–
:quality(85)//s3.amazonaws.com/arc-wordpress-client-uploads/infobae-wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/26171108/Netanyahu-1920-1.jpg)
——

BIBI KNOWS PRESIDENT OBAMA HAD A DIFFERENT ATTITUDE TOWARDS ISRAEL THAN BUSH!!!
“Prime Minister,” said the caller, “there’s been a botch-up. Our forces met resistance from Turkish militants armed with iron bars and knives. One of them grabbed a weapon from one of the commandos. Our guys barely extricated themselves, and they killed nine Turks in the process.” I called my staff. “Pack up. We’re going back to Israel.” I apologized to Harper and asked our embassy in Washington to apologize to President Obama, whom I had hoped to see briefly after my visit to Canada. I would call him from the plane. That turned out to be mission impossible. The plane I was flying was dilapidated and lacked proper means of communication. So much so that in one of our repeatedly interrupted calls, Obama quipped, “Bibi, why don’t you guys buy a new plane and I’ll pay for the communication gear.” When we finally were able to talk, it was far from amusing. The conversation occurred on a secure call in a hangar while on a refueling stopover in Toronto. I asked Ron Dermer to join me. The UN Security Council was rushing to judgment. They were about to issue a presidential statement directed against Israel and calling for an investigation of the incident, just hours after it took place and well before any reliable information reached it. The IDF video showing the IHH attack on our forces made no impression on them. I urged Obama to ask the Security Council members to wait until the facts were established. If they didn’t agree, I asked him to veto the resolution. Obama said he couldn’t apply the veto. “If I do that, America will be isolated,” said the president. I looked at Ron. We were both thinking the same thing. When a heavy fog descended over the English Channel, cutting off Britain from Europe, Churchill declared, “The continent is isolated.” Now we heard the leader of the greatest superpower the world has ever known expressing the reverse sentiment. The US had traditionally vetoed outrageous UN resolutions against Israel and was seldom concerned that it would be “isolated” as a result. It shielded Israel from UN excesses not only because they were patently absurd, but also because it believed that those taking potshots at Israel were also attacking America. Now that American shield was removed as a result of Obama’s concern over America’s international legitimacy. He didn’t see the US as taking a leading position and having the other nations follow. Rather, he felt that America should “lead from behind.” I decided on two courses of action. The first was to establish our own independent inquiry, led by former Supreme Court justice Jacob Turkel and staffed by respected Israeli legal scholars and notable figures from abroad, including the Irish Nobel Peace Prize laureate David Trimble and the former Canadian military judge advocate general Ken Watkin. The committee’s three-hundred-page report exonerated Israel and helped defuse some of the slander. It found that the actions of the Israeli Navy in the raid and Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza were both legal under international law,1 and accused the “IHH activists” of having armed themselves and conducting hostilities “in an organized manner.”2 My second course of action was to speak confidentially to Ban Ki-moon, the secretary-general of the United Nations. Meeting in his office at UN headquarters in New York, he sought to reassure me.
REVIEW OF “Bibi: My Story – by Benjamin Netanyahu” Part 6 Obama administration didn’t understand that BIBI was looking out for the security of Israel first and foremost!!!!
The Specter Of Barack Obama’s Deeply Held Anti-Israel Ideology Hovers Over Israeli Attacks
Obama embraced antisemites, steeped himself in anti-American ideas, and cozied up to Iran — and now he leaves a violent legacy.
–
As of Monday morning, two days after Hamas committed horrible atrocities across Israel, the worst single attack in the country’s history, former President Barack Obama had yet to issue any statement about the attacks. There could be any number of benign reasons for that, but it’s also true that Obama’s relationship with Israel would lead one to speculate about some not-so-benign motivations.
Certainly, there are many legitimate questions to ask about the government of Israel’s behavior, the limits of America’s national interest in the region, and whether Protestant America’s fetishization of the “Holy Land” keeps us from seeing issues in the region with moral clarity. However, any fair-minded critique of Israel is a far cry from Obama’s well-established and radical views on the Middle East that stem, by his own admission, from his affinity for radicals such as Frantz Fanon, whose brain-dead swagger produced such sentiments as “decolonization reeks of red-hot cannonballs and bloody knives.”
