews and that the Arabs have no legitimate legal claim upon Judaism’s most holy location.
    Canadian lawyer Jacques Paul Gauthier recently finished a twenty-year project in which this Gentile Christian researched at the University of Geneva political science department and international law school, the legal issues relating to the ownership of Israel and Jerusalem. Gauthier’s PhD thesis was completed in 2007 and is entitled:
    “Sovereignty Over The Old City of Jerusalem.” Dr. Gauthier has demonstrated in painstaking detail in his thesis of over 1,200 pages the following conclusion:
    After our examination of the principles of international law pertaining to belligerent occupation, we have concluded that Israel has the right to occupy
    the territories under its control since 1967, including East Jerusalem and its Old City, until a peace treaty is concluded. Since Gauthier’s publication was a PhD thesis, he had to painstakingly document every opinion or conclusion with legal and historical facts. Had the readers of his thesis not agreed with the information in his work they would not have accepted Gauthier’s thesis. This means that Gauthier’s work is the most authoritative opinion covering the international status of the old city of Jerusalem and the land of Israel. So what is Dr. Gauthier’s argument?
    Gauthier notes that the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917 did not have the status of international law, at least not when issued. However, it did become the official policy of the British government that bound Great Britain to pursue the founding of a future state of Israel and granting them self-determination. The United Kingdom took the next step toward founding the Jewish state when General Allenby captured Jerusalem on December 11, 1917 and then the rest of Palestine (Israel).
    On January 3, 1919 Chaim Weizmann, who was the leader and representative of the Zionist Organization on behalf of the Jewish people, met with Emir Feisal, who represented the Arab Kingdom of Hedjaz. Included in an agreement that both parties agreed upon was that the Jewish people should get the land west of the Jordan River and that the old city of Jerusalem would be under Jewish control. The Paris Peace Conference began on January 18, 1919 and lasted about six months in which new borders were decided upon for parts of Europe and the Middle East and were given the force of international law. The conference was made up of the victorious Allied powers from World War I. The “Big Four” were made up of theUnited States, Great Britain, France, and Italy. Lord Balfour represented Britain. It was during the summer of 1919 that Arab opposition began to be voiced against the Feisal-Weizmann agreement.
    As a result that aspect of the conference stalled and was never agreed upon. Nevertheless, Balfour issued the following statement on August 11, 1919:
    “The four great powers are committed to Zionism. And Zionism be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age long traditions, in present needs in future hopes of far profounder import than the desire and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land.”3 The Paris Peace Conference ended without a final solution reached concerning the status of Palestine, even though there was much discussion about the matter.
    A meeting to deal specifically with the unfinished business of Palestine, which was to be seen as an extension of the Paris Peace Conference was commenced on April 19, 1920 in San Remo, Italy. It was attended by the four Principal Allied Powers of World War I who were represented by the prime ministers of Britain (David Lloyd George),France (Alexandre Millerand) and Italy (Francesco Nitti) and by Japan’s Ambassador K. Matsui. The San Remo Resolution adopted on April 25, 1920 incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917 issued by the British government. The San Remo resolution and Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, which was adopted at the Paris Peace Conference on April 28, 1919, were the basic documents upon which the British Mandate for the stewardship of Palestine was constructed. It was at San Remo that the Balfour Declaration went from being just a statement of British foreign policy to international law.
    The British Mandate was fully implemented upon approval by the Council of the League of Nations on September 22, 1922. However, when the parties left San Remo in April 1919 the future state of Israel was to be made up of what now constitutes the Kingdom of Jordan, as well as all the land West of the Jordan River. After September 22, 1922 what is now the Kingdom of Jordan was taken away from Palestine and became another Arab nation. This was the beginning of the trend still operative today that Israel needs to give up more land in order to be promised peace. The reality is that every time Israel gives up land, she experiences even less peace.
    On July 1, 1920 the British military administration, which had controlled Palestine since December 1917, was replaced by a British civil administration covering all of Palestine on both sides of the Jordan River, with its headquarters in Jerusalem. The Mandate instructed Great Britain that she would oversee Palestine with the goal of the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. At the time of the issuance of the Mandate, it was believed that there were not enough Jews in the land to establish a nation. Thus, Great Britain was to oversee the immigration of Jews to the land and when there were enough then Palestine would become the national homeland for the Jewish people. However, normally, Britain obstructed the goal of developing a Jewish homeland in Palestine.
    As the League of Nations was dissolved in 1946, the United Nations, which was founded in 1945, began to deal with the Palestine issue. The UN General Assembly passed a Partition Resolution (Resolution 181) on November 29, 147. This UN resolution adopted the necessary legal status from the League of Nations needed for Israel to declare her independence on May 14, 1948. Under 181, the land of Palestine was partitioned and part of Palestine was given to the Arabs and the rest was given to Israel, except Jerusalem was to become an international city. Gauthier tells us, “The special international regime for the corpus separatum which was to be established on or
    prior to October 1, 1948 was to remain in force for a period of ten years. At the end of that period, ‘the residents of the City shall be . . . free to express by means of a referendum their wishes as to possible modifications of the regime of the City.'” The Arabs rejected resolution 181 and attacked the Jews resulting in a larger land area for Israel when the fighting stopped in 1949. Israel’s war for independence also prevented Jerusalem from becoming an international city. The promised election by October 1959 to determine to whom Jerusalem belonged never took place. There is no doubt that the city would have voted for Israel if an election had taken place. Thus, all of the legal rights to the Old City of Jerusalem belong to Israel and the Jews.

