Why Obama broke with Israel at UN: The White House spinner Ben Rhodes tells us why

crew-2231211The obvious reason is that Obama is an Arab, anti-Semite, P.O.S.

 

But take a look at how Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security adviser spins this nonsense below.

 

THE HILL

December 24, 2016

Obama didn’t just stab Israel in the back during the recent debacle, he has done so at every opportunity. (Source)
© Getty Images

The White House’s decision to break with decades of U.S. policy and allow the U.N. Security Council to condemn Israeli settlements is the culmination of years of bad blood between  Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. 

The decision won Obama criticism from across the political spectrum, and almost certainly wouldn’t have been made if Hillary Clinton had won the presidential election.

flashbacks

 

See U.N. Ambassador Samantha Powers have an LSD flashback in the video below.

 

It opened him up to condemnation from President-elect Donald Trump and the right, could lead to a battle over U.S. funding for the U.N. in Congress. 

But Obama’s team decided it was worth it.

Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security adviser, said the rapid expansion of settlement activity under Netanyahu had put the possibility of a future peace agreement at risk.

bullshitBen Rhodes is just as badly brainwashed as the rest of the “Klingons,” in Obama’s administration. 

 

We could not in good conscience veto a resolution that expressed concerns about the very trends that are eroding the foundation of a two-state solution,” he told reporters. 

Netanyahu’s office, in turn, made some of its harshest criticisms of Obama to date, accusing the president of plotting behind Israel’s back to undermine the Jewish state. 

“The Obama administration not only failed to protect Israel against this gang-up at the U.N., it colluded with it behind the scenes,” Netanyahu’s office said in a statement. 

Rhodes disputed that claim, saying that Obama only informed his national security team Friday morning of his decision to abstain from the vote.

He said the U.S. had no role in drafting the resolution. 

See the entire article below.

 

But Rhodes said Netanyahu had only himself to blame for its passage, saying he failed to heed repeated U.S. warnings that increased settlement activity could lead to greater pressure from the international community.

“Prime Minister Netanyahu had the opportunity to pursue policies that would have led to a different outcome today,” Rhodes said.

The administration’s decision was borne out of frustration and a desire to resolve a conflict that has dogged generations of U.S. presidents.

Multiple U.S. administrations have opposed Israeli settlement activity in areas claimed by Palestinians, calling them a major obstacle to a two-state solution. The language of Friday’s resolution was largely in line with that policy.

But since 1980, the U.S. has vetoed settlement-related resolutions at the U.N.

Rhodes explained the U.S. abstained from, instead of voted for, the resolution because it has long viewed the international body as an inappropriate venue to broker a Middle East peace deal due to anti-Israel sentiment of several member states.

The move could backfire on Obama by emboldening Netanyahu and Trump to pursue hard-line policies toward Palestinians that contradict the president’s approach.

“As to the U.N., things will be different after Jan. 20th,” Trump tweeted after the vote.

Rhodes denied the president’s decision would have any bearing on Trump’s policies, which he said were set long before Friday’s vote.

But he also struggled to explain how it would improve the situation in the Middle East.

Instead, the decision appeared to be one final chance for Obama to flex his muscles on the world stage in front of Trump, who has publicly taken stances on foreign policy at odds with the current administration.

“There is one president at a time,” Rhodes said. “President Obama is the president of the United States until Jan. 20 and we are taking this action, of course, as U.S. policy.”

That could make life difficult for the Israeli government down the road in possible peace negotiations, even though Trump appears poised change that policy.

While the Security Council resolution does not carry practical consequences, it could give Palestinians a precedent to point to on settlement construction in future talks with the Israelis.

That could have complicated Clinton’s efforts to reach a peace deal if she had won the election. Now it will be Trump’s problem.

Friday’s vote could alter Obama’s legacy on Israel.

Obama has long defended himself from criticism that he did not do enough to aid his nation’s chief ally in the Middle East, pointing to actions like the $38 billion military aid deal both nations struck this year.

But critics say the move could embolden Israel’s numerous enemies and invite new international pressure against the Jewish state.

It also deepened an emerging split in the Democratic Party over Israel, which many Jewish groups worry could weaken bipartisan support for the country.
Incoming Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) called the vote “frustrating, disappointing and confounding” and said it will move Israel further from peace.
But the liberal Jewish group J Street applauded Obama, saying the vote “conveys the overwhelming support of the international community.”
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who is Jewish, also came to Obama’s defense, saying the vote sends a “strong message that the United States still supports a two-state solution.”
Yediot Aharonot, one of Israel’s largest newspapers, called the vote “the lowest moment in the relations between the Israeli government and the Obama administration.”