And it’s probably time to admit that, while attempting to bury their aims under layers of academic sophistication, Obama and his acolytes used his presidency to destabilize the Middle East in the service of a left-wing ideology that excuses antisemitism and justifies terrorist violence.
In August, Tablet magazine published a much-discussed, comprehensive interview between David Samuels and Obama biographer David Garrow. The biggest headlines that emerged from that interview had to do with Garrow uncovering letters where Obama wrote in detail about his gay sex fantasies. But buried beneath that revelation was a substantial discussion of Obama’s anti-Israel politics. Or as Tablet’s David Samuels put it, “Obama’s hostility to American exceptionalism also seemed linked to his hostility to Israel, or more specifically to America’s identification with Israel.” As Samuels went on to note, the inexplicable fixation Obama had with making Iran — the world’s leading state sponsor of terror attacks, and the same country behind Hamas’ atrocities in Israel over the weekend — a regional hegemon in spite of Israeli (and Saudi) objections is ample proof of that.
But historically, it’s worth noting his animus is deeply personal, and not some misguided policy objective. In his biography, Dreams of My Father, he told a very self-serving version of how he came to break up with an early girlfriend, Sheila Miyoshi Jager — essentially, she rejected Obama’s “incipient embrace of Black racial consciousness” in favor of her own “white-identified liberal universalism.” However, Garrow tracked down Jager, who’s now a respected professor at Oberlin, and she told a very different version of events.
At the time they were dating, a Chicago mayoral aide named Steve Cokely, in conjunction with notorious Nation of Islam founder Louis Farrakhan, had “accused Jewish doctors in Chicago of infecting Black babies with AIDS as part of a genocidal plot against African Americans,” and she broke up with Obama after he pointedly refused to condemn Cokely’s obvious antisemitism. (Obama would later meet up with the execrable Farrakhan when he was a senator and take a smiling photo with him; the photo was taken in 2005 and mysteriously was never released until 2018.)
Three more controversies that stem from his 2008 presidential run stand out here. First was the Jeremiah Wright controversy — Obama had long attended a church in Chicago where the pastor, the aforementioned Wright, had said a lot of controversial left-wing things from the pulpit, including that America invited the attacks of 9/11 on itself, and he dabbled in antisemitism. The controversy forced Obama to distance himself from Wright, and a few months after Obama was elected, Wright blamed “them Jews” for keeping him from Obama. After years of exposure to Wright’s incendiary rhetoric, the idea Obama didn’t realize he was antisemitic until he ran for president is preposterous.
Then there was the issue of Obama’s friendship with Rashid Khalidi, who is now a professor at Columbia University, though he formerly worked at the University of Chicago with the future president. Khalidi is cited in press reports as a spokesman for the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) terror group in the early ’80s, though Khalidi claims this characterization is inaccurate. It’s undeniable, however, that Khalidi has made numerous controversial remarks over the years justifying Palestinian violence.
Eventually, as Obama’s 2008 campaign was heating up, The Los Angeles Times wrote a story headlined “Allies of Palestinians see a friend in Obama,” noting Obama’s especially close and warm relationship with Khalidi. The Los Angeles Times had a videotape of Obama speaking at an event honoring Khalidi where many of the speakers attacked Israel. However, despite calls to release the video of the event with Khalidi, the Times never released the video publicly, noting that “Obama publicly expresses a pro-Israel viewpoint that pleases many Jewish leaders.” Obama’s track record would certainly put that disingenuous assumption to the test.
Finally, there was Obama’s embrace of Robert Malley. In December of 2007, the Obama campaign put out a press release listing Malley as a campaign adviser. Malley had previously worked on Middle East issues for the Clinton administration, though he was not well-liked by the Jewish community because his father, journalist Simon Malley, was a friend and sympathizer of Yasser Arafat, the head of the PLO terror group. Robert Malley himself had also written a series of essays for the New York Review of Books on Middle East issues that led prominent Jewish commentator and the former owner of The New Republic, Marty Peretz, to call him “a rabid hater of Israel. No question about it.”
