Obama is a Racist Jew Hater it's Official Obama’s refusal to veto anti-Israel U.N. vote ranked most anti-Semitic incident of 2016

[Hankelvis]

lock THEM up!

Obama’s dick-move refusal to veto anti-Israel U.N. vote ranked most anti-Semitic incident of 2016

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/dec/27/obama-refusal-israe...

President-elect Donald Trump criticized President Obama’s treatment of Israel Wednesday, urging Israel to “stay strong” until he takes office next month and accusing the president of erecting “roadblocks” to a smooth transition.

“We cannot continue to let Israel be treated with such total disdain and disrespect,” Mr. Trump said on Twitter. “They used to have a great friend in the U.S., but not anymore.”

His comments were prompted by the Obama administration’s decision last week not to veto a U.N. resolution condemning Israeli settlements in the West Bank. The move angered the Israeli government, which accused the administration of orchestrating the vote.

“The beginning of the end was the horrible Iran deal, and now this (U.N.)! Stay strong Israel, January 20th is fast approaching!” Mr. Trump said of his pending inauguration.

Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu jumped onto Twitter to thank Mr. Trump.

“President-elect Trump, thank you for your warm friendship and your clear-cut support for Israel!” he wrote, adding images of the U.S. and Israeli flags.

http://www.unwatch.org/western-democraces-boycott-uns-hate-israel-day/

------------------------------------------

OBAMA lied about being a Christian

and well, everything.

Dershowitz rips Obama for Israel ‘bait-and-switch’ at U.N.: ‘He just stabbed them in the back’

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/dec/27/alan-dershowitz-rip...

 View Comments Print

By Douglas Ernst - The Washington Times - Tuesday, December 27, 2016

Famous Harvard Law professor and attorney Alan Dershowitz is livid with President Obama for allegedly deceiving him in an Oval Office meeting.

The White House’s decision Friday to refuse to rebuke a United Nations Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlement construction drew the ire of longtime Israel supporter Mr. Dershowitz, who told Fox News Monday that in a private meeting with the president prior to Election Day, Mr. Obama vowed to “have Israel’s back.”

The council approved the resolution with 14 votes after a U.S. abstention.

“He called me into the Oval Office before the election and he said to me, ‘Alan, I want your support. And I have to tell you, I will always have Israel’s back,’” Mr. Dershowitz said of the president. “I didn’t realize that what he meant was that he would have their back to stab them in the backHe just stabbed them in the back.”

The lawyer said complicating such matters for a successor during a lame-duck period is the “most undemocratic thing a president can do.”

------------------------------------------

UN Jun 2016

Dictatorships Blast Israel

Syria accused Israel of exploiting “terrorism to continue to occupy parts of the Arab territories, including helping the terrorists and carrying them to their hospitals and providing them with health treatment.”

Qatar on behalf of the 22-nation Arab Group decried Israel’s “violence and terrorism worldwide.”

The Non-Aligned Movement, represented by Iran, condemned “Israel’s ongoing illegal colonization.”

Pakistan excoriated Israel for “its cynical discourse of being victimized and singled out at the UN.” The Jewish state was guilty of “occupation, apartheid and colonization.” Pakistan expressed solidarity with the Palestinian people “67 years after the Nakba,” as Israel’s “policies of apartheid continue.”

Meanwhile, later in the day, under another agenda item, Pakistan denounced the “blaming and shaming” of countries, an approach which “does not work.”

Qatar lamented Israel’s “apartheid wall, racist policies and continued attempt to spread terrorism.”

Ecuador thanked Palestine for sending doctors following the recent earthquake in the country, scrupulously avoiding any mention of the Israeli health team sent at the same time.

Saudi Arabia lambasted Israel for subjecting Palestinians to “the worst forms of terrorism, oppression and intimidation.” Saudi Arabia regretted that “some countries had decided to boycott this key agenda item.”

Algeria said that while “we are unable to enumerate Israel’s violations because of the number, we must at least mention some of them.”

