Since he ascended from nothing to the office of President of the United States, Obama has shown a disdain for most of our western allies that borders on hatred. But he’s reserved his most backhanded treatment to Israel. It isn’t just what he’s done to show Israel that he has no use for them, but it goes all the way down to his every last appointment and this week we see another reminder of that in the comments belched forth by Obama’s U.S. Ambassador to Belgium, Howard Gutman, who basically said that anti-Semitism perpetrated by Muslims is really all Israel’s fault.

As Jake Tapper (one of the few real reporters in Washington) reported on Sunday, Gutman made his remarks at a conference on anti-Semitism organized by the European Jewish Union on Dec. 2.

At the conference Gutman said, “a distinction should be made between traditional anti-Semitism, which should be condemned and Muslim hatred for Jews, which stems from the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.” Gutman imagined that tensions between Muslims and Israel is one, “largely born of and reflecting the tension between Israel, the Palestinian Territories and neighboring Arab states in the Middle East over the continuing Israeli-Palestinian problem.”

Gutman said that “throughout the Muslim communities that I visit, and indeed throughout Europe, there is significant anger and resentment and, yes, perhaps sometimes hatred and indeed sometimes and all too growing intimidation and violence directed at Jews generally as a result of the continuing tensions between Israel and the Palestinian territories and other Arab neighbors in the Middle East…every new settlement announced in Israel, every rocket shot over a border or suicide bomber on a bus, and every retaliatory military strike exacerbates the problem and provides a setback here in Europe for those fighting hatred and bigotry here in Europe.”

What is all this if not a way to blame the Jews for Muslim anti-Semitism?

Naturally, many in Israel are not happy. In fact, one of the speakers that followed Gutman’s disastrous comments denounced him right there on stage, as well he should, according to Tapper’s report.

But Gutman’s blaming of the Jews for everything that befalls them — akin to blaming the woman for being raped, in my opinion — fits in nicely with Obama’s attitude against Israel. It also fits in with most of his appointees to the Middle East. Some of his past appointees were Susan Power — a woman that said we should be giving military aid to the Palestinians — and Robert Malley — a man that has close working ties to Hamas.

So, it just shouldn’t surprise that yet another Obama team member is blaming the Jews for radical Muslim terror and hatred.

Suicide bomb and gun attacks have hit central Kabul, with a string of blasts targeting the US embassy and at least one death reported in a suicide attack in the west of the Afghan capital.

Gunmen are holed up in a high-rise building overlooking the city centre, exchanging gunfire with police.

The Taliban say they are behind the attacks. (snip)

Tuesday’s attacks appear to be a complex operation, with a number of suicide bombers targeting Kabul’s upmarket embassy district, while others struck the west of the city, near the parliament. (snip)

Around five attackers are coordinating their operation from the high rise building which is under construction just 300m from the US embassy, correspondents say, with a rocket-propelled grenade apparently overshooting the embassy.

US officials confirmed the attack around the embassy. “There are no casualties at this time among embassy personnel,” said a spokeswoman.

This is the folly of leftists around the world: they think if they are just nice enough, and open a dialogue, they can reason with barbarians. Meanwhile, the barbarians use that time to foment and plan attacks, and have no intention to seek “peace in our time.” These Islamists despise modern culture (though they’re willing to use weapons they couldn’t possibly invent or build), despise Western civilization, and especially despise America for our freedoms and modern lifestyle. They prefer to live like it is 1200 AD, and want to spread their brand of extremist Islam around the world, including notions of women as chattel, stoning women who are involved in adultery, hanging gays, cutting off hands of thieves, and marrying and having sex with children, much as their “prophet” did. Yet, the worldwide left, which always states they are for “civil rights”, gays, women, and such, coddles these same barbarians.

Of course, lefties also refuse to go live in those same areas in order to spread awareness and understanding. Most know they will be treated pretty bad. They’re naive, not complete morons. Well, it could be that they just refuse to give up their fancy dress cocktail parties where they discuss how mean Conservatives are when it comes to these barbarians.

The Telegraph has live updates on the attacks.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

President Barack Obama is the unlikely star of a new Palestinian media campaign.

