Obama’s Spectacular Failure

Pages: 1 2

Reprinted from The Jerusalem Post.

Several weeks ago, in an unofficial inauguration ceremony at Tahrir Square in Cairo, Egypt’s new Muslim Brotherhood President Mohamed Mursi took off his mask of moderation. Before a crowd of scores of thousands, Mursi pledged to work for the release from US federal prison of Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman.

According to The New York Times’ account of his speech, Mursi said, “I see signs [being held by members of the crowd] for Omar Abdel-Rahman and detainees’ pictures. It is my duty and I will make all efforts to have them free, including Omar Abdel-Rahman.”

Otherwise known as the blind sheikh, Abdel Rahman was the mastermind of the jihadist cell in New Jersey that perpetrated the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. His cell also murdered Rabbi Meir Kahane in New York in 1990. They plotted the assassination of then-president Hosni Mubarak. They intended to bomb New York landmarks including the Lincoln and Holland tunnels and the UN headquarters.

Rahman was the leader of Gama’a al-Islamia – the Islamic Group, responsible, among other things for the assassination of Anwar Sadat in 1981. A renowned Sunni religious authority, Rahman wrote the fatwa, or Islamic ruling, permitting Sadat’s murder in retribution for his signing the peace treaty with Israel. The Islamic group is listed by the State Department as a specially designated terrorist organization.

After his conviction in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, Abdel-Rahman issued another fatwa calling for jihad against the US. After the September 11, 2001, attacks, Osama bin Laden cited Abdel-Rahman’s fatwa as the religious justification for them.

By calling for Abdel-Rahman’s release, Mursi has aligned himself and his government with the US’s worst enemies. By calling for Abdel-Rahman’s release during his unofficial inauguration ceremony, Mursi signaled that he cares more about winning the acclaim of the most violent, America-hating jihadists in the world than with cultivating good relations with America.

And in response to Mursi’s supreme act of unfriendliness, US President Barack Obama invited Mursi to visit him at the White House.

Mursi is not the only Abdel Rahman supporter to enjoy the warm hospitality of the White House.

His personal terror organization has also been the recipient of administration largesse. Despite the fact that federal law makes it a felony to assist members of specially designated terrorist organizations, last month the State Department invited group member Hani Nour Eldin, a newly elected member of the Islamist-dominated Egyptian parliament, to visit the US and meet with senior US officials at the White House and the State Department, as part of a delegation of Egyptian parliamentarians.

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland refused to provide any explanation for the administration’s decision to break federal law in order to host Eldin in Washington. Nuland simply claimed, “We have an interest in engaging a broad cross-section of Egyptians who are seeking to peacefully shape Egypt’s future. The goal of this delegation… was to have consultations both with think tanks but also with government folks, with a broad spectrum representing all the colors of Egyptian politics.”

Mursi is not the only Arab leader who embraces terrorists only to be embraced by the US government. In a seemingly unrelated matter, this week it was reported that in an attempt to satisfy the Obama administration’s urgent desire to renew negotiations between the Palestinians and Israel, and to satisfy the Palestinians’ insatiable desire to celebrate terrorists, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu offered to release 124 Palestinian terrorist murderers from Israeli prisons in exchange for a meeting with Palestinian Authority Chairman and Fatah chief Mahmoud Abbas.

Alas, Abbas refused. He didn’t think Netanyahu’s offer was generous enough.

And how did the Obama administration respond to Abbas’s demand for the mass release of terrorists and his continued refusal to resume negotiations with Israel?

By attacking Israel.

The proximate cause of the Obama administration’s most recent assault on Israel is the publication of the legal opinion of a panel of expert Israeli jurists regarding the legality of Israeli communities beyond the 1949 armistice lines. Netanyahu commissioned the panel, led by retired Supreme Court justice Edmond Levy, to investigate the international legal status of these towns and villages and to provide the government with guidance relating to future construction of Israeli communities beyond the armistice lines.

The committee’s findings, published this week, concluded that under international law, these communities are completely legal.

There is nothing remotely revolutionary about this finding. This has been Israel’s position since 1967, and arguably since 1922.

The international legal basis for the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948 was the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine. That document gave the Jewish people the legal right to sovereignty over Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem, as well as all the land Israel took control over during the 1948- 49 War of Independence.

Not only did the Mandate give the Jewish people the legal right to the areas, it enjoined the British Mandatory authorities to “facilitate… close settlement by Jews on the land, including state lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.”

So not only was Jewish settlement not prohibited. It was required.

Although this has been Israel’s position all along, Netanyahu apparently felt the need to have its legitimacy renewed in light of the all-out assault against Israel’s legal rights led by the Palestinians, and joined enthusiastically by the Obama administration.

