Ted Belman
Francisco Gil-White asks the question Is the US an ally of Israel? and takes a A chronological look at the evidence. and concludes conclusively that the US is not an ally of Israel’s. Contents
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
The 1930’s - Negative - The US Establishment helped sponsor the rise of the German Nazi movement.
1939-1945 - Negative - This year’s material is divided into the following sections:
1. The general policy of the Allies towards the plight
of the Jews2. No US visas for European Jews trying to escape the Nazi slaughter3. The allies refused to sabotage Hitler’s Final Solution by military means
1945 - Negative - After 1945, the US created US Intelligence by recruiting tens of thousands of Nazi war criminals.
1947-48 - Mixed to Negative - Forced by external circumstances, the US government gave lukewarm support to the creation of the State of Israel. But then it reversed itself and implemented policies designed to destroy Israel.
1949-1953 - Negative - In Israel’s hour of supreme need, the US allied with Israel’s mortal enemies.
1955 - Mixed - The US forces Israel to withdraw from Sinai, but makes some concessions to the Israelis.
1955-1965 - Positive (in one regard only) - Israel indirectly gets some US weapons.
1958 - Negative - Israel assists US military intervention in the Middle East; when this places Israel in danger, the US does…nothing.
1964 - Mixed - The US abandoned its previous official policy of trying to get Israel to relinquish the territories won in the War of Independence. Why had it been trying to do this?
1964-1967 - Negative - Although Israel suffered terrorist attacks from its Arab neighbors during these years, when they staged a full-scale military provocation, the US refused to help.
1967 - Negative - After the Six-Day War, the US put pressure on Israel to relinquish the territory gained, even though it knew it was indispensable to Israeli defense.
1967-70 - Negative - The Arabs attack the Israelis. The US response is to try and remove the Israelis from territory they need for their defense.
1970 - Positive - Washington temporarily abandons the diplomatic effort to make Israel withdraw from the territories.
1973 - Positive - The US assisted Israel in the Yom Kippur War.
1973-1975 - Negative - The US supported the election of a pro-PLO Nazi war criminal to the post of UN Secretary General.
1975 - Negative - The US reached an agreement with Israel not to have contacts with the PLO. The US immediately violated the agreement.
1977 - Negative - Jimmy Carter worked hard to give the terrorist PLO the dignity of a ‘government in exile,’ and then he teamed up with the Soviets to try and saddle Israel with a PLO terrorist state next door.
1978 - Negative - When Israel tried to defend itself from the PLO terrorists, the US forced Israel to stand back.
1979 - Negative - Jimmy Carter began large-scale US sponsorship of antisemitic Islamist terrorists, especially in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia.
1981 - Negative - The US pushed for a PLO state in the West Bank against Israeli objections.
1982-1983 - Negative - The US military rushed into Lebanon to protect the PLO from the Israelis.
1985 - Negative - 1985 includes more material than other years, so we have divided it into subsections.
1. Shimon Peres acted as a US agent, against Israeli interests.2. Bettino Craxi and Giulio Andreotti (respectively, the Italian prime minister and foreign minister) committed political suicide for the sake of pushing the PLO. The US was behind them.3. Ronald Reagan denied the Holocaust4. Who was in charge of US covert operations in 1985?
1987-1988 - Negative - The ‘First Intifada’ was a US-PLO strategy used to represent the Arabs in West Bank and Gaza as supposedly oppressed ‘underdogs.’
1989 - Negative - With Dick Cheney, the US began supporting a PLO state in the open as the ‘only solution’ to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
1991 - Negative - Bush Sr.’s administration forced Israel to participate in the Oslo process, which brought the PLO into the West Bank and Gaza.
1994 - Negative - Yasser Arafat was given a Nobel Peace Prize, and the CIA trained the PLO, even though Arafat’s henchmen were saying in public, this very year, that they would use their training to oppress Arabs and kill Jews.
1996-1997 - Negative - The United States exerted such strong pressure on the Netanyahu government (including threats) that, even though Netanyahu had been elected on an anti-Oslo platform, he had the necessary cover to betray the Israeli public that had elected him.
2005 - Negative - Mahmoud Abbas, who will soon have total control over Gaza, is the one who invented the strategy of talking ‘peace’ the better to slaughter Israelis. The US ruling elite loves Mahmoud Abbas.