    Gauthier’s work, which I have only provided a glimpse into, demonstrates that both the land of Israel and the Old City of Jerusalem belong to Israel and the Jews based upon the standards of international law. When commentators appear on the media today and start talking about how Israel is violating international law with their occupation, they are absolutely without any basis in the truth. These advocates for the Arab occupation of Jewish land have no legal basis to stand. However, that does not seem to bother them since they are lawless and many hope through jihad to take over Israel. Most of these spokesmen really do not care about the law, international or otherwise. The facts are that both the Bible and even international law says that the land of Israel and Jerusalem belong to the Jewish people. The fact that many within the international community know this information means nothing.

    • Jim Washington

      The Brits abrogated their promise amid the 1937 Riots (Arab Uprising). That was purely the result of anti-Semitic attitude within the British Foreign Office – which was coincidentally paralleled by the same thing occurring in the US State Department. That attitude was highly prevalent in 1946-7-8 at which time several operatives at Foggy Bottom tried to undermine President Truman’s decision to recognize Israel. Regarding post Six Day War 1967 borders. There is a long standing principle in international law of the Right of Conquest. First Great Britain had absolute rights to the territory of Palestine and could do as they wished with it as a result of Allenby’s conquest in WWI. Israel had the same right as a result of their overwhelming vanquishing of the multiple Arab armies in 1967. Had I been Levi Eshkol I’d have asked the Knesset to annex every inch of the conquered territory. The Marxists, socialists and progressive anti-Semites of the world would have whined and cried and postured and threatened, however, it would have been a fait acompli and the last almost 50 years would have been much more stable in the Middle East.

  • Paul

    In most conflicts, there is not one side completely right, with the other side completely wrong. Each side concentrates on the wrongdoings of the other side, and ignores or justifies their OWN. And this leads to escalation – divorce, or war etc – NOT to reconciliation and peace.

    If we just want to convince ourselves that we are right, and damn the consequences – we are apparently doing a good job of that. Nobody seems to think we are in the right except for half the Israeli right wing, and the consequences appear to be bad and getting worse, fast.
    If we really want to achieve a GOOD solution for Israel, we should maybe stop being satisfied with bashing the other side (who ARE doing lots of wrong, bad things) and start looking at what WE may be doing wrong.

    Let’s start with the legality of building across the ’67 borders. Here is what you say:
    Israelis naturally find the Obama administration’s characterization of such areas as “illegal settlements” laughable. Gilo is not a collection of trailers on some wind-swept hill. It is a modern, urban locale with more than 30,000 residents. Anyone who has driven in Jerusalem knows that Ramat Shlomo, Gilo, and the other neighborhoods denounced by the U.S. administration are physically indistinguishable from the rest of the city.

    So, the position here appears to be, that since we have been in Gilo for so many years, it is no longer across the ’67 border. Because it feels so GOOD and RIGHT to be in Gilo!

    It continues:
    But the White House and State Department refuse to accept this reality. They are locked into a rigid ideological formula, according to which the 1967 line is sacrosanct and anything beyond it is “illegal” and “occupied.” And anything that is illegal and occupied, is expected to be surrendered.