In a previous attempt to appease Obama’s rapacious appetite for Israeli concessions, Netanyahu temporarily abrogated Israel’s legal rights by banning Jews from exercising their property rights in Judea and Samaria for 10 months in 2010. All the legal opinion published this week does is restate what Israel’s position has always been.

Whereas the Obama administration opted to embrace Mursi even as he embraces Abdel-Rahman, the Obama administration vociferously condemned Israel for having the nerve to ask a panel of senior jurists to opine about its rights. In a press briefing, State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell banged the rhetorical hammer.

As he put it, “The US position on settlements is clear. Obviously, we’ve seen the reports that an Israeli government-appointed panel has recommended legalizing dozens of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, but we do not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity, and we oppose any effort to legalize settlement outposts.”

In short then, for the Obama administration, it is all well and fine for the newly elected president of what was until two years ago the US’s most important Arab ally to embrace a terror mastermind indirectly responsible for the murder of nearly 3,000 Americans. It is okay to invite members of jihadist terror groups to come to Washington and meet with senior US officials in a US taxpayer- funded trip. It is even okay for the head of a would-be-state that the US is trying to create to embrace every single Palestinian terrorist, including those who have murdered Americans. But for Israel’s elected government to ask an expert panel to determine whether Israel is acting in accordance with international law in permitting Jews to live on land the Palestinians insist must be Jew-free is an affront.

Pages: 1 2

  • Jon_Babtist

    My enemy's enemy is my friend.
    Any enemy of the U.S. is a friend of Obama.

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

      Even the horrible Carter did not betray us deliberately like Obama does.

  • franzvonfear

    Glick should study Machiavelli to understand the relationship between lord and vassal.

    Israel's policy of military and economic dependence on the US inevitably leads to a forfeiting of full foreign policy independence in exchange for autonomy and security alongside numerous other regional vassals, such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq, Egypt…etc.

    In nthis context, Glick should bear in mind that while Saudi oil, Egypt's Suez Canal or Iraq's stability are of vital strategic interest to the US, Israeli settlements are certainly not.

    It's high time Israeli rightwingers like Glick wake out of their "special relationship" fantasy and realize that to a pragmatic Washington foreign policy there is no difference between dealing with a freely elected Muslim Brotherhood party or a freely elected United Torah Judaism party.

    • reader

      Obama's foreign policy is pragmatic only if you assume that he is the Muslim Brotherhood, anti-Western shill. And you don't need to read Machiavelli to figure this out. All you need to do is read Obama's own writings, follow his affiliations and track his appointments.

    • RonL

      A pragmatic foreign policy would note that the Muslim Brotherhood hates America and that its children organizations are conducting a war of terror against America.
      Delusional academics who call themselves "realists" or "pragmatists" are so stuck on their own ideology, that they pretend that other ideologies do not count. Hence Czarist Russia and the USSR, the Kingdom of Iran and Khomeeiite Iran, and Weimar and Nazi Germany all must have the same foreign policy and goals. As I said, delusional.

    • jose

      Franz, i guess the whole world is a 'vassal' of the U.S.. Remember we fund the IMF, and many other global financial institutions as well as NATO and U.N.

    • intrcptr2


      She has read Machiavelli, you knob, and clearly understood it far better than your likes. In point of fact, it is the Arabs, who get free cash in the billions, who are the vassals, not the free market, Nobel Prize winning Israelis.

      And as the others pointed out, the financial, emotional, and theological support of terrorism which our new friends spew daily is in no one's national interest.

    • Kufar Dawg

      I believe the Nazi party was initially "freely" elected into office and, like the Muslim Brotherhood they share similarly totalitarian and antisemitic ideals.

  • davarino

    Glick assumes this is not the outcome that Obama wanted. I on the other hand believe this is exactly what Obama wants, as evidenced by his every move. He does a lot of bowing whenever he goes to the middle east.

  • ApolloSpeaks

    In plotting the destruction of the World Trade Center in 1993 which killed 8, injured 1000 and caused millions in damage Abdel Rahman may have broken US law committing a heinous crime, but he didn't violate Islam's divine law of supramacy, intolerence and war which abrogates all other laws and makes Rahman an innocent man in Mursi's eyes unjustly punished by evil, unwashed, enemy infidels.

    Death to Mursi!

    Death to the Brotherhood!

    We are at war and these are our enemies!

  • Theo Prinse

    Tnx for the article Caroline !
    "Obama came into office with a theory on which he based his Middle East policy. His theory was that jihadists hate America because the US supports Israel. By placing what Obama referred to as “daylight” between the US and Israel, he believed he would convince the jihadists to put aside their hatred of America."
    I commented on Michele Bachmann's facebook that (like you wrote a half a year ago in another context) it is among neo-conservatives like John McCain who follows the Zbigniew Brzesinski's doctrine (my friend Karl Kraut from the Netherlands commented this to me a year ago) to support 'neo-conservative' fundamentalism in the Islamic world – at the expense of those in the Islamic world who are oriented on the west – against what these neo-conservatives view as the even worse enemy of their western world … the communists in the former Soviet Union or perhaps China.