Part of a speech Obama gave in 2010 to the United Nations General Assembly is featured in an ad aimed to rally support for the Palestinians upcoming bid for statehood at the United Nations on Sept. 20, Reuters reported on Wednesday.

“When we come back here next year, we can have an agreement that can lead to a new member of the United Nations, an independent, sovereign state of Palestine living in peace with Israel,” Obama said in the 2010 speech in the clip that is played in the radio ad.

The Palestinians use of the remarks is at odds with the Obama administration’s current all-out push to stop the Palestinians from pursuing their statehood bid. U.S. Special Envoy to the Middle East David Hale is set to hold talks Wednesday with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to urge him to reconsider the statehood effort and instead return to direct negotiations with Israel.

During the 36-second radio spot starring Obama, Abbas tells listeners “If he said it, he must have meant it.”

Obama’s leftist base is rabidly anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian, as are many at the United Nations and around the world, so Obama’s little UN speech was designed to elicit accolades from those people, yet, once again, Obama forgot that he was no longer candidate Obama, but President of the United States of America Obama, and his words have actual meaning. Then, when the Palestinians actually pushed for their own state as part of the UN, some advisers surely came to the White House and said “this is a really bad idea“, and the reality of being POTUS reached up and smacked the campaign speech out of him.

On the tenth anniversary of 9/11, we mourn our losses. We mourn the loss of fellow Americans who died at the hands of a sworn enemy and we mourn the loss of those in the ranks of our military who have since fought a righteous fight to protect us from that enemy.

In a weekly radio address, President Barack Obama called for unity as the 10th anniversary of September 11, 2001 draws near: “We were united,” said the President, “and the outpouring of generosity and compassion reminded us that in times of challenge, we Americans move forward together, as one people.” Obama’s words are a brazen reminder of how far apart on ideas and ideals most Americans are from the current government. Americans recognize that it is the Obama government itself that has created “times of great challenge” that threaten our nation’s safety and sovereignty.

On 9/11, terrorists attacked our people and our nation. Knowing who the enemy was, and still is, is itself a uniting force in the battle to protect this great nation. Once in office and well-knowing that extremist Muslim terrorists were behind the attacks, overt efforts were made to diffuse public awareness. The Obama administration attempted to rename terror attacks as “man-caused disasters” and classify the global war on terror as “Overseas Contingency Operations.” Failure to identify one’s enemy unifies no one. 9/11 survivors well know who their attackers were. Osama Bin Laden proclaimed on video tape that his terrorist group Al Qaeda carried out the 9/11 attacks.

The Obama White House has issued guidelines for the 9/11 ceremonies. Al Qaeda’s threat is to be downplayed and the impact of America’s 9/11 tragedy is to be diminished by equating it with all other terrorists’ attacks globally. What will go unmentioned by Obama is that the Muslim Brotherhood, that is making power gains in Egypt and the Middle East, is allied with Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah and the jihadists. An earlier affront to and “de-unification” of the American people came when Obama tried to transport accused terrorists, housed at Guantanamo Bay, into our American cities and courts to grant them the same Constitutional rights allowed for U.S. citizens. Americans stood “united” and stopped the outrageous proceedings by Obama and his Justice Department. The first step in Obama’s reunification should be to call the enemy what it is — terrorists.

What cannot be overstated in the healing and reunification of America, after the 9/11 attacks, was the importance of prayer. Prayer and the call to God to protect and guide the nation were at the heart, the core, of bringing Americans together with compassion and determination. This nation was founded on Judeo-Christian faith and principles. Today, a reported 95% of Americans are people of faith in various religions. Yet, prayer and clergy have been banished from the 9/11 state run day of remembrance by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. By eliminating God, the state steps into the role of God with its ceremonies devoid of prayer. Politicos will direct attention to themselves as the guiding lights of national healing, looking to reflect a god-like glow as benevolent caretakers of the masses.