Venezuela reproached Israel for its “colonialist policy as well as harassment and discrimination against people living in the Occupied Territories.”

Egypt denounced Israel’s “shameful” refusal to participate in the discussion.

Kuwait “categorically” condemned the “heinous crimes of Israel.”

Iraq decried Israel’s “policy of discrimination, collective punishment and killing”

Bahrain said that “Israel continues to kill Palestinians in an arbitrary manner, confiscating lands and destroying homes.”

Iran inveighed against Israel’s “indiscriminate use of force by Israeli forces against Palestinians and destruction of vital Palestinian infrastructure” as well as the “killing and extrajudicial killing of Palestinian civilians including children.”

Libya criticized Israel for “wanton murder” and the “Judaization of Jerusalem.”

Lebanon censured Israel for continuing “to flout all humanitarian values and international instruments,” casting it as “a real enemy to peace and security”

Oman blamed Israel for all the Middle East’s woes, suggesting that “peace and war in the region has the Palestinian problem at its core.” With no hint of irony, Oman condemned the EU’s absence as evidence of “a politicized alliance in support of one party.”

UN Watch Intervention by Executive Director Hillel Neuer 

Mr. President,

Citizens around the world listening to today’s debate have reason to be confused. For never before in the history of the United Nations have the pronouncements made here been more disconnected to reality.

In here, we have been told by various Middle Eastern nations that Israel is the greatest violator of the rights of health, women, equality and the environment.

In reality, Israel, with all its flaws, is the only country in the Middle East whose hospitals treat Palestinians and Israelis; Jews, Muslims and Christians; the only country in the Middle East that respects women’s rights; the only country in the Middle East that respects the rights of minorities; and the only country in the Middle East that is a world leader in developing vital technologies such as desalination, water treatment, and drip irrigation.

In here, Syria, Libya, Yemen are some of the countries that lecture on human rights. In reality, many of these are not even countries any more.

Mr. President, Let us be clear. Israel should be subject to criticism like any other country. But Israel is not treated like other countries. No other country has an entire agenda item devoted to it—not even Syria, not even North Korea.

There is, however, one silver lining today—the countries who did not speak. Democracies, like France, Germany, UK, Canada, made the decision not to take the floor because this agenda Item singles out one country, Israel, for what Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon himself denounced as selective and unfair treatment. Today is just one of many devices employed here at the UN that cross the line from legitimate criticisms of Israel’s policies to attempts to delegitimize the state of Israel itself.

Here at the United Nations, where the majority faction has the power to decide whatever it wants, and where the minority faction has no judicial recourse, no right of appeal, no remedy, democracies have protested this injustice in the only way possible.

In 1968, René Cassin, at the 20th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which he helped to create, left early in protest at the singling out of Israel.

Today, on the 10th anniversary of the Human Rights Council, the free world has protested the vilification of Israel by not showing up at all.

Thank you, Mr. President.

http://www.unwatch.org/western-democraces-boycott-uns-hate-israel-day/

[Hankelvis]

Israel urges Obama to stop diplomatic ‘assault’ amid fears of more U.N. action

Netanyahu’s spokesman says there is evidence of White House collusion on U.N. anti-Israel resolution

By Valerie Richardson - The Washington Times - Wednesday, December 28, 2016

An Israeli spokesman called Tuesday for President Obama to stop his diplomatic “assault” on the Middle East nation and warned that last week’s anti-Israel U.N. resolution may be only the beginning.

David Keyes, spokesman for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said his government is concerned that the Obama administration is scrambling to put its stamp on Israeli foreign policy before President-elect Donald Trump takes office.

The White House sparked a bipartisan outcry Friday by refusing to veto a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlements.

“We actually believe this may be the first of another series of pushes before the Obama administration leaves office,” Mr. Keyes said on “The Kelly File” on Fox News.