    I distinguish between the neuro-sociological vehemently advancing force of Islamic fundamentalism versus the need for the west to quit the U.N for the O.I.C and
    b. end subsidizing Al Qaeda through the gasoline pump against us for people like McCain and Lindsey Graham to profit from and
    c. acknowledge that even then the Islamic caliphate will proceed and
    d. put the Islamic world behind an Iron Curtain and
    e. adjust all classic military conceptions to the progressing asymmetry of the Jihadists.
    If Obama-Davis wins it will – again – be due to psy opsed John McCain.

  • Steve Chavez

    THE BLIND FOOL WANTED TO BRING DOWN THE TOWERS and tens of thousands would have died but that's only if the Twin, or Twins, collapsed straight down like they did in 2001. Imagine the damage to tens of thousands others if the Twins fell like a tree and on top of passers-by and on top of other buildings?


    WHO ARE "THEY?" "They" are our Communists who were the most bitter of all the world's Communists with the Fall of the Wall, Iron Curtain, and the Soviet Union, a country "they" loved more than their own. ONE OF "THEY" IS BARACK OBAMA, who surrounded himself with Communists since birth and these Communists are not members of the Communist Party USA who join to be cool or a rebel, but CPUSA members who advocate "the overthrow of the United States" which is just as radical as Ahmadinejad's, "Wipe Israel off the map."

    "They" are not scrutinized though as most American's dismiss them as insignificant but since the 1960's, "they" have been aiding their Soviet comrades which culminated into directly aiding SOVIET KGB FRONTS, FUNDED BY THE KGB, THROUGH THE COMMUNIST PARTY USA FRONTS. BARACK OBAMA WAS A SOVIET KGB APOLOGIST DURING HIS COLLEGE DAYS with proof of his article he wrote while at Columbia. Google: "Obama Sundial 1983" which proves that he sought out the most radical Marxist students as well as his saying he sought out Marxist professors. IF YOU LOOK AT HIS "CIRCLE OF COMMUNISTS" in the White House, his advisers, his czars, his appointments, and his Cabinet, you will find that "THEY" WERE THE SEEDS THAT WERE PLANTED IN THE 60'S THRU THE 80'S BY THE SOVIET KGB!

    With that, the mindset of Obama towards all our enemies and our friends is now the opposite.

    If you listen closely to Obama's Cairo speech, when he starts talking about "radicalism is not the way" his face and eyes and movements change WHICH IS SIGNALING THE AUDIENCE THAT RADICALISM IS THE WAY which is the ARAB SPRING THAT HE SUPPORTS BUT ONLY AS LONG AS IT OVERTHROWS COUNTRIES AND RULERS WHO WILL SPIT ON THEIR PEACE TREATIES WITH ISRAEL. Now you have Syria, a puppet of Iran and Russia, and no action by Obama even though his action on Libya was to stop the genocide and yet Syria is much worse. Then you have veto's by COMMUNIST RUSSIA AND CHINA ON IRAN AND NOW SYRIA AND OBAMA IS ALL TALK AND NO ACTION! CONNECT THE DOTS!

    The world has been dealing with Jimmy Carter's Iranian mullahs for forty years. The world will be dealing with Obama's Arab Spring FOR GENERATIONS!

  • Phil

    I did not vote for Obama or McCain: to me this is nothing new, just another incompetent politician. I have no degree in psychology, but from what I know, a person is constantly in a balancing act, and decisions they make can either drive them to insanity or not….incompetent insanity is all we are watching.

    I will not vote for Obama or Romney this election… but I will vote the Democratic ticket locally this election.

    I know people like writing about thees idiots that run for office; but to me it is not even worth wasting my breath talking about them.

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

      Then you deserve not to have any president or country nationally.
      Why not go to a small country that lacks our central federalist system?

    • Stephen_Brady

      I will not vote for Obama or Romney this election…

      Then, you will be voting for Obama. I hope you like the outcome …

    • Supreme_Galooty

      Yeah, Phil! Vote Democrack!

  • clarespark

    Caroline Glick's voice will be a counter-weight to MSM and such trendy institutions as HBO, that has produced its super-idealistic The Newsroom, designed to appeal to a youong demographic. See http://clarespark.com/2012/06/26/aaron-sorkins-sc…. "Aaron Sorkin's [Scottish blood]."

