Obama And Israel

Well, it’s Amateur Hour at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue again.  Take a look at this report, released today by the British press:

For a head of state to visit the White House and not pose for photographers is rare. For a key ally to be left to his own devices while the President withdraws to have dinner in private was, until this week, unheard of.

Yet that is how Binyamin Netanyahu was treated by President Obama on Tuesday night, according to Israeli reports on a trip seen in Jerusalem tonight as a disastrous humiliation.

After failing to extract a written promise of concessions on Jewish settlements, Mr Obama walked out of his meeting with Mr Netanyahu but invited him to stay at the White House, consult with advisors and “let me know if there is anything new”, a US congressman who spoke to the Prime Minister said today.

“It was awful,” the congressman said. One Israeli newspaper called the meeting “a hazing in stages”, poisoned by such mistrust that the Israeli delegation eventually left rather than risk being eavesdropped on a White House phone line. Another said that the Prime Minister had received “the treatment reserved for the President of Equatorial Guinea”.

To say that I am angry and embarrassed by the treatment that Barack Obama gave the Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, would be understatement of the year. Can you imagine any other president of the United States telling a visiting Head of State–any State–to “let me know if there is anything new” while leaving him and his aides to find their own way out the door, so to speak. I mean, was there a basketball game on or something?

Whatever the reason, such rude treatment can only come from someone who is actively determined to humiliate his guests. And this is something we’ve seen before, whether it was the lackluster gifts–a $15 model of Marine One from the White House gift shop and stack of American DVD movies which would not play in European players–given to British PM Gordon Brown and his wife during their first official visit, or whether it was shuffling the Dalai Lama out the back door next to snow-covered trash piles in order to appease the Chinese.  We’ve seen it before, and it’s troubling.

From my perspective, this is just as much a concern as the passage of the healthcare reform bill. You might say that I am livid at the arrogance shown by President Obama and his representatives because Israel is the only friend that we have in the Middle East and because, without the support of the U.S., Israel faces an existential threat that few other than the Jews have had to deal with on a daily basis.

Of course, explaining the conundrum of the number of Jewish members of Obama’s administration while all this takes place would require someone much more knowledgeable than I in the diverse ways of the Jews, but from the perspective of this evangelical gentile, Israel and the Jews will always be “the apple” of God’s eyes. In my opinion, Israel is truly the “epicenter” of world affairs, as Joel Rosenberg so clearly and eloquently represents in his writings. Without joining the conspiracy theories that Barack Obama is a closet Muslim, the obvious disrespect that the Obama administration has shown for the rights of the Israelis to merely exist in peace is a clear indication that all of his claims of being a follower of Jesus Christ are merely an attempt to obfuscate his true religious commitment.

Important changes are taking place here in America, but don’t take your eyes off the relationship between the Obama administration and Israel. As Obama maneuvers to gain support of the U.N., Russia and China for “acceptable” sanctions against Iran, Israel must know that support from the U.S. is becoming more tentative every day. That being the case, I am convinced that it will drive Israel towards the inevitability of an armed response to Iran’s nuclear ambitions. If that should happen, the U.S.–along with the U.N. Security Council members–will blame Israel for being aggressive just when they were on the verge of implementing sanctions against Iran and a “two-state” agreement with the Palestinians. Israel will be left to “twist slowly in the wind.”

Jimmy Carter, in recent years, has demonstrated a propensity toward hugging Hamas members.  Bill Clinton’s most frequent foreign guest to the White House was Yasser Arafat.  This, it seems, is Barack Obama’s thumb in the eye of Israel, and it may be the worst of all of them.

Regardless, don’t be fooled. It will eventually come down to Israel against the rest of the world if we don’t demand that our elected officials guarantee protection of Israel against all aggression. I urge everyone to contact their representatives and insist that we remain steadfast in our commitment to Israel. Of all of the failures that the U.S. will be held accountable for in the sight of God, the failure to protect Israel will be right at the top of the list. At least that’s how I see it.

Share

Comments

  1. Just sayin says:

    3a : scrupulously and conscientiously faithful b : fervent, zealous

    this def of religious seems to fit Johns fervent, zealous, scrupulous and conscientiously faithful position on there being no God.

  2. Brian says:

    Hi Hugh,

    I appreciate your comments, as well as your zeal. Allow me to explain myself a bit…

    For the Christian, the purpose of the chosen people (royal lineage etc.) was simply to bring the Christ into the world. Thus, the royal line of David was carefully traced. All for the sake of the Messiah to come. In that respect, the Jews fulfilled their role in the world perfectly.

    Part 2 of their role was simply to accept Him when He came. In this regard, some of them did and some of them didn’t fulfill their role. Another way of phrasing it would be: Does the Old Covenant bring salvation, that is apart from Jesus Christ? For Christians, the answer is decidedly NO. For that matter, all of the Old Testament points to the coming of the Christ. To interpret it apart from Him is shaky at best.

    What happened when Our Lord was betrayed and put to death? The temple veil was torn in two, symbolically and literally indicating that God had left the temple. In other words, those who accepted His Son were to be His people.