Reports out of Israel say Mr. Netanyahu fears that Secretary of State John Kerry may seek a Security Council resolution to enshrine the administration’s vision for an Israeli-Palestinian accord before Mr. Trump takes office.

Mr. Kerry is scheduled to make a policy speech Wednesday on the longstanding conflict, which could lay the groundwork for a Jan. 15 summit in France on Israeli-Palestinian relations.

[Hankelvis]

U.N.’s anti-Israel vote fuels Republican calls to defund world body

By Valerie Richardson - The Washington Times - Tuesday, December 27, 2016

The resolution condemning Israeli settlements in the West Bank could be the most expensive vote ever taken at the United Nations.

The Obama administration ignited an uproar on the right Friday after refusing to veto Resolution 2234, sending U.S.-Israeli relations into a tailspin and fueling calls from key Republicans and conservative leaders to strike back by pulling U.S. funding.

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan vowed to “reverse the damage done” to the U.S.-Israel alliance, while Republican Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina have called for stripping funding from the U.N. until the resolution is repealed.

“Twenty-two percent of the United Nations budget comes from the American taxpayer, and I’m going to lead the charge to withhold funding until they repeal this resolution,” Mr. Graham, South Carolina Republican, told CNN.

Adding to the furor are top Israeli officials who say they have “clear” and “ironclad” evidence that the Obama administration orchestrated the resolution behind the scenes, which White House officials have denied.

Ron Dermer, Israeli ambassador to the U.S., said Monday he was interested in working with the incoming Trump administration and Congress on the defunding issue, saying, “I think there’s a lot of changes that can happen at the United Nations.”

Obama’s team cancels Muslim registry to foil Trump’s ‘extreme vetting’ plans

By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Thursday, December 22, 2016

The Obama administration rushed Thursday to cancel a program set up in the wake of Sept. 11 to track and deport illegal immigrant Muslim and Arab men, hoping to hinder President-elect Donald Trump’s plans to impose “extreme vetting” on Muslim visitors.

Civil rights and immigrant groups cheered the move and said they hoped it would force a rethink by Mr. Trump who, while softening some of his other positions postelection, has not budged on his call for more thorough checks on those coming into the U.S. from terrorism-connected countries.

The National Security Entry-Exit Registration System had been dormant for years, but activists demanded that the Obama administration take it off the books entirely. They feared Mr. Trump could use the program as a shortcut to starting his own vetting.

“Keeping NSEERS out of Trump’s hands was the right thing to do,” said David Leopold, a prominent immigration advocate and former head of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

The Bush administration set up the program in 2002 as a way to track Muslim men in the U.S. When it was fully operational, the program required new arrivals to turn over extra biographical information and required those planning to stay more than 30 days to provide even more data, including where they planned to stay in the U.S. Those already in the country were also asked to register.

The goal was to give authorities a way to keep tabs on potential bad actors such as the 19 Sept. 11 hijackers who came into the U.S. legally but stayed after their visas expired, which made them illegal immigrants at the time of the attacks.

[charles royer]

Ted Cruz Launches Movement to Defund U.N. Over Obama’s Israel Betrayal
After the United Nations’ perfidy last week, throwing Israel to the wolves yet again in a resolution condemning the Jewish state, plenty of conservatives were furious.

They were even more furious that the Obama administration did nothing about it, instead abstaining from voting on the agreement they could have vetoed.
http://conservativetribune.com/cruz-obamas-israel-betrayal/?utm_sou...

[Hankelvis]

Obama is a piece of...work.

[Rhodes]

Most people, I among them, do not hate Jews and really do not think much of them at all.

I also do not think we have any more business being involved with them than we do the Suadi's.
The Nazis carried out exterminations on many groups, where is their country as recompense?

There is not even a biblical case to be made among Christians because not one person calling themselves Jew can even name the House to which they belong much less their bloodline. You bible scholars out there know this is critical. Rev 2:9 warns us of this and history confirms it.

God needs no help from us to accomplish His plan, we just make a mess of it anyway.