  • Schlomotion

    This article is amusing because it makes Meir Kahane seem like he was a nice guy and not a stinking terrorist killed by another stinking terrorist. Also, the deliberate misnomer "jew-free." No Jews live in my house. Does that make it judenrein? They weren't purged from my house after trying to annex it. They just don't live there. Ms. Glick also wrote "rapacious appetite for Israeli concessions." That is a rather odd way to describe asking Israel to refrain from its one consistent, belligerent activity of annexation in violation of treaty. It's just plum crazy to refer to Israel as a stable ally, too.

    • Boston

      And speaking of spectacular failures, here's one now !!!

      • Schlomotion

        No need to be coy. If you want to meet up for beers, just ask. I live in Boston.

        • Boston

          I'm betting you live in Cambridge but thanks anyways.

          • Schlomotion

            No problem. I thought you might want to get past all this anonymous sniping B.S. Some people prefer it though. Anyway, I don't live in Cambridge. Enjoy.

          • Zionista

            I'm betting you're in a homeless shelter – or prison – either way, you're soooooo out of your league responding to whatever Glick writes about. A Jew hating moron like you against Glick is like your awful red sox against the Yankees. And remember, for each rant I see, $ for Zionist causes! Bling!!!! silly goy.

    • Touchstone

      For someone who believes he's single-handedly slaying the Zionist dragon with his internet connection, you're not in a credible position to decide what constitutes "plum crazy".

      Funny thing, that 1922 League of Nations Mandate. Perhaps you should focus your superhuman, Atlas-like powers on this specific excerpt from Glick's article:

      "The international legal basis for the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948 was the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine. That document gave the Jewish people the legal right to sovereignty over Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem, as well as all the land Israel took control over during the 1948- 49 War of Independence. Not only did the Mandate give the Jewish people the legal right to the areas, it enjoined the British Mandatory authorities to “facilitate… close settlement by Jews on the land, including state lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.” So not only was Jewish settlement not prohibited. It was required."

      • Boston

        Schlocky will deride the source but here is a source of the Jewish population of the area historically:

      • Schlomotion

        Correct. What it did not stipulate was that they expel non-Jews and bulldoze their homes, claiming a need to do target practice but graciously granting them cattle grazing rights on Saturdays. Also, Israel quickly wheeled on the British Mandatory authority to kill them. You can spare the history lesson. We are in the present and in the present Israel is a bad country trying to take more than it has a right to. The rest is fluff. In the present day, that is to say, now, Israel dishonors its treaties, steals land, vilifies us in our own press and is an electoral and foreign policy liability.

        • Touchstone

          You know, with a few hundred thousand more incisive comments like that, you might just make good on your promise to bring down the Zionist Goliath. Truly, Israel has never had to deal with such a redoubtable opponent. Iranian nukes pale in comparison to your earth-shattering rants.

          "Israel is a bad country" — That's about as facile and empty an analysis as I've come to expect from you, oh great Herculean demigod. Conceivably, one could find enough reasons to label any country a "bad" country. And considering the fact that Israel has been surrounded by truly bad actors for a century, it's only a narrow-minded, tunnel-visioned, quest-driven fool like you who would be myopic enough not to take such conditions into account. Israel-bashers are the ULTIMATE in short-sighted fools who omit the all-important factor of CONTEXT in their moronic efforts to pursue their agenda. As if there's no such thing as radical Islam and jihadist terrorism! As if Israel isn't surrounded by nations trying to destroy it! Apparently, you had no idea what Nasser's plans were, or Hafez Assad's, or Saddam Hussein's, or Ayatollah Khomeini's. Neither are you aware of what Nasrallah, Bashar Assad, Mursi, Ahmadinejad, Haniyeh, Meshal and Khameini are inclined to do. Nope, Israel is just a "bad country" all alone in a sea of peace-loving angels and mermaids.

          "more than it has a right to" — You obviously didn't read or comprehend the excerpt I quoted. I know you're an Olympian deity, but even you don't get to make up your own facts.

          "Israel dishonors its treaties" — Look at what the Palestinians do. Look at what the Egyptians do. The antisemitic incitement is unbelievable. What peace partner prepares its populace for genocidal war? Oh, but I forget. Those are the "good guys" in your Manichean, context-free world.

          "steals land" — Again, was Glick's excerpt not written in terms you could understand? By the way, how did the Muslims expand from Morocco to Indonesia? Peacefully? How did America expand from one oceanic coast to another? Whose land are you living on, hypocrite? Who are you calling a thief? Ah, how quickly you forget your extreme credibility deficit. It's a pleasure to remind you.

