Tag Archives: Netanyahu

Obama Snubs Paris, Disses War on Terror

President Obama snubbed Paris – and the world – by refusing to participate in a truly historic gathering of world leaders who met in Paris to show solidarity against Islamic terrorism.



The world united against terrorism!

And the President watches a football game while history is in the making!

A headline highlighting this truly global event proclaimed, “Paris Is the Capital of the World Today.” But Obama missed the memo.

Obama refuses to even admit that we are at war with terrorists of any kind, let alone to identify their source and motivation. Indeed, Obama defends the perpetrators of evil around the world. Failing to identify and name the enemy, Obama fails to offer a strategy. Indeed, we see this administration giving lip service to the defense of the nation while failing to act.

Obama would rather appease and negotiate with terrorists than fight them. Obama and his Kumbaya comrades think we can live in peace with people who want to destroy us. He, and they, prefer to empathize with and accommodate the enemy.

At the same time, Obama is vociferously opposed to Israel. What he should be doing, instead, is learning from the Israelis how to fight terrorists! Instead, Obama makes war on global warming.

Millions of people participated in this astonishing global rally, representing a sea change in world opinion, but Obama fears giving his imprimatur to the movement. He does not want to validate what he opposes.

Obama certainly does not oppose Islamic terrorism. At another time, in a different war, Obama would be called a fifth columnist.

Obama Targets Israel

Is Barack Hussein Obama “the first Jewish president” as some contend?

A lengthy feature in New York Magazine quoted White House counsel Abner Mikva, who claimed in 2008, “When this all is over, people are going to say that Barack Obama is the first Jewish president.”

The columnist concluded, “’The first Jewish president?’ Maybe not. But certainly a president every bit as pro-Israel as the country’s own prime minister – and, if you look from the proper angle, maybe even more so.”


If President Obama is so pro-Israel then why is he so anti-Israel?

Obama Anti-Israel

Author and columnist Ken Blackwell disagrees. In the wake of Obama’s Jakarta trip, Blackwell wrote:

“With his remarks in Jakarta, Indonesia, President Obama made history once again. Sadly, it’s a most unenviable title. I believe he is the most anti-Israel President in U.S. history.”

“He used his Jakarta platform to complain about Israel building apartments for her growing population. Where? In Jerusalem, the capital of Israel.”

“To make matters even worse, Jakarta is a city no Israeli is allowed to enter! The symbolism of saying what he said in the country and city where he said it is simply atrocious.”

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R – MN) concurs, calling the “first anti-Israel president in American history.”

Bachmann recognizes the flawed nature of Obama’s worldview, explaining, “In their fantasy world, a smaller, diminished, less powerful United States is somehow supposed to bring about global tranquility.” Mocking Obama, she said. “Well Mr. Obama, Mrs. Clinton, we want our 1980s foreign policies back. Peace through strength!”

For Obama, America is the problem. For Obama, Israel is the problem.

An Obama acolyte recently reversed reality, using an Orwellian formulation, to assert that “to be pro-Israel is to be in favor of liberating the country from its occupation of Palestinians.”

To be against Israel is to be for Israel reminds me of the infamous claim “It became necessary to destroy the town to save it.”

Proposed Sanctions Against Israel

Now Obama is considering sanctions on Israel.

Weekly Standard investigative reporter Steve Hayes finds it remarkable that the White House is “refusing to deny that the United States is considering sanctioning one of its closest allies facing an existential threat, daily threats, from Iran but you have the White House on Capitol Hill lobbying now against any additional sanctions [against Iran] because it’s going to blow up those negotiations that constitute the threat Israel is facing. The levels of idiocy on this I think are befuddling.”[1]

As JihadWatch notes, “While he hands Iran approval for its nuclear program on a silver platter, Obama is apparently considering sanctions against Israel. He turns allies into enemies and enemies into allies – the latter in his eyes only, not theirs.”

Obama – Netanyahu Rivalry

President Obama has had a stormy and icy relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu throughout his presidency. As CNN notes, they have squabbled “over peace talks, wars in Lebanon and Gaza, settlements and Israeli military action in places like Iraq and Syria.”

CNN concludes:

“For Obama, the Iranian nuclear challenge is another crisis to be managed, and a test case of his doctrine that the United States should be prepared to talk to its enemies. But people familiar with Netanyahu’s worldview say he believes history has handed him the role of delivering the Jewish state from an existential threat posed by Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.”

But there’s far more to it than that. There are distinct ideological and (dare I say it) theological differences between these two heads of state.

Obama is Pathologically Pro-Islam

Is Obama really pro-Israel? The first Jewish president? Hardly.

Obama has Muslim roots and Muslim sympathies. Throughout his political career, Obama has defended and extoled Islam at every turn, while expressing either disdain or hostility toward Christianity and Judaism.

Obama finds a strange moral equivalency between Israelis conducting defensive strikes and Palestinians engaging in terrorism. Strikingly, Obama always sides with the Palestinians and actually blames Israelis for the deaths of civilians used as human shields by Palestinians.

Throughout his presidency, Obama has insisted on a Middle East peace process but taken the side of the Palestinians, insisting that Israel stop its settlement program – as a precondition to those very peace talks. Obama also favors a suicidal return to pre-1967 borders.