    WOW !!!
    What is legal or not legal is laid out by laws. International law says building in territories you are holding under your military control, is illegal. Now, THAT is the law. And if the US says that is illegal – that is because it IS illegal, even if us Israelies have decided that that is ridiculous. They didn’t say it is not ridiculous, they said it is not legal.
    The Americans believe we should act in accordance with the law. WE are the ones who appear to be locked into a sancrosanct belief that if we break the law for a long time, it becomes OK.

    And to say “And anything that is illegal and occupied, is expected to be surrendered.” is either very dumb, or manipulative, or cynical. Who said we must return Gilo ?The US wants us to keep Gilo but do it legally – is that so BAD ? What the US has said is that we should NEGOTIATE PEACE,make agreed borders including border adjustments that would make Gilo LEGAL.
    But what the Americans (Kerry) get for their efforts of getting peace between us and the Palestinians is ridicule and contempt.
    The Americans ARE naive. they mkae stupid blunders in their efforts. They don’t know the middle east as well as WE claim to. So, WHY DON’T WE present a peace plan ? Draw the lines, showing Gilo inside future Ilegal Israeli borders. This would defuse most of the accusations against us, making it only a technical illegality, because we would be pouring our efforts and resources into something that would in the future become our, legally. (Could it possibly be that we don’t really WANT peace because peace involves returning OTHER territory? This is what it looks like.)

    Regarding the division of Jerusalem: Does anyone here really think that Jerusalem today is NOT divided ? De facto ? Can Jews stroll safely through Silwan, or any of the Palestinian enclaves in the city, across the ’67 border? Through the old city ? Although Israel has the military strength to enforce itself on the city – are we really one city ? Is this unity between the inhabitants or only a matter of police enforcement? Is there equality of services between Jewish and Arab inhabitants ?
    If there is peace, Jerusalem can exist as a united city, shared by all the religions, and housing two sets of government institutions. Without peace, it will remain divided between two peoples who live there,one of them under force of arms, who are increasingly becoming polarized and extreme and violent towards one another. Jerusalem is being divided by hatred.

    • Lef Elliot

      @Paul :
      You are COMPLETELY IGNORANT of true International Law. You had better revise elementary notions before making foolish statements again.

      International Law is NOT what you and others perceive because they have been fed the vocabulary of the Arabs and the Media. It is set by Resolutions of successively The Ligue of Nations and the United Nations or by signed Treaties willingly entered into and ratified internationally.

      Please read the above until you get it engraved into your brain cells. Thank you.

    • Yale


      The real problem with using international law (IL) to analyze what’s happening between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs is that this situation has not occurred before and there is basically nothing in IL that addresses it.

      IL prohibits the forcible settlement of people from an occupying power, especially those seen as not citizens of that power, in territory it occupies, (as in German Jews being sent to concentration camps in Poland) but that is NOT the iussue raised by Israel’s building policies; the “settlers” were not forcibly sent to these locales and continue to be regarded as Israeli citizens.

      IL seeks to enable civilian life to continue as normally as possible and this includes continuing normal economic activity, like trade, including in real estate. Israel’s “settlements” are basically a real estate activity, and while they have security and political implications, those aspects are intended to be addressed in negotiations, not the courts. Any serious consideration of the “settlements”, even the tiny ones on hill tops, must acknowledge that this issue is NOT properly justiciable.

      The 1949 frontiers were cease-fire lines that hold only as long as the cease-fire did, which means the 1967 war erased them; they have no remaining validity at all. The 1967 war was caused by Egypt’s desire to destroy Israel and returns the situation to square one: any territorial settlement must be negotiated between the parties with claims to the territory. Israel has been willing to do so, with the expectation of keeping some of the land taken in 1967. The Palestinian Arabs continue to claim all the land, including pre-1967 Israel, with the intent of making it judenrein.

      In principle, there is no reason Israel should NOT make the reciprocal claim, i.e., that all the land is Jewish and the Arabs must go. Israel hasn’t made that claim (yes, there are some fanatics who do) and has never declared its intention of expelling or killing the Arabs. That by itself should lead any serious person to stand with Israel against Palestinain Arab intransigence.

      This is why the Obama administration has been so bad for peace. It doesn’t understand the reality that the primary obstacle to peace is the Arab insistence that Israel must be set up for destruction. Israelis now generally agree that this is the problem, which is why they see Obama and Kerry as basically ridiculous.

  • If Netanyahu wants the US to be frank, he should stop saying that he supports a two state solution

  • Yussi

    Name the two officials and when Obama gives us land back to the Indians then we can talk..