          "vilifies us in our own press" — Another massively facile oversimplification. Many diverse perspectives are exchanged in many diverse publications every day. It's called a free press. Try to remember that the next time you vilify Israel and only Israel, you loudmouthed hypocrite. (Hey, aren't you the guy who hates v-words? I see you don't mind using them yourself. One rule for you, another one for others, is that it? You really DO conduct yourself as though you're above the rest of us mere mortals.)

          "an electoral and foreign policy liability" — My my, and yet you recently claimed to be a Zionist yourself! Only a supreme hypocrite like you would venture to claim he wants Israel the "liability" to "not only survive, but thrive". Israel is a liability only to its opponents, which in America are numerous, but then its American friends are legion.

          Every ally is considered a liability by people who seek to sever the alliance. Churchill's England was a great big liability to the non-interventionists who preferred to find an accommodation with the Nazis rather than oppose them. You're in the same company, except the Nazis are radical Muslims who want you ground to a pulp despite the fact that you bash Israel and keep giving the radicals a pass.

          Anyway, as a world historical figure of epic importance, you must have a lot on your plate, so far be it from me to distract you further from your larger-than-life plans.

          • Schlomotion

            Let us take good stock of what you have in your tool tray:

            P1: "Iranian nukes" which haven't been built, while Israel has been stockpiling warheads since 1967.
            P2: "Israel is surrounded by enemies" which Israel has beaten and has been attacking covertly and overtly for decades, until finally the central governments weaken and a weak pan-Arabism unfolds.
            P3: "Let's repeat P2."
            P4: Whenever someone points out bad Israeli behavior, point to a Palestinian. (Liar's Paradox).
            P5a: "The British Empire and the League gave the whole of Palestine to Israel." No they didn't.
            P5b: "Americans stole land from Indians a hundred years ago, so it's OK for Israel to do it today."
            P6: "Diversity in the press is OK unless it vilifies Israel. Israel may vilify the US in the interest of Diversity."
            P7: "All Zionists must fanatically support Israel, right or wrong or hand in their Zionist badge."
            P8: "Muslims, like anyone who criticizes Israel are Nazis, and those who do not side against them are appeasers."

            Taking all of these flaccid defenses/tools/reasons into account, there is really no defense of the indefensible actions of Israel. These are the same old wooden handled pipewrench game pieces from the last century. You were better off when you were throwing Historical Determinism around. These other ones are canards.

          • reader

            Actually, your P5a is enough. The British and the League created the Palestinian state in Jordan, a whopping 80% of the Mandate. Case closed.

          • Touchstone

            <"Iranian nukes" which haven't been built, while Israel has been stockpiling warheads since 1967.>

            It's widely believed (though feverishly denied by frothing Israel-bashers) that Iran's fanatical clerics — whose top priority is the destruction of Israel; who sponsored the bombing of some 90 Jews in Argentina in 1994; who are behind the violence of Assad, Hamas and Hezbollah (including the recent bombing of Israeli tourists in Bulgaria) — have been working on a nuclear program that only the most naive souls would regard as peaceful. I certainly hope you're right that Israel has been "stockpiling warheads", as the Jewish state doubtlessly requires the ultimate deterrent, considering what a hellishly barbaric neighborhood they find themselves in. Only a gull and an overzealous propagandist like yourself would both trust Iran's monstrous leaders when they insist their nuclear program is peaceful, and condemn tiny Israel for "stockpiling" perhaps the only weapon with the potential for deterring the extremist apocalyptic nutjobs it faces. (Not to mention the fact that, since it was primarily two Jews who invented the science and technology behind nukes, it makes no sense that a majority-Jewish state should be denied such arms.)

            <"Israel is surrounded by enemies" which Israel has beaten and has been attacking covertly and overtly for decades, until finally the central governments weaken and a weak pan-Arabism unfolds.>

            Israel hasn't really been allowed to conclusively defeat its enemies. Also, ridiculous measures have been imposed on it, such as being prematurely forced to end its assault on Hezbollah, and forcing it to entrust UN observers with monitoring Hezbollah thereafter (when they easily managed to stockpile thousands of rockets under the UN's hawk-like watch). As for covert and overt attacks, you persist in propping up a tunnel-visioned view of Israel as acting alone, as if in a vacuum. What of the dedicated terrorists that have necessitated Israeli countermeasures for decades? Arabs were stabbing Jews to death daily since before Israel was founded. What of the endless suicide bombers that preceded and necessitated the security fence? Does it bother you that mass murderers can't infiltrate Israel anymore because of the wall? Israel's targeting of the Munich killers would qualify as "attacking" its enemies. Got a problem with that, too? Is Israel supposed to do nothing when its people are slaughtered? Do Israelis have a right to defend themselves? To avenge their victims? Or do you see only the "attack" and not the terrorist atrocity that preceded it? Do you know what casus belli means? How long will it take until you comprehend the simple fact that Israel has to keep battling to protect its people in the face of so many barbarians that keep trying to do it harm? To you, is Samir Kuntar a heroic freedom fighter, and his Israeli jailers the oppressive villains?

