Obama sides with Hamas against Israel [Updated: Netanyahu responds]
I was disgusted by President Obama’s speech yesterday urging Israel to surrender Old Jerusalem and the most sacred sites of Judaism and Christianity as appeasement to the Hamas-Fatah terror alliance. I suppose I really shouldn’t have been surprised by this. But even after two years of systematically destroying America with his radical policies, it shocks me when the President of the United States notably turns his back on our ally. He squarely tossed Israel under the bus to curry favor with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the Palestinian terrorists in Fatah and Hamas who are dedicated to Israel’s demise.
Netanyahu swiftly rejected Obama’s call for Israel to pull back to the borders that existed before the 1967 Six-Day War. Roughly translated from Hebrew, a statement from the Prime Minister’s office said that they appreciated Obama’s commitment to peace, but called the pullback to the 1967 borders “indefensible,” and said that the Palestinians were less than an honest partner in the peace process.
While the idea of using the 1967 borders as a starting point to negotiate land swaps for a final peace deal is not new, hearing an American president use those words sent chills through the Netanyahu government, which is loathe to even think the words “’67 borders.”
Every Israeli television channel carried the speech live and commentators did not have to wait for a formal reaction to the speech to comment that Netanyahu and his right-wing coalition government would feel both blindsided and abandoned by a U.S. administration that has never been viewed as a friend.
Terrorism analyst Erick Stakelbeck explains the significance of what Obama is asking Israel to give up:
…the President wants Israel to give up most of the West Bank and half of Jerusalem, including, presumably, any right to the holiest site in Judaism, the Western Wall, not to mention the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the site where many believe Jesus was crucified and buried. That also means, presumably, that Israel would have to give the Golan Heights back to Syria. After all, Israel gained that strategically vital region in 1967 as well. Israel, which is roughly the size of of New Jersey, would slowly creep towards looking more like tiny Delaware. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rightly responded to Obama’s speech by calling the pre-’67 borders “indefensible.”
Obama’s call for Israel to essentially leave itself open to Palestinian terror attacks by surrendering strategic land won in a defensive war was a stunning and unprecedented move by a U.S. president. Worse still, it was given just weeks after Israel’s supposed “partner for peace,” Fatah, struck a unity deal with the genocidal terrorist group Hamas to rule the Palestinian territories. Asking Israel to cede land under these conditions with no promise of security in return is pure madness.
Israel has paid dearly in blood for the territory it currently owns. From 1947–1948, Israel fought for and won its liberation in a bloody war against its Arab neighbors. And in 1967, as a result of the Six-Day War against Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, Israel gained control of the Gaza strip, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. Israel now owns those territories. They do not belong to the Palestinians. A return to pre-1967 lines would abandon significant Jewish population centers, such as those in the West Bank, beyond those lines and leave Jews in the hands of the Hamas-Fatah alliance.
Reminder: This is the same Hamas who declared “We are a nation that drinks blood, and we know that there is no blood better than the blood of Jews. We will not leave you alone until we have quenched our thirst with your blood, and our children’s thirst with your blood.”
Yeah, I don’t think it’s such a good idea for Israel to blindly trust these psychopaths. Or our president, apparently.
Throughout history, wars have been fought to establish nations’ borders and sovereignty. If we’re going to side with terrorists and ask Israel to continuously relinquish territory in order to “maintain peace” with those whose officially expressed goal is Israel’s utter annihilation, what’s next? Must the United States give North America back to England? Or to Mexico and the Native American Indian tribes? Must the geographical boundaries of the entire world be arbitrarily reset to what they were 100 years ago? 500 years ago? 2000 years ago? To do so is insanity. And in this case, it is an insult to all who fought and died to prevent the genocide of Israel.
This neverending call for the Jewish population to surrender more and more land is completely ludicrous. Every time Israel cedes territory in the name of peace, more is later demanded. Israel’s enemies have consistently proven — and unconditionally stated — that they won’t be satisfied until Israel is completely eradicated.
For President Obama to side with the alliance of Palestinian terrorists proves him to be an enemy of Israel.
RELATED: via The Weekly Standard…
Even liberal Alan Dershowitz believes the president made a mistake in his Middle East speech yesterday:
President Barack Obama should be commended for his emphasis on Israel’s security and his concern about Hamas joining the Palestinian Authority without renouncing its violent charter. But he made one serious mistake that tilts the balance against Israel in any future negotiations. Without insisting that the Palestinians give up their absurd claim to have millions of supposed refugees “return” to Israel as a matter of right, he insisted that Israel must surrender all of the areas captured in its defensive war of 1967, subject only to land swaps.
This formulation undercuts Security Council Resolution 242 (which I played a very small role in helping to draft). Resolution 242, passed unanimously by the Security Council in the wake of Israel’s 1967 victory, contemplated some territorial adjustments necessary to assure Israel’s security against future attacks. It also contemplated that Israel would hold onto the Western Wall, the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem and the access roads to Hebrew University, without the need for any land swaps. Land swaps would only be required to make up for any areas beyond those contemplated by Resolution 242. The Obama formulation would seem to require land swaps even for the Western Wall.
Peter Berkowitz believes that Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu “should reaffirm before Congress on May 24 that further progress toward peace depends above all on Palestinian recognition that the Jewish people, no less than the Palestinian people, have a right to national independence in a state of their own.”
—
UPDATE: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejects a return to the 1967 borders, via CNN:
Washington (CNN) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Friday firmly rejected President Barack Obama’s call for an approximate return to the borders that existed before the 1967 Middle East war, telling the U.S. leader that such a move is impossible in light of current security concerns and demographic realities.
The two leaders pledged to work together, however, in the pursuit of a comprehensive Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement.
“Israel wants peace. I want peace,” Netanyahu said while meeting with Obama at the White House. But “a peace based on illusions will crash eventually on the rocks of Middle Eastern reality,” he said.
Prime Minister Netanyahu’s statement comes at 7:15 in the video, and at 8:11 he schools Dear Leader about why his arbitrary call for 1967 borders won’t be happening.
12th gen. American, Constitutionalist, Harley-riding Texan, gun owner & NRA member, blogger, illustrator, Florida Gator alumnus. #TCOT






[...] of the White House, he’s actively insulted and alienated America’s allies and embraced our enemies. Now his administration is taking things a step further by classifying Israel — the only [...]