  • Dov

    Its rather very foolish to be afraid of America. Fear breeds more pressure and Obama, having lost the entire world, feels that his only hope is to bring “the Jew” to his knees and make himself (Obama) look great. If Israel would stand up in strength, Obama would fall back because the last thing he needs is to allow the “Jew” to humiliate him.

  • art

    Obama/hillary/Kerry declared the administration of the “west Bank” an OCCUPATION and the settlements ILLEGAL and signalled to the world that the US would not back Israel. This latest vulgar attack and security leak declared OPEN SEASON on Israel. The US will impose the saudi plan on Israel, allow abbas to make his demands and demand from Israel obedience and silence on Irans nukes. Obama gave iran the time to build hide and scatter their nuclear program so it can no longer be attacked successfully Wake up US Jews

  • Sonia Willats

    “There is, of course, nothing sacred about the 1967 armistice line. It was never an official border…” This is the para about which the world is either in ignorance, or willfully, unaware. And it is not only USA. The UK and Europe take this stance as well, willfully, or in ignorance. In a recent youtube clip, Jack Straw refers to PM Netanyahu as if he’s a delinquent child! That the original “Palastine” was much bigger than Israel today, and that it was then divided into ‘Transjordan’ and Israel is also ignored; willfully not known by the international press and indeed USA under Obama, UK, Europe.

    Without this concrete understanding that it is not Israel who is out of line (and the repulsive behaviour of Jordan described above etc.) all the traditional allies of Israel are lining up against Israel – even Conservatives in the UK are seen on youtube condemning Israel to a man. And as for Ban kiMoon and the UN…!

    One cannot but see the lining up of the nations as seen in prophecy, notably Ezekiel 38/9, Ps2 etc. One does not want to see this line-up taking place, but it is difficult not to.

    It seems to me that PM Netanyahu has bowed and cow-towed as much to foreign powers as a man and ruler WHO IS NOT A COWARD can do – even to the release of prisoners who have shed Israeli blood, which was hard to swallow. IF ONE CONTINUES TO CONCEDE, WHERE DOES IT STOP? As a courageous man, with huge vision informed by history, HE NEEDS TO STAND against all these amnesiac (turncoat) governments of the world and do what is right by Israel. If one allows the battery of Israel according to international demands, WHERE DOES IT END? As described above – with a divided and crippled Jerusalem and Israel, unable to defend herself. IT CANNOT HAPPEN and it cannot be understood to be the will of the G-d of Israel, Isaac and Jacob (I believe.)

    BUT LAPID AND HERZOG will exploit Bibi’s vulnerability and blame him for the stand-off with USA and the world; yet it is not his fault! Here is the achilles heel of the situation within Israel? I hope Bibi stays in power in order to stand firm against the absurd demands of previous, traditional allies.

    I did not know about Resolution 113, celebrating “the reunification of Jerusalem.” But this I know – Jerusalem must NEVER BE DIVIDED AGAIN and this, I believe, is an instruction from a much higher source.

  • Tzippi Whinestein

    Not sure if Netanyahoo is a coward, but there is no doubt he is a corrupt leftist traitor, and puts his misplaced faith is in the worship of idols.

  • nelson marans

    Time and time again from the beginning of the Obama administration, the president,in coordination with an always anti-Israel State Department, have shown their contempt for the Jewish state. Only the U. S. Congress has been able to serve as a counterbalance during the vitriolic attacks by the present administration against Israel.
    Let us hope that after two more years of the assault against the Jewish state, that a new administration will bring back the warm relations between the U. S. and Israel.

  • WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF TIME. · almost at 7500 HITS PLEASE SHARE . This is the only way I can speak out. I have a small not rich synagogue and you are my voice. Thank you Christians for Israel for you continued help. I am a product of the holocaust, a son of survivors who lost most of their family. Tomorrow is election day. If Israel is destroyed by a nuclear Iran we will have another holocaust.

    HILLARY = OBAM 3, and 4


    . Where is our President Obama as our foreign policy has turned into a complete disaster.

    Video is on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ig8c795KymA

    Another holocaust is possible. If it happened once it can happen again. Thank G-d we have Israel. We need to do everything possible to keep Israel militarily strong. Jews get out of Europe. There can be no compromise regarding Israel nor can we depend on the good will of others. This unfortunately is a lesson that many Jews have never learned. Never forget, never forgive never again. Rabbi Dr. Bernhard Rosenberg