          • Schlomotion

            On the contrary. I hope Iran does develop nuclear weapons. That would be a good check against Israel in the Middle East and put an end to their Old Testament based rambling that they have biological and theological rights to all the land East of the Mediterranean Sea. I live in the United States. Iran has really not done me any harm more or less than Israel has done me any favors. In their region, however, Israel likes to blame any stalemate on their land grabs on agents of Iran. Really, self-described Jewish messiahs have been trying to freak off a war with Iran since the 1500s. Iran Contra was a really disgusting page in American history and all the serious money, drug and weapons laundering was done by Israelis. That's really scummy. Then listening to Barbara Walters go on and on and on about how awesome the Shah was and how fancy his wife's jewelry was. Sick, obsequious, exchequing and flattery of monarchism. Makes me want to puke, really. It runs counter to the American spirit to fawn over these kinds of people and fix their colons, patch their arteries, and send them back to devour their own people. It's really heinous.

            Israel should really sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Until it does, it is a rogue state, no better than Iraq or North Korea. They still deny having nukes, like they deny annexing land, like they deny being the hub of the world blood diamond and cocaine trade. Shameful.

            Israel is not a bound Prometheus. It is a rabid Shih Tzu at the end of an American colonialist leash. All of that is bad for the American national character and makes us so much more like England, and so much more susceptible to internal putrefaction from the backwash of our client peoples and their savage struggles for a racially pure religious fortress state. I strongly suggest we just dump Israel off on her own and let her go her own way. Yet when our leaders suggest taking Meyrav Wurmser at her word and closing our wallet and our carpetbags to that region of the world, the Israel Lobby flips out and tries to muddle our elections with bribery, bad reporting, memory-holing, and Hasbara. I agree we should unbind and unmuzzle the Shih Tzu. The only problem is that it cannot fight the bigger dogs and would just commit suicide and take everyone with it using the Samson Option. It's another reason Israel is seen as creeps.

            Another reason they are creeps, is, as you mentioned, they just tried to hijack the opening of the Olympics and politicize it with a forced memorialization of the Munich Massacre. Having failed to do that, Netanyahu's Hasbara team went on a rampage and announced wildly that he fears the Olympics will be targeted by Iranians to commemorate the Munich attacks. That is why he is widely viewed as a craven and hysterically duplicitous beast and our own President admitted to France that he can't stand him.

          • Touchstone

            "I hope Iran does develop nuclear weapons. That would be a good check against Israel in the Middle East"

            Thank you for permanently removing yourself from anything resembling serious debate. Thank you for exposing once and for all why you're a complete buffoon and not to be taken seriously. Thank you for reassuring me unwittingly that you will indeed fail spectacularly to accomplish diddly squat.

            If Iran gets nukes, that will trigger widespread nuclear proliferation in the world's most dangerous region. Brilliant suggestion, Sherlock. Thank goodness you'll never be in any position to make important decisions regarding the fates of nations.

            Also, if Israel has been stockpiling nukes since 1967, as you stated, and the Middle East is still standing, which it is, then obviously no deterrent is needed against Israel, so your point is completely moot. And stupid. And worthless… except in its capacity to remind us all that you're just a disgruntled wingnut crying in the wilderness.

            By the way, as mentioned many times already, one minute in a three hour ceremony (or however many hours it is) does not come anywhere close to constituting a "hijacking", except in the minds of hyperbole-spewing buffoons like yourself, utterly warped by seething ethnic hatred and thus rendered hypersensitive to such fleeting, innocuous displays of international brotherhood.

          • Schlomotion

            I didn't realize that you were the Arbiter of Serious Debate. Please describe any actual credentials you might have to constrain debates about politics into categories that you deem serious.

            Secondly, your claim that a nation is not belligerent simply because it has not launched a nuclear attack is not only goofy, it would negate Israel's claims about Iran. As you have stated previously, one need only have experienced a collective history of oppression in order to stock up on nukes.

          • Touchstone

            <Whenever someone points out bad Israeli behavior, point to a Palestinian. (Liar's Paradox).>

            I expected you to rebuke me for justifying bad behavior by pointing to bad behavior in others. But that's not really what I was doing. I was expanding on the foundational point of the 1922 Mandate and its implications, namely that theft of land in this case depends on where you draw the map, and you've obviously decided to draw the map without regard to any pre-existing agreements, following only your Zeus-like whim of where you think the boundaries should be. But pointing out the lack of credibility of an accuser is indeed a valid point. If you are indeed sitting on land that was stolen, what gives you the right to object when you see, or think you see, the same behavior in others? Who are you to champion the cause? One rule for you, another rule for your enemies. Gotcha. You're just another credibility-free bloviator with zero integrity and zero impact. You're a joke and you deserve to be regarded as such.

