Obama Despises Israel Because He Despises the West

Loading

Ben Shapiro:

Barack Obama has done his best for nearly eight years to undermine the state of Israel. He’s signed a treaty that enshrines an Iranian path to a nuclear weapon while funding their global terrorist activities to the tune of tens of billions of dollars. He’s repeatedly undercut Israel’s image on the world stage, labeling Israel a mere outgrowth of the Holocaust and suggesting that Israeli intransigence stands as the chief obstacle to peace. He’s ushered Benjamin Netanyahu out the side door of the White House, attempted to undercut the prime minister’s speech before Congress, and then deployed an election team to Israel to try to defeat him in an election. Obama has tried to cut weapons shipments to Israel in the middle of a war against terrorists, forced Israel to apologize for stopping weapons shipments to Hamas terrorists, and funded the Palestinian terrorist unity government with American taxpayer dollars.

Nonetheless, Israel has survived.

Actually, Israel has thrived.

It’s thrived, in part, because Obama’s absolute incompetence has created an alliance of convenience between Israel and its erstwhile enemies. Saudi Arabia is more fearful of a nuclear Iran than of Israel; Egypt worries more about the Muslim Brotherhood than about Israel; Jordan frets over the Palestinians more than it does over Israel. Even the Palestinian Authority is more concerned about Hamas and ISIS than about Israel.

That means that there’s been very little pressure on Israel to make concessions to Palestinian terrorists in recent years.

Until now.

Obama’s animus for the state of Israel stretches beyond the typical internationalist leftist view of Israel as a colonialist outpost, a cancer growing in the heart of the Muslim Middle East. Most internationalist leftists think that Israel is the cause of Muslim ire, that if Israel were to disappear, suddenly the Muslim lands surrounding it would view the rest of the world with fresh, dewy eyes. This is the same general philosophy that blames the West for the problem of Islamic violence, that suggests that income maldistribution breeds discontent that in turn breeds terrorism.

Obama may think that, but that’s not what drives him.

Something deeper drives Obama when it comes to Israel. Why else would he spend the last few weeks of his presidency throwing gasoline on Israel and then lighting a match?

Some might suggest ideological kinship with Islam. Obama isn’t a Muslim, of course, but he has bragged often and loudly about his heartfelt connection to the religion — and Muslims the world over, by polling data, see Israel as the chief threat to global peace. There are points of commonality between Obama’s philosophy and that of Muslim hardliners: Both see the Crusades as the instigation of the Islamic world’s war on the West; both believe that Israel has destroyed Muslim solidarity in the Middle East; both attribute democratic feeling to Islamist movements.

Or perhaps even that explanation is insufficient: It doesn’t tell us why Obama is so eager to hand over control of Middle Eastern policy to Vladimir Putin and Russia, for example.

Here’s the most plausible explanation: Obama despises Israel because at root, Obama despises the traditional Judeo-Christian underpinning of Western civilization. He breaks down Bible believers into two categories: fools and liars. The fools are the “bitter clingers,” the idiot masses who fall into racism and xenophobia and Bible jabber because they’re poor and stupid. The liars are the self-interested characters who want to do what they want to do while citing the Bible for their support.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
4 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

A gypsy has predicted Obama will die on a jewish holiday, which one? One will be created.

Obama needs to crawl back under his rock again were tried of this no good little troll get back to your dark place troll before the sun turns you to stone and quit eating your peas with your knief

Obama believes the power and influence of the United States is oppressive and one of the negative results of that influence is the survival of Israel. Obama, like every other anti-Semite, would be ecstatic were Israel to be overrun by those who would slaughter the Jews and create another terrorist state.

The reference back to Wright and his “church” is indicative of Obama’s true feelings and goals and it certainly all adds up.

The left has always been in opposition to Israel and the Jewish people.

Why did FDR refuse Jewish refugees aboard the SS St. Louis?

SS St Louis: The ship of Jewish refugees nobody wanted

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-27373131

Franklin Roosevelt’s response to the Holocaust was epitomized by his June 1939 decision to refuse political asylum to more than 900 passengers aboard the German ocean liner St. Louis. The passengers, nearly all of them Jewish refugees, had the lights of Miami in sight when the United States government refused them permission to disembark. Roosevelt did not respond to pleas for help. The ship returned to Europe, and the Holocaust claimed more than a third of those who returned to the Continent.

http://www.historynet.com/fdr-st-louis.htm.

Why did the NY Slimes, a Jewish owned newspaper, bury articles during WWII regarding the extermination camps located in Eastern Europe?

Buried by the Times, a book by Laurel Leff, Associate Professor of journalism at Northeastern University, is a critical account of The New York Times’s coverage of Nazi atrocities against Jews that culminated in the Holocaust. The book argues that the news was often buried in the back pages in part due to the view about Judaism of the paper’s Jewish publisher, Arthur Hays Sulzberger. It also gives a critical look at the work of Times correspondents in Europe.

Placement of news articles

The placement of news articles in a newspaper is a good indication of the importance given by the newspaper to a story. The Times consistently placed major stories about the Nazi treatment of European Jews on back pages “by the soap and shoe polish ads.”[1] Leff found that during the period September 1939 to May 1945 very few stories about Jewish victims made the Times front page. “The story of the Holocaust—meaning articles that focused on the discrimination, deportation, and destruction of the Jews—made the Times front page just 26 times, and only in six of those stories were Jews identified on the front as the primary victims.” [2]