(I will soon post documentation for the missing years in between.)
[Do visit his site and get all the detail.]
This is the time line:
May 4, 2010- - Election Day, 2010: Obama will scale back the public animosity against Israel to con once again those most (willingly) gullible of creatures…liberal American Jewish voters. His anti-Zionist aggression will continue unabated, but will be done furtively.
November 3, 2010 - circa December 31, 2011: Obama will put the screws to the Jewish state to the maximum extent that domestic American politics allows. The assault will be vicious, but the level of transparency will depend upon which party controls Congress. If the GOP gains a huge victory this year, he will have to resort to extreme subterfuge. It is at this point when a Gulf of Tonkin-style incident becomes likely.
Approximately January 1, 2012 - Election Day, 2012: Obama will sweetly caress Israel…tenderly…lovingly. BO will reveal that he is the twin brother of Jackie Mason. He will claim that he has been repeatedly circumcised while watching “Schindler’s List”. He will confide that during intercourse, he always insists Michelle (and Vera) must call him “Rabbi Moshe Goldberg”.
Post Election 2012: If re-elected, Obama will treat Israel the way Tex Watson treated Sharon Tate.
Comment by ayn reagan — May 4, 2010 @ 1:01 pm
For those unaware of who Tex Watson is:
Good ole’ Tex
tex watson
When Charles “Tex” Watson entered the Cierlo Drive home of Sharon Tate and Roman Polanski he said, “I’m the devil. I’m here to do the devil’s business.” And that’s exactly what he did. All victims died of gunshots and multiple stab wounds coming mainly from Tex’s knife. Abigail Folger was stabbed 21 times. Voityck Frykowski was shot once and stabbed 51 times. Jay Seebring was shot twice and stabbed six times. Steven Parent was shot three times. Sharon Tate was stabbed 16 times.
When the heat came down Tex ran to his home in Texas. There he was arrested and extradited to California. While awaiting trial he lost fifty pounds and was unable to communicate or feed himself. He reached an acute state of psychosis and was sent to the Atascadero State Hospital. Once his health improved he was tried, found guilty and sentenced to death. A year later the Supreme Court abolished the death penalty and Tex’s mental instability improved rapidly. He found God and devoted himself to praising the lord with the same fervor he once wallowed in the blood of his victims. A changed man, Tex has become a preacher, a husband and a father (thanks to conjugal visiting rights). He hopes to be released soon on parole so he can preach the word of the law.
Comment by yamit82 — May 4, 2010 @ 2:42 pm
Comment by yamit82 — May 4, 2010 @ 2:49 pm
Over the past few years I have posted numerous historical facts that substiantiate Gill Whites independent research. It is impossible to
understand American Israeli relations with the historical context.
I have maintained that from the very beginning America was not only not our friend and ally but constantly working to weaken and undermine
our existence and security.
All American administrations from Washington to Obama have had strong elements of antisemitism. American Jews may point out that when compared with all other countries where Jews inhabited none can compare eith the freedoms, opportunities and saftey America has provided and there is truth in that.
lets not forget though that those freedoms and opportunities where awarded only grudgingly and not without numerous battles of jews and other minorities to win those freedoms, rights and opportunities. Jews were not allowed most rights of citizens until the 14th amendment.
Jews did not actually receive most of those rights until well after the second world war.
Most American Jews like the pre WW 2 German Jews fail to understand that what was not given freely can be taken away under certain conditions.
I don’t believe Jewish History began in America and that human nature is different in Americans than any other place. Sooner or later Jewish history will manifest and repeat what has been before in all the other places in the World.
What, How and When it will manifest itself, is another topic for possible discussion.
Comment by yamit82 — May 4, 2010 @ 3:39 pm
You must mean California Watson.
Comment by RandyTexas — May 4, 2010 @ 3:44 pm
The US will soon have much more to be occupied with than undermining Israel—I’m sure Obama will still find time—economic disaster is looming and national security threats are greatly increasing. Some professionals in off-shore drilling are saying the way the rig in the gulf is purported to have blown is not plausible without assistance of a human element and explosive device. After the 911 Truthers everything is a conspiracy, which makes me a skeptic. Still, there are a whole lot of questions marks now than in any other time I can remember. Thousands of little puzzle pieces are all over the place, by the time they come together to where most people can get the picture, it will be too late.