            And I wasn't just pointing randomly to "bad behavior" by Muslims. The violent expansion of Islam is exceedingly relevant to the Arab-Israeli conflict. It's not just a quasi-point one leans on as a crutch during a debate. Why do you support land theft from native Americans, or land theft by armies of Muslim Arabs, and take issue only with a handful of Jews determined not to steal land, but to live on land where their ancestors once lived? Why is this land to be eternally Muslim, just because they insist that any land conquered by Muslims must forever remain so? Why are you an apologist for Islam's vast, triumphalist expansion? Because you're keen to seek an amoral accommodation with them (and sacrifice Jewish aspirations in the process), not because you actually give a damn who's in the right.

            <"Diversity in the press is OK unless it vilifies Israel. Israel may vilify the US in the interest of Diversity.">

            I support the right of anti-Israel publications to publish their views, even though I'm generally bothered by such views. I can support a sacred right without supporting the individual or organization that exercises that right. Apparently, you can't countenance a site like FPM, nor do you support its right to exist. That's why you've said, over and over, that part of your grandiose mission is to topple Horowitz. You're not just a critic, you're an aspiring destroyer. A fascist destroyer, bent on silencing the opposition.

          • Schlomotion

            I am not sitting on land that was stolen. I was born in, and have consistently lived in towns that were purchased in exchange for settlement rights from local chieftains. I don't live at Wounded Knee, or Payne's Landing, or Little Big Horn. I am from Haverhill, MA. Do you need to see the Charter and the signatures of Passaquo and Sagahew to appease your bogus thirst for reciprocity? Do you honestly think Israelis can white-guilt Americans out criticizing them?

            America is the land of E Pluribus Unum, a place where Muslims and Jews are welcome, at this point probably glorified for being so exotic and wonderful and mysterious. I sit on stolen land? False. Even if it were true, that justifies Israel? Then it also justifies the Blitzkrieg and the annexation of France to Germany. Do you know how stupid your argument is? Quid pro quo is absurd in that context.

            I have made no apology for Islam or Islamism. That's just the rote response of a witch-hunter. The rhetoric has not changed since Salem, since the McCarthy hearings, or up to now. I beg you to remember how many Communist Jews in the United States claim to have been persecuted by HUAC. And remember who brought the atom bomb plans to the Soviet Union. And whose lobby flips out every time we discuss reforming the federal reserve bank and reducing foreign aid to the Middle East.

          • Touchstone

            <"All Zionists must fanatically support Israel, right or wrong or hand in their Zionist badge.">

            Who said support must be fanatical? You slipped that word in there like the slimy weasel you are, knowing that you had to resort to cheap hyperbole yet again to make yet another worthless, specious "point". You hoped that nobody would notice your pathetic little rhetorical trick, but by now it's so expected, one can merely assume you embedded a hyperbole somewhere in your tendentious rant.

            <"Muslims, like anyone who criticizes Israel are Nazis, and those who do not side against them are appeasers.">

            All your cheap word-twisting aside, the reason I likened radical Muslims (not just "Muslims", you slimy hack) to Nazis, was that they want to kill Westerners like you and me (but especially me, because I'm of Jewish heritage). You completely and shamelessly distorted the meaning of my point into something that bears no resemblance to what I was getting at. Nobody's a Nazi just for criticizing Israel, and I never said such a thing. (You rarely make a point without putting words in your opponent's mouth.) But radical Muslims are certainly acting like Nazis when they pursue a policy of exterminatory antisemitism, and wholesale slaughter of non-Muslims in general.

            I wonder which points of mine you'll now distort, sneaking in as much hyperbole in the process. (sigh)

    • Ghostwriter

      Anti-semitism,thy name is Schlomotion.

      • Boston

        Nah. Schlocky is just a pest who craves attention. :=))

    • Kufar Dawg

      LOL, so the pogroms (i.e. in Iraq) and persecution (Iran, Egyptistan, Syria, Tunisia, Libya etc.) Jews endured throughout the Mid-East at the hands of the muslime apes didn't have anything to do with why these lands are now judenrein? I know a 6'5" Syrian Jew who might like to discuss w/you why his entire family left Syria, maybe
      you can convince him the persecution of Jews there was mythological.

      Why in particular was Kahane a "terrorist"?

    • reader

      So, let's see how much of an idiot you are. Would you sell your house to a Jew for the right price? Under no circumstances? Or you're you going to try to sell your house to a Jew and then claim that the Jew stole it from you? This is a simple multiple choice. Give it your best shot, troll.