Historically, Socialist/Fascist regimes that diminished God and circumvented clergy began in seemingly benign ways. Today, faith is under siege in America. (See: Christian Purge – The Obama Factor: http://darwinsracists.com/book/?p=155). Politicians supplanting prayer with their own verbiage and public spectrum, lessens us as a nation. A major factor in America’s exceptionalism is that America is the preeminent nation in the world that turns to God and prayer for healing and guidance. America may elect an Obama or a Bloomberg, but it does not worship them. The current American President and Mayor of New York will ceremoniously memorialize “sacred” ground and memories of our lost as long as God is excluded despite the fact that “sacred” by its very definition means “connected with God.” To misconstrue an ambiguous moment of silence as “sacred” is itself a sacrilegious dodge. Public office is transient and any glory derived from it is short-lived. These politicians may learn that what really “unites” Americans is political leaders going against the people’s will by imposing state censure on religious expression. The ban on clergy should immediately be reversed.

Presidents nor mayors can separate God from His people. So, there will be prayer, there will be open tribute to their Creator by the faithful across the nation for the healing and “unifying” of this great nation on this important day of remembrance. May God bless the survivors, the families, our first responders and our military warriors. May God bless America as long as its people know that those blessings come from the Creator God and not from transitory politicians.

Obama’s is one of the most disastrous foreign policies of any president ever. His latest outrage is the dual absurdities of, on one hand putting Israel on a list of state sponsors of terrorism, while on the other hand opening a dialog with and bestowing diplomatic legitimacy upon the terrorists of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

This is the schizophrenic mess that Obama’s anti-western centric foreign policy ideas have created. It shouldn’t be much of a surprise, though. Upon becoming President Obama almost immediately launched into a series of one more example of Obama giving Israel the back of his hand.

In 2008, the Bush administration created a list of nations whose citizens asking to visit our country the administration thought needed to be watched. This list contained nations that were determined to be possible state sponsors of terrorism. Nations like North Korea, Yemen, Libya, Turkmenistan, and Syria appeared on this list of nations that, in the State Department’s words, “have shown a tendency to promote, produce, or protect terrorist organizations or their members.”

However, the list put out during the Bush years has been altered by the Obama administration. On the 2011 list, North Korea has been removed while Israel has been added. Obama apparently feels Israel is worse than North Korea.

As my friend Jeff Dunetz says: “Only in the twisted world of the Obama Administration, where allies are trashed, and enemies are embraced, could the tiny nation of Israel, on the front lines of the war on terror for decades, be on a list of 36 nations which “have shown a tendency to promote, produce, or protect terrorist organizations or their members.’”

Then, to offset that news, the Obama administration has made another decision as opposite of the one above as possible. Obama and his State Dept. have decided that actual terrorists deserve to be given official diplomatic recognition!

That’s right, Obama has decided that the terrorists of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt deserve to be treated as a legitimate political body, one that deserves official recognition by the USA.

In explanation, an Obama administration official told the media that, “The political landscape in Egypt has changed, and is changing… It is in our interests to engage with all of the parties that are competing for parliament or the presidency.”

So, on one hand, Israel, our truest ally in the Mid East, is called a “state sponsor of terror,” while an actual terrorist outfit is “in our interests to engage.”

Meanwhile, the president himself won’t even cross the national mall to go meet with Senate Republicans to discuss the budget. I suppose it won’t be long before Obama puts the GOP on the list of state sponsors of terror.

Witnesses and activists in Syria say at least 15 people were killed Friday when security forces fired on crowds as tens of thousands of protesters took to the streets nationwide in another round of demonstrations aimed at overthrowing President Bashar al-Assad.

The demonstrators gathered throughout the north and around the capital, Damascus, despite a heavy military presence and the fear of the continuing military crackdown. Protesters have been under assault by pro-government forces for more than 100 days. (snip)

Details of Friday’s violence have not been independently confirmed, largely because Syria does not permit outside media to cover protests. Activists say Syria’s crackdown has killed at least 1,400 people in the last three months.

Turkish officials said Friday that more than 1,500 Syrian refugees crossed the border into Turkey after Syrian troops stormed the town of Khirbet al-Jouz.

According to Turkish government estimates, nearly 12,000 Syrians are now housed in massive tent encampments in Turkey.

Syrian troops are said to be within 500 meters of the border.

I’ve argued that Libya does actually have a small importance to the USA in that it lies in a geographic spot that could be dangerous to international, and American shipping in the Mediterranean. Also, even a small oil producing nation with issues could cause problems on the world market. But, of course, that is not what Obama argues: he says it is all about humanitarian relief, and stopping a humanitarian crisis from happening, which would be stopped in days, not weeks, continuing on for months. Well, what of Syria? They sure seem to be having a humanitarian crisis. Well over a thousand killed. Syrian troops waiting for Syrians to cross back from Turkey. No known number for those who have been jailed, and being jailed in Syria will involve torture.