The vote also kick-started an effort by some Senate Republicans to reduce U.S. financial assistance to the U.N.

Obama has long valued the U.N. as a venue to broker important international agreements on issues like climate change and prevent foreign wars.

Any withdrawal of financial support would be a rebuke to the president’s vision.

“If we were to cut funding for the U.N. in response for this resolution, all we would be doing is hurting other people, hurting our own interests,” Rhodes said.

 

THE END

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “Why Obama broke with Israel at UN: The White House spinner Ben Rhodes tells us why

  1. Pingback: Why Obama broke with Israel at UN | zooforyou

  2. We just saw on the news that the idot John Kerry stated that those Israel states were the cause of the terror attacks.

    Liked by 1 person

    • John Kerry, Dumber than a box of rocks. Israel formed in 1948 Muslims have been killing non-believers since Islam was reported to be a religion when in fact it’s nothing but a cult.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Obama is a Muslim and he has stated that as FACT so many times I wonder how people missed it?

    The Islamic Culture is completely out of step with a sane and educated world.

    Israel is doomed if it allows this type of gang behavior to continue. Of course, Israel will not allow this type of attack upon its sovereign being and there will be yet another war.

    Simply put, the Muslims cannot survive in their existing world and will continue to attempt to dominate the entire world. SO, more wars and death.

    While the oil is an important ingredient for the world, the Muslims are not a necessary benefit to a global society.

    Like

  4. Actually, he’s a homosexual arab, a muslim, married to a man masquerading as a woman. I truly suspect he’ll have revelations about his religion and sexual preference once he’s out of the White House. We’ll be taught what racists and sexists we are by a man that can’t recite the “Happy Birthday” song without a teleprompter.

    Merry Christmas or Happy Chanukah as the situation fits.

    Like

  5. To Dave the Differentiat (and others) – Concerning Muslims.

    Australian police foil terror attack planned for Christmas Day in Melbourne

    Four men that were arrested were born in Australia while the other suspect facing charges was born in Egypt.

    The contagion of a diseased political movement masquerading as a religion. Years ago, reading books by the Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung, I remember him addressing the issue of how dangerously appealing thoughts of psychotics can be to their therapist, or for that matter, any non-psychotics they encounter. Not able to find the exact passage (I think it pertained to a psychotic patient describing a black sunrise), I did find this:

    Society is organized, indeed, less by law than by the propensity to imitation, implying equally suggestibility, suggestion, and mental contagion.

    This is why it’s absolutely imperative that all muslim refugees are kept out of America and Europe. 4 men arrested in Australia were born there, the 5th born in Egypt.

    Listen to others with firsthand experience with muslims.

    Brigitte Gabriel: Western Leaders Afraid of the Truth About Islam

    Brigitte Gabriel gives FANTASTIC answer to Muslim woman claiming all Muslims are portrayed badly

    Woman Raised muslim Drops Truth About Islam

    The Latest News From The Shoebat Foundation

    Polish Protesting Against Muslim Refugees: 150,000 Polish Nationalists march against muslim immigration

    And, in response to the massacre of innocent people in Germany during their Christmas event: ‘We Will Not Let You Muslims Destroy The Cultural Identity Of Europe’ Slovakian PM Robert Fico Doubles Down Against Islam After Terrorist Attacks

    After the horrible terrorist attacks at the Christmas market in Berlin, Slovakian PM Robert Fico has doubled down again the Muslims, saying what happened there was proof that Islam is threatening to destroy the cultural identity of Europe. He vowed to work with the Czech Republic and Austria to seal their borders, keep Muslims out, and prevent the formation of a Muslim community in Slovakia…..This is how a government is supposed to handle a threat from Islam and Muslims. Kowtowing, pleading, or “dialog” does not work because Islam does not care about these things because it only comes to crush, conquer, and convert anybody and anything that is not part of the dar Al-Islam.

    Do we want this barbarism in America, should this have ever been allowed in Europe? “I would do it again 100 times”: Muslim father ‘murdered his THREE daughters in honour killing for dating wrong boys’

    This assures muslims will not assimilate, they are not allowed, they want to dominate at all costs.

    • A radical muslim will cut your head off.
    • A moderate muslim will ask the radical to cut your head off.
    • A peaceful muslim sits silently watching the moderate ask the radical to cut your head off.
    ° So the day that the muslim world stands up ENMASSE and denounces its radicals is the day every last one of them ceases to be a threat to humanity.

    Not a single day before.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s