If Kim gets money, will he give something back such as being a proxy (a state ‘hit-man’) to do the dirty work China doesn’t want it’s fingerprints on…ships, oil rigs, ?????????????
Comment by RandyTexas — May 4, 2010 @ 4:13 pm
California Watson would have taxed and regulated Sharon to death.
I think she preferred Tex.
Comment by ayn reagan — May 4, 2010 @ 4:21 pm
Ayn Reagan in her comment 1 in particular has cut across the main lesson of the FGW research. Rather than dealing with this learned research Reagan cuts off at a tangent, into an attack on Obama, but the point of the GW article is that it is ALL Presidents of the US, and this furthermore is reinforced by learned articles by Joseph Alexander Norland on the Eisenhower Dulles years.
And that is the point that I made to Ted a week ago, and to Spencer and Geller, that we know that the US is creating Sharia states in the world, Afgahnistan, Kosovo, Palestine. But why? What is the strategy behind. Ted refused to publish my article and so the discussion was avoided, as did Spencer and Geller.
To get some idea of what is going on underneath the surface you will have to turn to the site http://www.4international.wordpress.com
In fact Gil White did not answer this question either because he is not based on an analysis of the capitalist crisis and how antisemitism has always been used as a tool by ruling classes.
Also Yamit82 is also merely restating the obvious, all of us here know that the US is siding with Islam, but why? He does not even pretend to answer that central question.
There is much rubbish talked above and it appears that many on Israpundit live in a dream world if they think as Reagan suggests above that there will be an orderly development through the next years to elections etc. What makes Reagan so sure there will be a next election? As in the past?
A much better idea can be had from perusal of this article
http://www.newsmax.com/KenTimmerman/Timmerman-Israel-Iran-nuclear/2010/04/02/id/354614
Leave aside that Ephraim Sneh is from the traitorous wing of Israeli society, yet his prediction of a November strike by Israel on Iran, and the suggestion by another that Israel will be forced to use “low yielding earth penetrating nuclear weapons” against Iran.
And Timmerman is correct, it will be a conscious attempt to buy Israel time, to set the Iranian regime back some.
But who will come to the rescue of the Jews of Israel.
Here all on Israpundit are bankrupt and especially bankrupt are the suggestions before
Comment by Felix Quigley — May 4, 2010 @ 5:03 pm
The Israelis. If worse comes to worse, the Samson Option will come into play, but with one difference this time; Samson will be left standing.
…and so you have come to enrich us all?
Comment by RandyTexas — May 4, 2010 @ 5:23 pm
Felix,
Your thinly-veiled attack on the proletariat is despicable.
Once again, you have inadvertently exposed yourself as being an agent provocateur of the bourgeoisie.
The working class will surely rise as one to eliminate the oppression imposed by your hegemonistic ways.
You are truly a running dog for the capitalist pigs.
Comment by ayn reagan — May 4, 2010 @ 5:32 pm
.
Police detective to Bank robber: Why did you rob banks?
Bank robber to Detective: Because that’s where the money is!
Everything else is commentary
Comment by yamit82 — May 4, 2010 @ 5:37 pm
Attention, National “Jewish” “Democratic” Council; this was by order of your Almighty God, aka Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who also put American citizens in concentration camps because of their race.
NJDC Holy Trinity: Franklin Roosevelt the Father, Barack Obama the Son, and Lyndon B. Johnson the Holy Ghost. NJDC prays to a golden donkey while it serves kosher ham and cheese sandwiches for Yom Kippur.
Comment by Bill Levinson — May 4, 2010 @ 5:48 pm
By doing so, we risked nuclear war with the Soviet Union.
Most of the U.S. is pro-Israel. We currently have a President who is anti-Israel and anti-UK, but that does not mean he enjoys the respect or support of the American people. I even question whether he is on the side of the United States.
Comment by Bill Levinson — May 4, 2010 @ 5:51 pm
Where is the UN?
don’t be surprised if familiar tragedies keep recurring as farce, like a broken record and effluvium of a bad meal.
The big bad hologram wants to make a meal out of Israel again; those damn Jews still won’t get out of Arab-occupied central Israel, and idiot Jews won’t stop giving them jobs within the green line. And now this dude, an ostensible victim of racism wants the Jews out: in ‘his’ defense, he’s just an image on a screen, a talking head, a façade, albeit a grimy and unpleasant one.
