Hello Friends,

It appears that the great pretender B. Hussein Obama knows no limits when it comes to supporting enemies of the US, the world and Israel.

Hamas is recognized by law in the US and in most western countries as a terrorist organization and can receive no Federal support or monetary aid/assistance according to law. B. Hussein committed over $800 million to the PA for Gaza (that is under the control of Hamas).

B. Hussein is trying to change that now by asking/telling congress to make changes in the law that would allow Federal Aid be given to the Palestinian Authority even if it will be a coalition government of Fatah/PLO and Hamas. Aside from the danger of this money never reaching the people but instead turn into funding for the Hamas military activity it will give them the feeling that the US administration supports Hamas. They would justified in their feeling.

It is my belief that BHO is following an agenda that in a way is counter productive in assisting to finalize a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. I also believe it is an extension of his appeasement  policy that hasn't shown much success nor will it. So far all he's gotten from the enemies of the US is the proverbial finger and from his European allies "mind your own business". His inexperience and lack of knowledge in Foreign Affairs is obvious to friends and foes alike and the response is similar in both cases.

My concern is that despite his lack of experience and blunders he has an agenda and is following through with it Internationally and within the USA. This agenda which is becoming clear to more and more Americans including those that supported him and now regret it, will bring the USA to it's knees and ruin a proud democratic Republic that will in the end be a socialistic third world country.

Shalom,

Peter



The administration's proposal is akin to agreeing to support a government that "only has a few Nazis in it," Rep. Mark Steven Kirk (R-Ill.) told Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton at a House hearing last week.

The move underscores the quandary faced by the Obama administration in its efforts to broker Mideast peace. President Obama has repeatedly called for a separate Palestinian state. But negotiating a peace agreement, or even distributing aid, will be difficult without dealing with Hamas, which won Palestinian elections in 2006.

The administration requested the changes this month as part of an $83.4-billion emergency spending bill that also contains funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill also would provide $840 million for the Palestinian Authority and for rebuilding in Gaza after the 22-day Israeli military assault this year. The administration still is wrestling with how to deliver the aid to Gaza because of the tough federal restrictions on dealing with Hamas.

U.S. officials insist that the new proposal doesn't amount to recognizing or aiding Hamas. Under law, any U.S. aid would require that the Palestinian government meet three long-standing criteria: recognizing Israel, renouncing violence and agreeing to follow past Israeli-Palestinian agreements.

Hamas as an organization doesn't meet those criteria. However, if the rival Palestinian factions manage to reach a power-sharing deal, the Obama administration wants to be able to provide aid as long as the Hamas-backed members of the government -- if not Hamas itself -- meet the three criteria. Read the rest here.

 

Hello Friends,

Here's another article by Barry Rubin you'll find interesting about the changes in the law regarding Hamas that B. Hussein Obama is asking/demanding "his" congress to pass.

The problems are obvious and I wonder if Congress will submit to his demands.

Shalom,

Peter

Proposed Concessions to Hamas Show Obama Administration Is Clueless

Posted: 28 Apr 2009 04:08 AM PDT

In what might eventually become its first step directly damaging U.S.-Israel relations and injuring Israel’s interests, the Obama administration has reportedly proposed allowing American aid to go to a Palestinian Authority (PA) even if Hamas, which is designated in U.S. law as a terrorist group, would be participating in it.

Several notes of caution: this is a trial balloon; it isn’t clear that the administration is going to make a serious effort to pass this; it is probable that Congress won’t do it; and even if the change would be made it isn’t going to have any direct practical implication.

And what does all this start to tell us? It is more an incredibly stupid idea than it is a dangerous one on its own merit, but in the final analysis it is both stupid and dangerous.

Why does it reflect so badly on the administration’s judgment and understanding of the Middle East? Not for the reasons you probably think.

First, it is unnecessary. There is no immediate need or strategic gain to be made by such a step (quite the contrary, as we shall see in a moment). Hamas isn’t in coalition with the PA nor does it have any prospect of joining. The negotiations are going badly and anyone with half a brain should be able to see that Fatah, which runs the PA, won’t accept Hamas’s domination and vice-versa.

What do you call someone in Washington DC who sacrifices political capital for nothing? Answer: extremely stupid.

As the great French foreign minister Charles de Talleyrand once put it, in international affairs blunders are worse than crimes. Talleyrand was not a very nice man. He never apologized for anything. He was a very successful diplomatist.

Second, though, the proposal is dangerous. It signals Hamas that the United States is ready to give it a concession without that group changing anything. Go on, the administration appears to be saying, being terrorist, genocidal in intention, antisemitic, and incredibly repressive of your own people. Why should that stop us giving you money and recognition in future?

And it signals Fatah and the PA that the United States wants them to make a coalition with Hamas. That’s the way people think in the Middle East and U.S. officials are supposed to understand this. You can bet your real assets that at this very moment in Ramallah, Hebron, and Nablus people are saying: Obama is now backing Hamas!

As such, it gives aid and comfort to those in Fatah who think that the two Palestinian groups should join to fight Israel. And it gives encouragement to almost all of Fatah which would rather have peace with Hamas than peace with Israel.

Obama says he wants to move the peace process forward. Instead, he has just punctured one of its tires.
Note however that in a few weeks the administration may face a real situation like this. If the Lebanese election results in Hizballah participating or even dominating the government, the United States is signaling that it will continue aid there also, thus undermining the moderates in the voting.