    But, you may ask, what about the verses that you quote about God and Jerusalem/Israel? A case could be made that the Church now fulfills that role on earth, and is called to be an image of the ‘heavenly Jerusalem’ mentioned in Revelation. That is my belief.

    Further food for thought: Not all Palestinians are Islamic. Many of them are Christian. They suffer a lot at the hands of the State of Israel. Some truly horrific stuff, which I won’t get into here. My question for you is: Shouldn’t a supposedly Christian nation (USA) be somewhat concerned for what is happening to our Christian Brothers & Sisters being persecuted by our allies? Have you ever heard even a whisper out of Washington about their plight? Perhaps God cares more about those who reject His Christ than those who accept Him? I am still not saying that we shouldn’t support Israel. My point all along is that we have no Biblical obligation to do so.

    I will make one final point. When it comes to Israel and the Jews, people seem to be almost unable to think rationally. By way of example, I will point to the Bishop (Williamson, I think) who denied the Holocaust. Honestly, I didn’t take the time to examine his (unusual, to be kind) beliefs, but was greatly interested in the reaction. He was run out of the country that he was in (can’t recall the country). He had to go into hiding in England, I believe. He is still being threatened with law suits and the like. All of this for having an unpopular and strange opinion? What would you think if the 911 Truth-ers were run out of America? He was and is being persecuted because of AN OPINION! No matter how wrong headed or stupid his views may be, isn’t he entitled to them? What is wrong with people? He wasn’t advocating violence, he just disputes the history of WWII. Kooky, but run him out of the country and sue him? What?!?! People need to calm down and think rationally about the Jews. Our support of them should first and foremost be about OUR foreign policy, not someone’s ideas concerning them as somehow ‘chosen’ and demanding our support on religious grounds. We can, of course, disagree on this point. I just wanted to offer a bit of clarification.

    Brian

  3. Randy Wills says:

    I think that I’m going to be sick.

    Randy

  4. My dad liberated one of the camps says:

    I’m with Randy, my head is in the bowl.

  5. See ya later says:

    We’re not allowed to gloat in the afterlife, are we? What a shame.

  6. Stella Barbut says:

    Christians who think they have replaced the Jews and are now heirs apparent of the promises God made to the Jews, will wait a very long time. First God does not lie, He does not make promises He cannot keep. He made an everlasting covenant with Abraham which He extended to His descendants for all time, swearing an oath on His Own Most Holy Name as there was no one higher than Himself He could have sworn by. Even St. Paul admits as much. Heb. ch. 6 vs. 13 – 18. ” For when God made promise to Abrahan, because He could swear by no greater, He sware by Himself, saying, ‘Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee ‘ …… Wherein God willing more abundantly to show unto the HEIRS OF PROMISE THE IMMUTABILITY OF HIS COUNSEL, CONFIRMED IT BY AN OATH: THAT BY TWO IMMUTABLE THINGS, IN WHICH IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR GOD TO LIE ….” KJV.
    I think this is Saul, the Hebrew scholar chosen by Jesus speaking. Paul, Marcion’s make over has never been able to completely obliterate Saul. You will see what I mean if you read the beginning of the chapter. ” Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity…” (Revised Standard Version, Ecumenical Version ) ” Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go unto perfection ….” Isn’t the ” Elementary
    Doctrine of Christ ” or “the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ” what Christianity is all about?

  7. Take 2 says:

    Just for the record, my gloat comment was regarding atheism.

  8. Randy Wills says:

    To “Stella”.

    I agree with you that God’s plans for Israel did not stop with the advent of Christ and will continue until the “end of the ages”. I believe the Scriptures (both Old and New Testaments) are clear on that, but I would interpret Paul’s words regarding the “elemental things of the Gospel of Jesus Christ much differently (if I understand you correctly). I belive that what the apostle Paul is saying is that we who profess faith in Him should not remain as “babes in Christ, requiring milk rather than solid food”, not that the Gospel of Christ itself is “elemental”. He, and He alone – no doctrine coming from the mind of man, no church, no other intermediary – is the finished and complete work of God for salvation. However, there is a process of maturation in the life of the believer by which we griw into His likeness. I think that the writer of Heb.12:14 makes that very clear, and therein lies the problem of Christianity; few professing believers engage themselves in this process.

    With deep respect,

    Randy

  9. Arse with cash says:

    If the unhappy day ever comes when Israel is deserted by the rest of the world, Mr. Soros should understand that all the conversion in the world, as his mother did, or all the passing as a non-Jew, as he did to survive World War II, will not help. The ovens did not distinguish between rich or poor. Nor should all of Soros’ money give him a “pass” when it comes to public repudiation. If you put a pile of cash upon a donkey’s back underneath it, he is still a donkey.

    -jewishworldreview

Trackbacks

  1. [...] meeting.  Netanyahu failed to give Obama the concessions on Jewish settlements requested, so the President walked out of the meeting after inviting the prime minister to stay to consult with advisers and “let me know if there is [...]

Speak Your Mind

*