Where is the UN? One ought to ask before one places all the blame for “the cycle of violence in the Middle East” and world tensions on the Jew-hating nut-ball who styles in Tehran. While post-modern students may not know it, the United Nations is in NYC; it was conceived there and in London and squats unpleasantly on land gifted to it by a munificent doyen of the Rockefeller clan. There is a photo of him handing the check to the first President of “the world body” in 1946: it is not a pretty picture.
Those who think that the goal of I’m a dinner jacket is to incinerate Israel are stewing because this hate-monger was at the UN (last year) for, what, the third straight year, to flaunt his dashing person and to keep the world’s level of Judenhaas high. The holy perpa must be pleased not least because the annual extrusion tends to occur very near Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. Hisster also liked to plan special actions on Jewish holy days.
Where is the UN? It is in NYC; Mr. Ahmadinejad would not be in NY or anywhere in the USA unless those who run its diplomatic and intelligence operations wanted him here. It is no stretch to notice that if he is here and here repeatedly it is because they want him here, perhaps even to get briefed and de-briefed. He serves their purposes.
As to their purposes, they also blare forth from the mouthpiece that goes by various names, among them, “Obama.”
Is the hologram a racist? Of course not, it’s just that he loves peace, hates segregation, and those damn Jews in Judea and Samaria, etc…
Why do the power brokers who design and manage the grand game want the dinner jacket in NY raising tension, nastiness and keeping the concept of exterminating the Jews in everyone’s consciousness and, therefore, possible? It is, in principle part to push a contrived dialectic whose solution, a “comprehensive peace agreement” will create a greater Middle East that will be anchored by Israel and Persia, restoring control to the managers of Anglo-Persian Oil, now terming itself, “Beyond Petroleum.” In plain English that means that the plebes won’t get much of an oil ration in future and that it will be veddy, veddy expensive.
“Comprehensive Peace Agreement” is the modern Pax Romana as in, “they made a desert and called it peace,” or, “you need protection.” From whom? “From us” or is that, from USA?
Notice: as the threat of attack from Persia and its Syrian satellite grows so does the American protective presence in what remains of the land of Israel. We assume readers know about the advanced American anti-missile batteries in Israel that do not share their intelligence readings with IDF staff unless the Americans deem it useful to dribble some leftovers to their vassal. How bitter that the Israeli vassal does more genuine service to its American masters than perhaps any other vassal state in history.
There is a ‘good’ reason for this: by running the “Jewish State” as a subsidiary of the Quartet directorate, the subcontractors (perennial client regime, a.k.a. the undertakers) get to suppress the Jews. There are few things a modern or post-modern Hellenist loves more: it demonstrates the progress s/he has made from the superstition of a living culture into the great darkness of world-Hellenism and its Dionysian trappings and substrate.
The unacknowledged chieftain of this de facto Quintet wears a funny suit and hat, and a vest with keys on it. Tony Blair is the silly putty by which he binds together the various members of this world body, the penultimate incarnation of the British invasion first planned by the illustrious Round Table whose end game is on track.
The thoughts and writings of Prof. Eugene Narrett
Comment by yamit82 — May 4, 2010 @ 6:10 pm
The definition of a liberal: someone who believes that illegal Mexicans can live in eastern Los Angeles but Jews cannot live in eastern Jerusalem.
Comment by JonnyGee — May 4, 2010 @ 6:12 pm
Bullshit
True but a Republican congress had passed anti Jewish immigration Laws and congress does have some power I think, more then than they do today.
During the war years every poll showed Jews ranked above both Japan and Nazi Germany as the more hated in America.
Do you think the American Jewish leadership wasn’t aware of the American sentiment against the Jews?
So Levinson take your simplistic political monodemensional world view and stick it where the sun don’t shine.
America hated Jews more than the Germans and the japs. FDR as a Master politician had the American people behind him.
Comment by yamit82 — May 4, 2010 @ 6:35 pm
American liberals are crestfallen that the NYC terrorist whom they had deceitfully identified as being a “white guy” turned out to be a Pakistani Muslim.
They were so hoping that he would be a Tea Partier.
Or a Southern Baptist holy roller.
Or a Roman Catholic pedophile priest.
Or - best of all - an evil
Jewneocon.No, he is one of the Left’s Chosen People…a Muslim terrorist.
So, they have seamlessly transitioned into casting him as a victim.