After the backlash to Malley, the Obama campaign issued a statement saying Malley was not officially on the campaign and he was only providing “informal advice.” Despite supposedly not working on the Obama campaign, in May the Times of London reported that Malley had been ejected from the campaign’s Middle East advisory group after they learned he had meetings with Hamas. After supposedly being sacked from the campaign twice, shortly after Obama was elected it was revealed Malley had been dispatched to“Egypt and Syria over the last few weeks to outline the Democratic candidate’s policy on the Middle East.”
I confess I hadn’t thought much about Malley in the last 15 years, other than to assume he was up to no good. This summer I learned he was the Biden administration’s special envoy to Iran and that he had been fired once again, and this time it was serious enough that he lost his security clearance and was being accused of mishandling classified info. Only in the past few weeks have the real facts come into sharper relief: “Robert Malley helped to fund, support, and direct an Iranian intelligence operation designed to influence the United States and allied governments, according to a trove of purloined Iranian government emails.”
Iran, of course, was actively involved in funding and coordinating Hamas’ atrocities this past weekend. At the same time this was all being planned, the apparently traitorous Malley was working on Iran issues in an administration that made the questionable decision to give Iran billions of dollars in a desperate attempt to jumpstart Obama’s Iran nuclear deal.
Indeed, many have observed that Iran’s role in the attack seems motivated by a desire to force Israel to aggressively defend itself. A violent response from Israel would then be exploited to drive a wedge between Israel and the Sunni gulf states that had engaged in reproachment under the successful Abraham Accords of the Trump administration. That the Biden administration, which is essentially functioning as Obama’s third term and involves many of the same personnel, also had the same goal of blowing up the Abraham Accords to focus on empowering Iran as the regional hegemon, threatening Israel, is not a coincidence.
Speaking of coincidences, did I mention that America’s feckless secretary of state, Antony Blinken, is an old high school pal of Robert Malley? On Sunday, Blinken tweeted out that he was pushing a “ceasefire” between Israel and Hamas before deleting it. The idea that Iran would be behind the most successful attack on Israel in history and the U.S. would be against Israel fighting back… weird how everything keeps breaking Tehran’s way, huh?
Indeed, Obama is hardly the only tenured radical in our political establishment that shares these radical left-wing foreign policy views, a toxic combination of self-righteousness and self-loathing, that views our national interests and America’s relationship with Israel as inherently suspicious.
“The sheer amount of political capital and focus Obama put into achieving the [Iran nuclear deal] during his second term, to the near-exclusion of other goals, suggests that the deal was central to his politics. It also carries more than a whiff of the kind of politics in which the American Empire is seen not just as unexceptional, but also, in some ways, as actively evil,” observed Samuels. “It was a politics born out of the confluence of the Vietnam War and the civil rights movement, which saw a racist war abroad being used to protect a racist power structure at home. That old alliance of civil rights, anti-imperialism, and identity politics made the Democratic Party that Obama positioned himself to lead — college-educated, corporate-controlled — seem cool, allowing it to use post-1960s radical ideology as a language to sell stuff.”
I hardly believe Obama is such a monster he secretly roots for atrocities in Israel, even if it seems he’s never met an antisemite he would willingly disown. Regardless, there’s no doubt that these horrifying nationwide terror attacks in Israel are Obama’s legacy, a result of his arrogant anti-American ideology put into practice. But after the weekend, even Democratic partisans are scrambling to distance themselves from the Biden and Obama administrations’ ill-advised cozying up to Iran. Now we need to follow through and make sure the Obama-Biden foreign policy legacy, and the dangerous ideology that motivated it, is rejected and held up for the failure that it is.
Who was Jesus? (Larry King Live with John MacArthur)
Published on Jul 17, 2012
___________
I have seen John MacArthur on Larry King Show many times and I thought you would like to see some of these episodes. I have posted several of John MacArthur’s sermons in the past and my favorite is his sermon on the Tyre prophecy.
John MacArthur
Related posts:
Atheist says “It’s not about having a purpose in life..” (Arkansas Atheist, Part 1)jh69
The Bible and Archaeology (1/5) The Bible maintains several characteristics that prove it is from God. One of those is the fact that the Bible is accurate in every one of its details. The field of archaeology brings to light this amazing accuracy. _________________________- I want to make two points today. 1. There is no […]
Book of Mormon is not historically accurate, but Bible is (Part 32) (What are the Dead Sea Scrolls?)
