Since when does the US Administration send condolences to a criminal's family?
I know it happened in the Michael Brown case in Ferguson, Missouri. Now it is happening in Israel after an Arab youth who hurled firebombs at passing Israeli cars in Judea & Samaria, was killed by security forces. The Obama Administration sent official condolences to the family of this young terrorist when, as part of a violent mob, he endangering the lives of Israelis.
Any country must adopt an unquestioned zero tolerance to growing deadly violence and terrorism. But the attitude of an American Administration is troubling. Would it, I wonder, have sent condolences to the family had the perpetrator of firebomb attacks been an Israeli-American, and the intended victims Arabs? I doubt it. I suspect the Administration would have harshly condemned the act, the perpetrator, and Israel.
Enough, already, of this political incorrectness!
But where is this biased animus coming from? I strongly suspect it is coming from the top of the present US Administration, from Obama himself.
There is a deep motive behind Obama's animus toward Israel. It stems from his far left Socialist political upbringing both at family and personal mentor levels. It has framed his political mindset both at home and abroad. It is this that affects his worldview. Anyone reading his autobiography, particularly the imprisonment and alleged torture of his grandfather in Kenya by the British, must take from it a sense that the American president harbors resentment to perceived colonizers, oppressors, and imperialist powers. He looks on countries through the prism of his upbringing. Official relations may appear normal on the surface, but grievances bubble up in personal slights. Take, for example, the little addressed gesture by Obama of returning the bust of Winston Churchill that had taken pride of place in the White House, to Britain on entering the presidential residence. It was nothing less than a personal gesture of resentment.
There is little doubt that Obama feels a personal kinship with the Muslim world. This again is grounded by his personal life experiences in Muslim countries. A personal affinity by an important world leader is often a good thing and can make for a more peaceful world if balanced with wisdom and diplomatic skills. What Obama does not take on board is the centuries old hatred of non-believers, and a past of corrupt and primitively brutal reigns of conquest, slavery, and slaughter. Instead, he shares their accusations that all their troubles have been caused by the colonizers, oppressors, and imperial powers of which America is the modern day leader.
Obama is a quintessential abusive husband. He tells Israel he loves us even as he abuses us
Once adopted, Israel is perceived as a colonizer and occupier, especially if that view is expounded through his formative contact years with people such as Khalid al Mansour a vile anti-Semite and radicalized Muslim, who was a high level adviser to Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal. He wrote a letter of recommendation to Harvard for Barack Obama to gain acceptance, and Arafat adviser, Rashid Khalidi, to whom Obama lavished praise at a Chicago farewell party when Khalidi headed off to Columbia.
Obama has exhibited a double-talk and double vision to the carry-over of nations formally viewed as American allies prior to his election. Trapped in an establishment that conducts business as normal, his antipathy spills over in personal spats that Israel has seen on numerous occasions.
Obama is a quintessential abusive husband. He tells Israel he loves us even as he abuses us.
The latest example was his, and Kerry's, rebuttal of Israel's Defense Minister in Washington, which was a new low point in US-Israel relations.
The nastiness of the Obama Administration was displayed by the State Department spokesperson that summarily dismissed the Mahmoud Abbas incitement that led to ongoing Jerusalem terror attacks which left a 3 month old baby dead, but slammed down on Jews legally buying homes in Jerusalem.
This spitefulness is seen in America denying visas to Israelis and temporarily preventing the resupply of armaments to Israel in the middle of a Gaza war.
A headline display of spite was Obama leaving Israel's Prime Minister to stew in the White House while he stormed off to have dinner with Michelle in March 2010. Obama snubbed Netanyahu again in September 2012 over important Iranian nuclear issues.
In an October, 2013 article, "Obama gets cozy with Turkey; Snubs Israel." Frank Gaffney wrote; "his administration has behaved toward Israel as though it were, at best, a country in which we have no interests. At worst, Obama seems to consider the Jewish State as a hostile power. He has: repeatedly demeaned its leader, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu; contributed to its international isolation (for example, by demanding at one point an end to settlement expansion as a precondition for the resumption of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations); and subverted its vital interests (notably, by declaring that Israel must withdraw to the indefensible pre-1967 borders)."
Gaffney added, "Barack Obama has treated Turkey as a reliable partner even though, for the better part of a decade under its Islamist Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, this nation that is supposedly a NATO ally has been aligning ever more palpably with our adversaries."
We see the US both retreating from the region but also changing sides in the region. Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood on Egypt. During the Gaza conflict, his Administration sided with Qatar and Turkey against the wishes of Israel, Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia.
Because of local upheavals linked to the attitude of Obama's Administration we have seen the emergence of an alliance of common interests which is a fascinating new opportunity for Israel.
As Caroline Glick astutely pointed out in a recent talk in Netanya, our neighbors are pondering on how to get through an Obama presidency. This particularly applies to an Israel suffering from a presidential animus, which is an integral part of his personal and political DNA.
My opinion was formed from living in Israel, witnessing the horror of terror, reading the misinformation and downright lies perpetrated by the Western media, seen the incompetence of Israeli leaders to project the facts. My website comes from a particularly personal perspective. The articles may be controversial and provocative. For whatever strikes Israel today will surely visit you tomorrow.