His house was being foreclosed.
Ergo, the terror attack is the fault of George W. Bush.
I’ll say it again, Ted: the enemy is liberalism.
Islamism can be defeated only after liberals have been defeated.
Comment by ayn reagan — May 4, 2010 @ 6:41 pm
Your right Ayn. Liberals can’t handle the truth. They prefer to be pacifist than fighting and defending what is good and right.
By the way New Yorkers have to be thankful the terrorist didn’t know how to set a clock otherwise this disaster would have been on the acorn community organizing, anti-Semitic, anti-Israel US impostor presidents watch.
Of course his staff will come to his aid and declare “we were on it from day 1″. Bull shit.
Comment by rongrand — May 4, 2010 @ 7:18 pm
Look at his pro Islamic Marxists policies again and there should be no question whatsoever.
Comment by RandyTexas — May 4, 2010 @ 7:49 pm
Yes, but they have been buoyed by the oil spill. “Drill Baby Drill”, has been replaced with “Spill Baby Spill”
Comment by yamit82 — May 4, 2010 @ 8:27 pm
ma shlom Laura ?
Comment by Tar Yag — May 4, 2010 @ 9:07 pm
The American people are pro-Israel. I stand by that. Polls show that to be the case and I know that from personal experience. Again, I wonder why you are tolerated here given that you have no real contribution to make.
Comment by Laura — May 4, 2010 @ 11:27 pm
He did no such thing.
Comment by Laura — May 4, 2010 @ 11:29 pm
Laura you can take that to the bank. In fact all my Catholic friends feel the same way and are pro Israel and agree the Jews have G-d given rights to the Holy Land.
This tiny but giant nation is and will be protected by G-d. Think, G-d did not lead the Jews back to the Holy Land and leave them unprotected.
The Muslim world should be careful, as my Catholic school nun use to say, “A word to the wise should be sufficient”. (unfortunately I remember it now more than then. Wow was she smart).
Comment by rongrand — May 5, 2010 @ 12:26 am
That is a reference to his Bitburg speech:
Controversy
This planned visit caused a great deal of anger outside of Germany. Many prominent government officials, U.S. Army officers, and celebrities, protested the planned visit. Concentration camp survivor and author Elie Wiesel spoke out on the topic at an unrelated White House ceremony, saying, “I… implore you to do something else, to find another way, another site. That place, Mr. President, is not your place.” 53 senators (including 11 Republicans), signed a letter asking the president to cancel, and 257 representatives (including 84 Republicans) signed a letter urging Chancellor Kohl to withdraw the invitation. Former Army S/Sgt. Jim Hively mailed his World War II decorations, including a silver star and a bronze star, to Reagan in protest. The Ramones recorded the song “My Brain Is Hanging Upside Down (Bonzo Goes to Bitburg),” which alludes to Bedtime for Bonzo, a movie from Reagan’s film career that co-starred a chimpanzee, and Frank Zappa recorded “Reagan At Bitburg”. Robyn Hitchcock’s song The President from his album Element of Light also makes reference to the incident.[2]
Chancellor Kohl responded in an interview with the New York Times: “I will not give up the idea. If we don’t go to Bitburg, if we don’t do what we jointly planned, we will deeply offend the feelings of [my] people.” A poll revealed that 72% of West Germans thought the visit should go forward as planned. Kohl admitted that rarely had German-American relations been so strained, and in the days leading up to the visit, the White House and the Chancellery were pitted against each other in the blame game. The White House claimed the Germans had given assurances that nothing in the Bitburg visit would be an “embarrassment” for the president: “As clumsily as we handled it, Kohl &. Co. have surpassed us in spades.” A German official said: “The Americans also have a responsibility toward the president. They must also check on the history that is beneath the ground. It was not very intelligent.” Reagan defended himself by saying:
“These [SS troops] were the villains, as we know, that conducted the persecutions and all. But there are 2,000 graves there, and most of those, the average age is about 18. I think that there’s nothing wrong with visiting that cemetery where those young men are victims of Nazism also, even though they were fighting in the German uniform, drafted into service to carry out the hateful wishes of the Nazis. They were victims, just as surely as the victims in the concentration camps” [3]
Reagan was criticized for this statement by opponents of the visit. Equating Nazi soldiers with Holocaust victims, responded Rabbi Alexander M. Schindler, president of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, was “a callous offense for the Jewish people.” Many questioned Reagan’s claim that most of the SS soldiers at Kolmeshöhe had been teenagers drafted against their will into serving, but later research indicated that most of the 49 SS dead were between the ages of 17 and 20[citation needed]. Some critics claimed that Communications Director Patrick Buchanan wrote those remarks, which he denies [3]. Kohl confirmed earlier press comment that in the last days of the war he was able to avoid service in the SS because he was only 15, “but they hanged a boy from a tree who was perhaps only two years older with a sign saying TRAITOR because he had tried to run away rather than serve.”