I’m not advocating military intervention, but the hypocrisy from the Obama administration is amazing. But, Syria apparently doesn’t have the oil resources necessary for our European allies like Libya.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

US President Barack Obama used a prime-time address to the nation from the White House today to confirm the withdrawal of about 10,000 troops from Afghanistan this year. Mr Obama said a further 23,000 troops would be brought back to America by mid-2012 – ending the US military “surge” in the war-torn nation.

“After this initial reduction, our troops will continue coming home at a steady pace as Afghan Security forces move into the lead. Our mission will change from combat to support,” he said. “By 2014, this process of transition will be complete, and the Afghan people will be responsible for their own security.

“We are starting this drawdown from a position of strength. Al-Qaeda is under more pressure than at any time since 9/11.”

The US currently has about 100,000 troops in Afghanistan, so even after all of the surge troops leave, the military will still have nearly 70,000 forces in the country.

Responding to Mr Obama’s address, House Speaker John Boehner said he was pleased the president recognised that success in Afghanistan was paramount.

However, he cautioned, “It is my hope that the president will continue to listen to our commanders on the ground as we move forward. Congress will hold the administration accountable for ensuring that the pace and scope of the drawdown does not undermine the progress we’ve made thus far”.

General David Petraeus and top Pentagon officials had asked for a slower drawdown through the (northern) summer of 2012 to allow them to solidify gains in southern Afghanistan and to mount counter-insurgency operations in eastern districts.

Senator John McCain said Mr Obama’s decision, communicated to senior national security officials yesterday represented an “unnecessary risk” and said Gen Petraeus and Defence Secretary Robert Gates had recommended a “more modest withdrawal”.

More HERE

Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.). For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. To keep up with attacks on free speech see TONGUE-TIED. Also, don’t forget your daily roundup of pro-environment but anti-Greenie news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH . Email me here

President Obama has subtly shifted Washington’s public explanation of its goals in Libya, declaring now that he wants to assure the Libyan people are “finally free of 40 years of tyranny” at the hands of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, after first stating he wanted to protect civilians from massacres.

Yes, the NY Times is calling Obama out for his BS.

But, no worries, Obama is on the case

But if toppling Colonel Qaddafi is now the more explicit goal, Mr. Obama’s European trip this week has highlighted significant tensions over how much time the NATO allies have to finish a job that is now in its third month.

Mr. Obama has urged strategic patience, expressing confidence that over time the combination of bombing, sanctions and import cutoffs will force Colonel Qaddafi from power. “Time is working against Qaddafi,” Mr. Obama said on Wednesday at a news conference in London with Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain.

Really? It is? He’s made no moves to leave, and Obama has no Congressional declaration allowing the military to stay much longer. Also

But in Europe and in Libya, patience is calculated differently. Many countries are struggling with the rapid pace of operations. Some, like Norway, have already said they will sharply reduce their forces beginning next month. According to NATO officials, Colonel Qaddafi has a calculation of his own: facing a possible indictment by the International Criminal Court, he may soon have few places to go and little to lose by waiting out NATO and betting that European public opinion will tire of the bombing campaign and its costs.

There is no incentive for Qaddafi to leave, if he’s just going to end up in the ICC.

Mr. Obama, however, has taken a gradualist approach that is based on America’s bitter lessons in Iraq. From the start, he has declined to commit ground troops, and quickly handed off the lead in combat operations to other NATO allies, a move widely seen in the United States and Europe as an effort to avoid “owning” a war in a nation the United States does not consider strategically vital. White House officials have also said that Mr. Obama was acutely sensitive to not leading a conflict in a third Muslim nation, while Americans are still withdrawing from Iraq and deeply engaged in Afghanistan.

Alright, we already knew that he committed our military then voted “present.”