Despite the fact that the Palestinians have consistently broken its cease-fire agreements with Israel, Obama blames Israel.

Obama opposes Israel in large measure because of his Muslim roots and because Israel is an American ally who shares American values.

Americans have supported Israel since its birth in 1948. Obama – hailed the first Jewish president – has broken with that long tradition and is risking both the demise of Israel and civilization as we know it.


Obama’s America – Fundamentally Flawed” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-1h.

Obama’s Muslim Roots and Sympathies” at http://t.co/3FIt1xmLqV.

Complete timeline of Obama’s anti-Israel hatred at http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/03/20/a-complete-timeline-of-obamas-anti-israel-hatred/.


[1]               Steve Hayes, Special Report, FNC, 12/5/14.

Need a Strategy? Learn from the Experts!

Last week, President Obama placed a Wanted Ad through the international media.

WANTED: A Strategy!


This essay addresses proven models for success.

Islamic jihadists have targeted the United States for destruction since the 1970s. Al-Qaeda shocked America on 9/11 – a wakeup call to the world. George W. Bush listened and responded.

Barack Hussein Obama denied the existential terrorist threat, relinquished victories gained in the “war on terror” (the war that dare not even be named) and nurtured the growth of Al-Qaeda’s offspring: ISIS.

ISIS is a product of Obama’s policies.

ISIS is a terrorist nation state with imperialist designs, one which seeks a worldwide caliphate and the destruction of all in its path. Including (especially) the United States.

But just yesterday, the State Department refused to admit the self-evident truth that we are at war.

Obama lives in a fantasy world where he believes that America is stronger than ever. He holds America in such low esteem and so highly regards the rest of the world that he swapped five terrorist leaders for one deserter.

Clearly, this man’s view of the world and of America’s place in that world differs markedly from most Americans. But Obama didn’t ask for a new worldview, he asked for a strategy.

WANTED: A Strategy!

Let’s give Obama a strategy.

Overwhelming Force

Gen. Colin Powell was a hero in the first Gulf War which was decisively won by using overwhelming force to win. (Powell’s failure to actually remove Hussein when he had the chance paved the way for future hostilities.)

The typical mantra from the far left demands “proportional response.” If you’re going to fight, fight to win. Do you recall that memorable Sean Connery line in the Untouchables? About bringing a knife to a gunfight?

Perhaps you were looking for something more nuanced?

Look to Cameron

British Prime Minister David Cameron has begun taking decisive action against the existential threat posed by ISIS.

First, Cameron recognized the threat facing his people (and civilization itself), clearing identifying it as “Islamist extremism.”

Second, Cameron has warned the public, raising the threat level to “severe.”

Third, Cameron announced that military action is an option (in contrast to the White House, which likes to announce what is not on the table), preparing his citizens for a potentially long conflict (as Churchill did prior to and during World War II).

Fourth, Cameron increased border security by tightening control over passports to ensure ISIS fighters cannot return to the U.K.

Fifth, Cameron tightened and improved existing anti-terrorism measures.

Look to Bibi

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been combating terrorists longer than Millennials have been alive. Indeed, Israel has been fighting for its survival from the day of its birth.

Israelis live under the threat of terrorist attacks on a daily basis. They know they are in a war and that their enemies pose an existential threat.

As part of his comprehensive strategy, Netanyahu has secured the border. By doing so, the enemy is deprived of one means of invading Israel and logistical lines of support are thwarted.

Although ever willing to live in peace with its neighbors, Israel forcefully defends itself against aggression, militarily when warranted. Netanyahu knows that appeasement never works.

Netanyahu – using every form of media available to himclearly articulates his strategy, explaining the threats his nation faces and why he is responding as he does. Netanyahu effectively expresses his views and counters the propaganda of his enemies.

It would behoove President Obama to emulate the attitudes and actions of Cameron and Netanyahu, but before he can do that he must take the terrorist threat seriously. That will require a paradigm shift in his thinking, something which, I suspect, he does not have the courage to contemplate.

Update: In a joint press conference (1/16/15), David Cameron and Barack Obama displayed a dramatic divergence of views regarding the recent Islamic terrorist attack in Paris and the threat posed by Islamic jihad worldwide.

As reported by the Daily Mail, “Obama pointedly refused to call ISIS terrorists Muslims” while “Cameron warned of a global ‘Islamist extremist terrorist threat,’ condemning the perversion of Islam in the strongest possible terms three times and using the word ‘poisonous’ to describe the radicalized ideology five times.”

“Obama would not refer to the religion of ISIS militants during the White House news conference but at one point called them ‘fanatics.’”

Cameron spoke with passionate zeal, saying “The world is sickened by this terrorism,” and denouncing “this poisonous, radical death cult of a narrative.”

Cameron added, “We face a poisonous and fanatical ideology that wants to pervert one of the world’s major religions, Islam, and create conflict, terror and death.” He expressly warned of the global existential threat posed by Islamic jihad: “We do face a very serious Islamist extremist terrorist threat in Europe, in America, across the world. And we have to be incredibly vigilant in terms of that threat.”

In contrast, Obama spoke with measured caution, almost disinterested in the subject at hand, refusing to admit the religious nature of these terrorist attacks.