  • Boston

    As opposed to Saudi Arabia whose main exports to our country are oil and ramming airplanes into towers.

    • Kufar Dawg

      I think you are grossly underestimating Soddy Barbaria's contributions to the USA. They've contributed the funds to construct mosques all over the US and fund various islamofascist organizations dedicated to the subversion and infiltration of our government at the state and federal levels. And what would terrorism be without the Soddy Barbarians financing it? It would just be an amateur hour jihad!

  • Katharina

    Saudi/Qatar/Islam-bowing Jihadist/War Criminal/Dictator Barack Hussein Obama now is trying to manipulate Israel to join its oil-robbing & Arabicizing non-Arab Mid-East/Syria (next will be Lebanon- under the pretext of war against Hezbollah) – it's a trap for Israel. Although Iran is evil but don't forget that the TERRORIST Saudi Arabia/Qatar/Obama’s REGIMES-sponsored Jew/Christian/women/girls-hating Nazi Muslim Brotherhood (MB) jihadists have called for Genocide of the Jews through Qatar-based Yusuf Qardawi. The MB created the terrorist cults of Hamas, Al-Qaeda, Taleban, Salafist and Boko Haram (in Nigeria), al-Shabaab (in Somalia) and so on. Their global goal is "One Saudi/Arabic Caliphate" (this is why Obama bowed to the Saudi king when first elected) and a 'pure' Saudi-Arabic Mid-East without the Jews/Israel. And although Iran's Ayatollah's REGIME also called for the Genocide of the Jews due to Islam, but they have no intention for that same global Caliphate as dreamed by the Saudi/Qatar/MB REGIMES (& Jihadist Obama himself of course)!

  • Ghostwriter

    If President Obama believes the Muslim Brotherhood are a bunch of peace loving people,than he's a gigantic fool. The Muslim Brotherhood are a bunch of fanatics who want to slaughter those who AREN'T Muslim. Sadly,President Obama doesn't want to see that. He's still living in Fantasy Land,and you can't make good foreign policy choices based on fantasies.

    • jose

      That is correct , slaughter those who are not mulim. Why should he care.

  • jose

    Ms C. Glick , are you in fact sure they are his enemies? ponder;(

  • Ronald Johnston

    If all the nonbelievers could bring themselves to put themselves in osama obama's place and ask what they could do to bring about world wide islam and sharia law, they would do exactly what osama has done. He has done all he could do in small increments to further his cause without being thrown out of this country!!!!!

  • BLJ

    O = One
    B = Big
    A = A$$
    M = Mistake
    A= America

    What else is there to say?

  • dennis metz

    it is idiot comments like this that upset me and make me wonder why people are so stupid
    Daniel Earley · Top Commenter · Jacksonville, Florida
    Military Contractors and the Insurance Industry have the biggest Lobbys in Washington. That's why Republicans start wars and have tried so hard to stop Health Care. This is not Rocket Science, folks, its about money…

    • Walt

      "Republicans start wars"????

      What kind of loon are you and where do you get your historical information?

      World War I
      World War II

      All took place (begun) while Democrats were in power!

  • WilliamJamesWard

    Obama is in league with the Muslim Brotherhood and all that they stand for. If Israel is disheartened
    that Washington is in bed with it's enemies, how much worse for American patriots to see their
    government in bed with it's enemies and helping them to grow in the World and import them and
    their viscious cult here in the United States. Is it reaching to far to conclude that this is treason
    and the highest violations of Federal law to embrace felons and to financially support them,
    they being terrorists. The silence is deafening, where are the responsible officials that should
    be stopping this outrage and impeaching the traitors. Voting the terror enablers out in November
    is insufficient to satisfy justice, I wonder if we will ever be clean again……….Does John McCain
    have anything to say other than "Allahu akbar"……….?…….John Boehner……….?……William

  • Gman213

    I'm convinced Obama could be anally raped and then call the offender his lover…what a moron

  • Asher

    Yeh, Whats wrong with this picture…The muslim Brotherhood visits the White House…So whose side does Obama take….pretty obvious he is advancing their cause. "You didn't build that." This persecutes any person who has been sucessful and helps to destroy the economy, destroying us from within.

    The Wright brothers never built the 1st airplanes, Henry Ford didn't build the Model T or Ford Motor Company, Steve Jobs didn't build computers or IPods, Crops just miracuously come up in fields without being planted, and if you run a business somebody else made it happen…Look at the Lunacy and deception here!

  • TomUSAFRet

    One should never assume that Obama is wrong in his thinking or his planning. He is not a fool. Obama hates America almost as much as he hates Israel. He is a radical Muslim with a hatred as deep as any of those who hijacked the airliners on 9/11/01.