Far as BO is concerned hell he just hates everybody apparently. Going to be a long 3 weeks... or more

[Hankelvis]

[Palestine was not a thing until terrorists created it in 1972 (Yassir Arafat) much like Black Lives Matter pretends millions of blacks are mowed down by racist cops every day.

They are terrorists, that is what they do, think and act differently than other people.]

link:

http://www.adl.org/israel-international/israel-middle-east/content/...

WASHINGTON (CNN) – The Obama administration would veto any UN resolution that dictated a peace solution or recognized a Palestinian state, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes said Wednesday.

Rhodes was speaking hours after Secretary of State John Kerry strongly criticized Israel’s decision to build settlements in the West Bank, saying it was ruining the prospect of a Palestinian state.

“So just to be clear here, when (Kerry) says, ‘These are not the choices we will make,’ which is kind of vague, is he saying that the US would veto any resolution in the UN which might dictate a peace solution or might recognize a Palestinian state?” CNN’s Jake Tapper asked Rhodes on “The Lead.”

“Yes,” Rhodes responded. “We’ve made that clear over and over, Jake.”

Earlier on Wednesday, Kerry warned that a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict is “now in serious jeopardy.” He also defended the US decision last week to abstain from a vote on a UN resolution condemning Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Wednesday that Israelis are worried about a UN resolution recognizing a Palestinian state or codifying a peace process that the US would allow. He’s also said the US was behind last week’s UN resolution, an accusation Rhodes called a “distraction” on Wednesday.

“We own the fact that we abstained from this 

http://www.marklevinshow.com/news/wh-says-it-would-veto-un-resoluti...

http://thelawfareproject.org/attorneys/

http://thelawfareproject.org/unsettled-global-study-settlements-occ...

http://thelawfareproject.org/ngo-demonize-israel/

Experts: Over 200 US-approved textbooks teach Palestinians to kill Jews

http://thelawfareproject.org/experts-200-us-approved-textbooks-teac...

Over 200 US-government approved textbooks used in hundreds of Palestinian UNRWA-sponsored schools are reportedly teaching Arab children between the first and ninth grades to kill Israelis, and sacrifice themselves as martyrs to drive Jews out of the country.

The violent narrative can be found in 240 books – ranging from civics to mathematics – in over 400 UNRWA schools in the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, said experts at a Tuesday conference for the Center for Near East Policy Research in downtown Jerusalem.

David Bedein, who heads the research institute and Israel Resource News Agency, said the disputed books were purchased from a warehouse owned by the Palestinian Authority and then carefully vetted by a team of researchers.

Despite repeated reassurances from the Palestinian Authority’s minister of education that all the textbooks would teach a “united curriculum,” Bedein said the findings showed a central theme: “the preparation of the children for war.”

Indeed, among the myriad of examples presented from the books, one is a math word problem asking students to use variables, including the number of Jews killed during the first and second intifadas.

Another was the following excerpt from a poem:

Hearing [weapons] clash is pleasant to my ear

And the flow of blood gladdens my soul
As well as a body thrown upon the ground
Skirmished over by the desert predator
By your life! This is the death of men
And whoever asks for a noble death – this is it!”

“We have copies of the books and went through them, and what’s happening is very clear.

The American government told Israel that it had checked out the school books and that everything is fine, but it’s not,” said Bedein.

Read the full article at JPost

[Rhodes]

You know my position on these people and their little spat over crap land.

Frankly the things taught in Orthodox Jewish schools is not much better. As the region goes further into Orthodoxy and Radicalism (real thing?) the masks of civility do drop and hard.

Both of these societies see an elite political position for themselves over others not of their faith and that includes us. Our lives have less value than theirs (if they assign any value at all) by religious and as is predictable state law in places.

My friends both sides see us as mere tools to be used and discarded, possibly useful animals and I see no gain for my side in either, and sound reason to be highly wary of both. Just because one wields a firearm and the other a banking system does not matter a bit. 