What would a smart policy do? Insist that the United States will never ever give money to any PA government in which Hamas participated unless Hamas changed its goals and methods, that is recognize Israel's existence and cease terrorism. In other words, the same policy the United States has had up to now.

Why? Because that presses Hamas to change (even if it won't change, that should be Hamas's problem and loss), encourges the PA to stand tough, shows the PA and others that the United States rewards moderation and punished radicalism and terrorism. This encourages others to be more moderate and not to give in to extremists, while encouraging other extremists to think about changing their ways.

Of course, if a coalition was formed in spite of your efforts you can rethink your policy. You shouldn't give in but at least you have the option of taking new facts into account.

That's how policymakers are supposed to work.

Memo to administration policymakers: Leverage is an important principle in international affairs. You have something. Others want it. Make them pay for it. Don’t give it away free.

Memo 2 to administration policymakers: Every time you make a concession to your enemies, it hurts your friends who have the same enemies. They start thinking you are supporting their enemies. They become demoralized. They seek to cut their own deals.

Whether or not the administration does push forward with a change that might be called the Let’s Give Money to Hamas Terrorists Act of 2009, it is one more piece of evidence as to its very serious misunderstanding of how diplomacy works and the current state of the Middle East.

Hello Robert,

Very interesting post and you raise important questions that most probably are part of the give up attitude we're seeing in Europe.

The European Union's function is clear to many and I'm quite sure you are aware of them. Not so much to repair the differences between the nations but more to have all of Europe under one law that will govern and in the end replace the governments of the individual Countries. A similar plan is in effect for North America and other parts of the world.This is in fact another danger we are facing but at the moment the Islamic danger of world domination is the more important of the 2 (unless they are part and parcel of the same plan).

Faith is a most important part of our salvation and not a religious salvation but our way of life, culture and the right to religious freedom. It is a bit difficult to compare the Europe of old to the Europe of today. Then there was one major religion in Europe until the divisions we've discussed in the recent past. Today Europe and the world have many religions incorporated in their countries and in that sense it might be more difficult to unite all under one religious "flag" but a more difficult process of uniting all the religions to fight the Islamisation of the world. A difficult task but one that we definitely have to consider.

Would this help Gert Wilders in mission?? For sure and for people of faith like yourself it's a starting point to assist in the massive fight Wilders has taken upon himself and  of course now the many that have joined  in that fight.

The thought that we will lose this fight is incomprehensible to me cos I can't envision the possibility that my children, grandchildren and future generations would have to live under Islam and its laws that are antidemocratic and barbaric. So we all must join in and fight in our different ways. I think we just found how you can do your share.

Shalom,

Peter

Hello Peter and Friends,
 Lots of reading here I had to catch up on. I believe BHO knows exactly what he is doing by supporting Hamas financially. I also know that none of the money he handed them is going to make it to any humanitian aid for the people of Gaza. It will be used to buy material to make rockets to send down on Israel.

 It looks like Europe has already given into the pressure of Islam. I also have a feeling that much of that has happened due to the politically correctness they have embrassed. I wonder how much pressure Islam has placed on those contries that the general population knows nothing about ?

Living under Islam  rule would be worse than death in my opinion and of  course being Jewish I probably would be killed and not have the choice anyway. If the people of the world don't unite for the common cause of ridding the planet of Islamic terrorist we are all doomed.

Shalom,

Geketa

Hello Peter,

Yes, there are many things to do in all sectors and often they are in those that may seem irrelevant but, as I said they have all their fundamental importance even if some are more spectacular than others. When a house is burning it is very relevant to have someone by the waterfront to fill the buckets as they come, even if this will never get that person or occupants highlighted for heroic deeds. I call this communal faith.

Europe, you say Eurabia, even if I do not believe that to be fitting, has its own battles. They are different maybe but just as bad as well as deadly. Recently Belgium tried to convict the Pope for association towards human slaughter for his words about the preservative. One only needs to bring out one sentence in a whole argument to pervert the saying of anyone. Only yesterday was this case abandoned for lack of substance and followers. The government, once more them, showed their real intentions and objectives. (BHO is no worse!)  I France the battle is on to abolish Sunday as a day of rest. The list simply goes on always in a very systematic anti Christian manner. Portray Our Lord or anything religious as a farce, and you hit record laughters and success. But dare you not even hint on Mohamed or you might face in court exemplary rulings. In all of these fronts people and associations are starting to move thanks to the courage of many, whether this is in national parliaments or in the European parliament, by creating private schools or private conferences, lobbying or demonstrations, as I said the list is very, very long. One such initiative some years back in Belgium was a Google bombing of the minister of armies. Mr Flahau. (It’s hard to do with Google now days.) How did this work? A few army webmasters and more of their friends all outbound-linked their websites discreetly to the Minister’s web homepage. We all know how interesting inbound links are for our Google rankings, especially when the link tag is relevant to your website. Some years back Google was less smart to detecting these “bombs”. All used the word in French rather similar to *ssh*le, and three weeks later the best viral email circulated to announce a top Google ranking of the minister for that word. I am afraid that this rather democratic voting bomb technique no longer works with Google, they have obviously become too republican! LOL

Friendly yours,

Robert.