Kohl made a call to the White House days before Reagan’s visit to make sure the president wasn’t wavering in the face of criticism, not to mention pressure from wife Nancy. The Chancellor’s aide, Horst Teltschik later said: “Once we knew about the SS dead at Bitburg - knowing that these SS people were seventeen to eighteen years of age, and knowing that some Germans were forced to become members of the SS, having no alternative - the question was, Should this be a reason to cancel?” Reagan aide Robert McFarlane later said: “Once Reagan learned that Kohl would really be badly damaged by a withdrawal, he said ‘We can’t do that; I owe him.’” Prior to sending Deaver back to West Germany for the third time, just two days before the scheduled visit, Reagan told his deputy chief of staff: “I know you and Nancy don’t want me to go through with this, but I don’t want you to change anything when you get over there, because history will prove I’m right. If we can’t reconcile after forty years, we are never going to be able to do it.”
There was one announced change: an added visit to the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp to itinerary.
The controversy might have cooled slightly if one of the many commentators had mentioned that the men buried in the Bitburg cemetery were Waffen SS—combat soldiers— not SS-Totenkopfverbände—concentration-camp guards. Soldiers, in fighting battles, sometimes commit war crimes, but this is not their purpose. The concentration camps and the death camps were designed to commit crimes against humanity: these crimes are the purpose of the guards.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitburg#Reagan_visit_controversy
Comment by ayn reagan — May 5, 2010 @ 12:31 am
No, he didn’t deny the Holocaust he just put German sensitivities ahead of Jewish sensitivities.
Now why should any Jew expect more? If that were his only decision were Jews would be placed at the bottom of his priories and Presidential decisions might be overlooked but RR had a history and a long list of screwing the Jews. Was he antisemetic? Probably but he might not have thought so Most gentiles of his generation were.
Comment by yamit82 — May 5, 2010 @ 12:54 am
Reagan’s unforgivable mistake was siding against Israel in Lebanon.
That was contemptible.
But compared with other recent presidents, he did pretty well.
Comment by ayn reagan — May 5, 2010 @ 1:02 am
He embargoes Israel with weapons ordered for over a year. Sold the Saudis AWACS to be used against Israel and by defeating AIPC thus
rendering them impotent to this day. There is much more.
Comment by yamit82 — May 5, 2010 @ 1:24 am
Reagan was appalled at the news footage from Lebanon that purported to show the IDF indiscriminately killing civilians.
Based on his own experiences with the network news, he should not have been so gullible.
But he was, and coerced Begin to back off.
That was a fateful moment in history. It represented an enormous victory for Iran, which repaid Reagan by having its surrogate Hezbollah slaughter Marines in Beirut.
Had he refrained from interfering, Lebanon would now be free and Hezbollah would be a memory.
I believe that GW Bush understood Reagan’s mistake and was willing to let Olmert correct the mistake, but Olmert was too irresolute.
Now, it is too late…unless Netanyahu discovers the courage to attack Iran, in which case he may as well take out Hezbollah and Fatah and Hamas since Israel will be castigated regardless.
Comment by ayn reagan — May 5, 2010 @ 3:14 am
Somebody is picking on poor Rabbi Lerner.
Shame shame shame
Comment by ayn reagan — May 5, 2010 @ 3:47 am
Note: I have posted the comments on Israpundit to share what others are thinking; however, anyone who stands with Israel, loves Israel knows beyond a doubt that the United States, under this administration, is NOT a friend of Israel's. Actions define the character of a person, and the actions and speech of Obama reveal his true feelings towars our friend, Israel. Our country is going the way of Islam, with a president who again, acts and plays the part of an Islamic follower; of course, it could have a lot to do with Obama's childhood training in Islam, or his 20 year former pastor, also a hater of Jews and Israel. Bee Sting