If Paul could shake off the idea of Jewish superiority from his feet how can we do any different?

Heck and those were all real Jews.

Like 99% of the happenings in the world , stay out of it are words lost in the wind of American empire.

[Hankelvis]

They use your love to kill you.

[Hankelvis]

Christians are being burned alive in locked caskets, tortured, and beheaded. Women are raped for refusing to renounce Christ. Children are crucified. Christians are pleading for help, "No one cares about us like we are not human."

[Hankelvis]

January 1, 2017

Since when did the Palestinians become entitled to a state?

By Ted Belman

As Newt Gingrich said in 2011, “The Palestinians are an invented people.”

In 1964, the Palestine Liberation Organization was formed to liberate Palestine through armed struggle.

But it took years for the notion of a Palestinian people to crystalize. 

In 1967, they were not recognized as such, nor were they considered a party to the conflict.  Security Council Resolution 242 passed after the ’67 war, made no mention of them.

The US as a matter of policy, promoted the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people and forced Israel to accept them in peace discussions at the Madrid Conference in 1991.

In 1993, Israel signed along with them the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements  (Oslo I)  and in 1995 the Interim Agreement on the West Bank (Oslo II)  but these Accords made no mention of giving them a state.

Surprisingly, President George W. Bush gave it the first official nod for the first time in his vision speech of 2002. This speech came about in response to enormous pressure from Saudi Arabia which was demanding the creation of such a state.

Even so, it was conditioned on the Palestinians fighting terror, not aiding it or abetting it. In fact, there were many other pre-conditions to the creation of the state.  But the US and the world quickly forgot about the preconditions and went forward with the idea that the Palestinians were entitled to a state.

Then in 2004, Bush gave a very important letter of assurances to PM Sharon in order to support his plans for disengagement.

“The United States will do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any other plan. Under the roadmap, Palestinians must undertake an immediate cessation of armed activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere, and all official Palestinian institutions must end incitement against Israel. The Palestinian leadership must act decisively against terror, including sustained, targeted, and effective operations to stop terrorism and dismantle terrorist capabilities and infrastructure. Palestinians must undertake a comprehensive and fundamental political reform that includes a strong parliamentary democracy and an empowered prime minister.

“Second, there will be no security for Israelis or Palestinians until they and all states, in the region and beyond, join together to fight terrorism and dismantle terrorist organizations. The United States reiterates its steadfast commitment to Israel's security, including secure, defensible borders, and to preserve and strengthen Israel's capability to deter and defend itself, by itself, against any threat or possible combination of threats.[..]

“As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338.”

In this letter, which amounted to a contract, Bush committed the US to prevent any other plan being imposed.  He also committed the US to Israel’s security and reiterated Israel’s right to defensible borders. By affirming Res 242, he was affirming that Israel need not vacate 100% of the land.

Within a couple of months of President Obama’s inauguration in 2009, he repudiated this contract. In response to this and other indicators, I wrote that Obama intended to impose a solution on Israel. I explained on these pages in 2009 that he had to repudiate it because the contract if allowed to stand, committed the US to oppose the imposition of any other plan.

Obama then forced Netanyahu to recognize a Palestinian right to a state in his Bar Ilan Speech in June 2009 in which Netanyahu said:

“In my vision of peace, in this small land of ours, two peoples live freely, side-by-side, in amity and mutual respect. Each will have its own flag, its own national anthem, its own government. Neither will threaten the security or survival of the other.”

He went on to stipulate two demands or preconditions: namely the new state must be demilitarized and must recognize Israel as the State of the Jewish people. This was the first time Netanyahu or his party embraced the two state solution. Obama was satisfied even with all the pre-conditions and stipulations. He got what he wanted. He would ignore the stipulations. And this resolution does just that.

Next, he backed the Arab Peace Initiative, which called for 100% withdrawal, contrary to Res 242, albeit with mutually agreed swaps.