It all begs the question, who blinks first: NATO or Qadaffi? Will we see Leftists out marching in the streets against this illegal war for oil? So far, haven’t really happened, much like the Leftists opposition to Iraq and Afghanistan has dried up. I suppose it makes a difference depending on whether someone has an R or D alongside of their names.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has accepted House Speaker John Boehner’s invitation to address a joint session of Congress on Tuesday. The speaker says his invitation is a chance to promote freedom, security and peace in the Middle East.

We Palestinians cannot agree more, for it is Israel’s denial of our freedom that prevents us from exercising our right to live in peace and security with our neighbors.

But, unfortunately, Palestinian freedom is not likely to be on the Israeli leader’s mind when he addresses Congress. Instead, he will probably avoid dealing with the core issues of Palestinian statehood on the 1967 borders and the end of the Israeli military occupation.

See? It’s not really about the 1967 borders, it’s about….oh, wait. Looks like they do want the 1967 borders, the indefensible ones. Not like the Palestinians really need those borders that much, as the lob missiles and artillery shells, along with suicide bombers, across the current border.

But the U.S. has principles that must be protected and preserved. These principles of justice, liberty and freedom, the foundation the United States was built on, must be Congress’s guiding light in helping President Barack Obama and his administration bring peace, stability and security for all people in the region.

Perhaps Hamas should renounce its charter, which calls for the destruction of Israel. Perhaps Palestinians should stop digging tunnels from their lands, like the Gaza Strip, in order to attack Israel. Perhaps Palestinians should recognize Israel’s right to exist.

In 1988, the Palestinian leadership accepted the two-state solution and unequivocally recognized the state of Israel. The future Palestinian state will be in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem — approximately 22 percent of historic Palestine. In 2002, the PLO endorsed the Arab Peace Initiative, which calls for the end of Israeli occupation of Palestinian and Arab lands in return for normal relations with Israel and a just resolution to the Palestinian refugee problem.

Yet, they don’t recognize Israel’s right to exist. Sure, they recognized that the state of Israel is there. Will they accept a divided country? The Palestinians had plenty of opportunity to make a deal with Israel, but, their leaders kept asking for more and more, giving little back, then walking away when the demands were met.

A peace agreement establishing a Palestinian state, existing side by side in peace and security with Israel, is in the interest of the U.S., the parties and world peace. It is an objective that Obama and his administration can still achieve — if all the parties can engage seriously and if the negotiation’s terms of reference are clear.

Well, Maen Rashid Areikat, Palestine Liberation Organization ambassador and chief representative to the United States, how, exactly, will a Palestinian state create peace? And there should be no peace talks till Palestinians stop their violence against Israeli civilians first.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

On Friday Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu schooled President Obama — who is clearly out of his depth — on Middle East diplomacy. This would not have been necessary if Obama had not tried to turn decades of American foreign policy on its ear, if he had not turned against our only real Mid East friend, and if he hadn’t made to come to the comfort of radical Islamists without conscience who only want to kill Jews and Americans. Obama also proved that just killing bin Laden does not equal foreign policy expertise.

Coming off his high after presiding over the end of America’s number one enemy, Obama thought he saw an opening to help bin Laden’s Islamist pals win a small battle over Israel. He planned his big speech on America’s new Mid East policy. Unfortunately for President Obama, the Hindenburg had a more successful flight than Obama’s new foreign policy ideas.

Most of the president’s speech was pedestrian and meandering, but one sentence was snuck in that completely changed American Middle East policy, or at least it was intended to.

“The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.”

Now, many on the left are claiming that this is an unremarkable sentence and is nothing less than the repetition of foreign policy espoused by presidents going back decades. This spin is, however, wholly incorrect. This sentence is a major shift away from Israel and toward the radical Islamists that want Israel destroyed.

Prime Minister Netanyahu understood full well what a major shift this was and during his joint press conference with President Obama the Israeli PM shot down Obama’s foolish attempt to change direction in no uncertain terms. Why did the Israeli PM so sternly reprimand President Obama? Because Obama’s shift changes decades of American foreign policy in the favor of the so-called Palestinians.

Obama is the first president to claim that the 1967 border goal is an American goal. Previous presidents always couched this as a Palestinian goal, not an American one. This may be subtle, but it is important. The U.S. has never backed the Palestinian’s claim that the 1967 border is a condition for peace. Past American presidents talked of that border, yes, but only to mollify Palestinian sensibilities never as an American goal.