The Book of Mormon vs The Bible, Part 6 of an indepth study of Latter Day Saints Archeology The Book of Mormon verses The Bible, Part 6 of an indepth study With the great vast amounts of evidence we find in the Bible through archeology, why is there no evidence for anything writte in the Book […]
Book of Mormon is not historically accurate, but Bible is (Part 31)
The Book of Mormon vs The Bible, Part 5 of an indepth study of Latter Day Saints Archeology The Book of Mormon verses The Bible, Part 5 of an indepth study With the great vast amounts of evidence we find in the Bible through archeology, why is there no evidence for anything writte in the […]
Book of Mormon is not historically accurate, but Bible is (Part 29)
The Book of Mormon vs The Bible, Part 3 of an indepth study of Latter Day Saints Archeology The Book of Mormon verses The Bible, Part 1 of an indepth study With the great vast amounts of evidence we find in the Bible through archeology, why is there no evidence for anything writte in the […]
Book of Mormon is not historically accurate, but Bible is (Part 28)
The Book of Mormon vs The Bible, Part 2 of an indepth study of Latter Day Saints Archeology The Book of Mormon verses The Bible, Part 2 of an indepth study With the great vast amounts of evidence we find in the Bible through archeology, why is there no evidence for anything writte in the […]
Easter Morning April 24, 2011,List of posts on series: Is the Bible historically accurate? (Updated 1 through 14C)
“In Christ Alone” music video featuring scenes from “The Passion of the Christ”. It is sung by Lou Fellingham of Phatfish and the writer of the hymn is Stuart Townend. On this Easter Morning April 24, 2011 there is no other better time to take a look at the truth and accuracy of the Bible. […]
Is the Bible historically accurate?(Part 14C)(The Conspirator Part 7)
Critics – Part 1 By Dr In my ongoing debate with other bloggers on the Arkansas Times Blog, I had an interesting response from Dobert: You can’t have it both ways. If the Gospel writers were allowed to adapt their message to a particular audience then it can’t be claimed that God literally took their […]
Is the Bible historically accurate?(Part 14B)(The Conspirator Part 5)
The Institute for Creation Research equips believers with evidences of the Bible’s accuracy and authority through scientific research, educational programs, and media presentations, all conducted within a thoroughly biblical framework. info@icr.org http://www.icr.org Last night I had the opportunity to go back and forth with a couple of bloggers on the Arkansas Times Blog and this […]
Is the Bible historically accurate? (part 14)(The Conspirator part 3)
This is a quick summary of the Bible’s reliability by a famous and well-respected former atheist. Please check out his website (http://www.leestrobel.com) for hundreds of FREE high quality videos investigating the critical aspects of our faith. Todd Tyszka http://www.toddtyszka.com On April 19, 2011 on the Arkansas Blog an entry of mine got this response from […]
Is the Bible historically accurate? (Part 13)
Many Kings and important people in the Bible are also verified by secular documents. From time to time you will read articles in the Arkansas press by such writers as John Brummett, Max Brantley and Gene Lyons that poke fun at those that actually believe the Bible is historically accurate when in fact the Bible […]
Is the Bible historically accurate? (Part 12)(Johnny Cash, Famous Arkansan pt C)
Dr Price, who directs excavations at the Qumran plateau in Israel, the site of the community that produced the dead sea scrolls some 2,000 years ago, expertly guides you through the latest archaeological finds that have changed the way we understand the world of the bible. (Part 6 of 6 in the film series The Stones […]
Is the Bible historically accurate? (Part 11)
My sons Wilson and Hunter went to California and visited Yosemite National Park with our friend Sherwood Haisty Jr. (Sherwood on left) March 21-27. Here you can see all the snow they had to deal with. Dr Price, who directs excavations at the Qumran plateau in Israel, the site of the community that produced the […]
Is the Bible historically accurate? (Part 10)
Dr Price, who directs excavations at the Qumran plateau in Israel, the site of the community that produced the dead sea scrolls some 2,000 years ago, expertly guides you through the latest archaeological finds that have changed the way we understand the world of the bible. (Part 4 of 6 in the film series The Stones […]