Then he demanded a complete building freeze, even in Jerusalem. Even so he could not get any concessions from either the Arab League or from the PA as compensation. Having no other choice, he backed the PA’s demand that, as the price of the PA entering negotiations, Israel should release over 100 Arab prisoners with blood on their hands. Israel agreed, though no one had any expectations that the PA would compromise. This prisoner release was in effect another freebie for them.

After strenuous efforts to achieve an agreement, Obama backed off but demanded that there be a continued freeze and nothing be done to make untenable the two-state solution.

But he hadn’t given up. By engineering the passage of Security Council Resolution 2334 declaring “the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity” and demanding 100% withdrawal, he, in effect, was getting the Security Council to back his parameters for a peace agreement, namely ’67 lines plus swaps, with a divided Jerusalem.

This, in other words, is a demand by the international community that all lands east of the ’67 lines be free of Jews (judenrein, as the Nazis used to put it).  That would include the Jewish neighborhoods in the eastern part of Jerusalem.  Thus, the lands east of the ’67 lines must be ethnically cleansed of the 900,000 Jews that live there. A majority of which Jews were born there.

The Security Council underlined  “that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations….”  Thus the Jews were denied the Temple Mount, the Old City, including the Jewish Quarter, the Holy Basin and the Western Wall, otherwise known as the Kotel.

This resolution completely overturned Res 242, which was passed 50 years ago and which was the cornerstone of all subsequent initiatives like the Oslo Accords, the Roadmap and the Bush letter of ’04. Throughout this entire period, all US presidents stressed the need for direct negotiations to settle all disputes. Any concessions that Israel made along the way were conditioned on the basis of direct negotiations to come.

This resolution removed from such negotiations, the ultimate borders, the fate of the settlements, the requirement that the borders be defensible and whether to create a state.

In the Oslo Accords, Israel made major concessions to the Palestine Liberation Organization representing the Arabs by inviting them into the territories and granting them autonomy in Areas A and B as demarcated by the Accords, believing that all Israeli safeguards in the Accords would protect her. Keep in mind that the Accords did not promise the Arabs a state nor did they proscribe settlement activity.

Prior to signing these Accords, Israel insisted that the PLO accept Res 242 as binding. This was important to Israel because it stipulated that Israel need only withdraw to “recognized and secure” borders. This new resolution negates all Israeli safeguards but not the concessions made by Israel. To do so is unconscionable.

On the one hand, the UN continually accuses Israel of violating international law and declares the settlements illegal by international law; yet, on the other hand, it ignores salient facts and binding contracts. The resolution thus violates the international legal order itself. The UN should be governed by law not by caprice.

Another example of invoking a law that doesn’t exist is the clause which cites “the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force”.  Howard Adelman makes short shrift of this proposition. There is no such law.

This resolution is built upon the proposition that the settlements are illegal by international law. But what if they aren’t?  The UN holds that the lands in question are subject to the Fourth Geneva Convention, which applies whenever a High Contracting Party (HCP)  i.e., a country which signed the convention, belligerently occupies the land of another HCP. But in this case the lands in question were not the land of a HCP but were unallocated land under the Palestine Mandate.

PM Netanyahu appointed a commission consisting of one retired High Court Judge and two senior lawyers to study the matter. In 2014, it issued the Levy Report, which concluded that the FGC does not apply. But even if it does apply, it doesn’t prevent Jews from voluntarily settling on the lands. And keep in mind that the Palestine Mandate gave Jews the right of close settlement on these lands, which right has never been terminated, nor can it be.

This matter has never been determined by a court of competent jurisdiction and thus the UN has no right to treat it as settled law.

To use the vernacular, Israel is being railroaded into creating a Palestinian state on all the territories captured 50 years ago, contrary to law, the facts, and existing agreements. Everything is twisted to label Israel a violator of law, when in fact it is the UN that is the violator. All this on behalf of an invented people who didn’t exist 50 years ago.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/01/since_when_did_the_...