USA/ISRAEL: Obama's speech on ME and reaction thereto...

 

“This movement (International Jewry) amongst the Jews (the Russian Revolution) is not new. This world wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and the reconstruction of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played.. a definitely recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century. There is no need to exaggerate the part (they) played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistic Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from Jewish leaders.” – Winston Churchill, “Zionism vs. Bolshevism”, in Illustrated Sunday Herald, February 8, 1920

 

Full transcript of Obama's Middle East speech

 

Below is the text of the speech on the Middle East and North Africa that U.S. President Barack Obama delivered at the State Department in Washington on May 19, 2011.

 

By Haaretz Service 

The text of the speech

"The State Department is a fitting venue to mark a new chapter in American diplomacy. For six months, we have witnessed an extraordinary change take place in the Middle East and North Africa. Square by square; town by town; country by country; the people have risen up to demand their basic human rights.

Two leaders have stepped aside. More may follow. And though these countries may be a great distance from our shores, we know that our own future is bound to this region by the forces of economics and security; history and faith.

Today, I would like to talk about this change - the forces that are driving it, and how we can respond in a way that advances our values and strengthens our security. Already, we have done much to shift our foreign policy following a decade defined by two costly conflicts. After years of war in Iraq, we have removed 100,000 American troops and ended our combat mission there. In Afghanistan, we have broken the Taliban's momentum, and this July we will begin to bring our troops home and continue transition to Afghan lead. And after years of war against al-Qaida and its affiliates, we have dealt al-Qaida a huge blow by killing its leader - Osama Bin Laden.

Read more here: http://www.haaretz.com/news/mideast-in-turmoil/full-transcript-of-obama-s-middle-east-speech-1.363035

Ahead of meeting with Obama, Netanyahu says 'there are things that can't be swept under the carpet'

 

Obama does not understand the reality of Israel's situation, senior Israeli official says on Friday.

 

By Reuters and Haaretz Service

Asked why he gave a strong rebuttal to U.S. President Barack Obama's speech on the Middle East, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told reporters on Friday on board his plane to Washington: "There are things that can't be swept under the carpet." 

As Netanyahu arrived in the U.S. ahead of his meeting with the American president later in the day, a senior Israeli official said that Obama does not understand the reality of Israel's situation.

Read more here: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/ahead-of-meeting-with-obama-netanyahu-says-there-are-things-that-can-t-be-swept-under-the-carpet-1.363041

Obama to aides: Netanyahu will never do what it takes to achieve Mideast peace

 

Comment reported in New York Times comes amid growing tensions between Washington and Jerusalem over the U.S. President's backing of a Palestinian state within 1967 borders.

 

By Haaretz Service

U.S. President Barack Obama does not think Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will ever make the concessions necessary to achieve a Middle East peace deal, the New York Times cited Obama aides as saying on Friday.

The comments attributed to associates of the U.S. president comes amid what is turning become into a veritable war of words between Israel and the U.S., following Obama's Mideast strategy speech on Thursday in which the American leader voiced his support for a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders.

Read more here: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/obama-to-aides-netanyahu-will-never-do-what-it-takes-to-achieve-mideast-peace-1.362964

Obama speech will assist UN recognition of Palestinian state, Egypt official says

Egyptian envoy to the UN says U.S. President's support of a Palestinian state within 1967 borders crucial, adding that Cairo was pressuring Hamas to accept Quartet Mideast peace principles.

 

By The Associated Press

President Barack Obama's backing of a key Palestinian demand on the borders of its future state will help win UN recognition of a Palestinian state, Egypt's UN ambassador said Thursday.

Maged Abdelaziz linked Obama's support for the borders that existed before the 1967 Arab-Israeli war to the Palestinian campaign to get two-thirds of the UN General Assembly — at least 128 of its 192 member states — to recognize Palestine as a state by September.

He predicted the Palestinians would get support from at least 130 nations, which would be "a milestone," and would keep pursuing additional recognitions.

Read more here: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/obama-speech-will-assist-un-recognition-of-palestinian-state-egypt-official-says-1.362961

___________________________________________

Blogger's Comment

Suez Crisis

The Suez Crisis, also referred to as the Tripartite Aggression,^[7][8] (Arabic: أزمة السويس - العدوان الثلاثي‎ ʾAzmat al-Sūwais/Al-ʿIdwān al-Thalāthī; French: Crise du canal de Suez; Hebrew: מבצע קדש‎ Mivtza' Kadesh "Operation Kadesh," or מלחמת סיני Milxemet Sinai, "Sinai War") was an offensive war fought by France, Britain, and Israel against Egypt beginning on October 29, 1956. Less than a day after Israel invaded Egypt, Britain and France issued a joint ultimatum to both Egypt and Israel, and then began to bomb Cairo. In a short time, and despite Israeli and British denials, considerable evidence showed that the two attacks were planned in collusion, with France as the instigator, Britain as a belated partner, and Israel as the willing trigger. Anglo-French forces withdrew before the end of the year, but Israeli forces remained until March 1957, prolonging the crisis. In April, the canal was fully reopened to shipping, but other repercussions continued.

The attack followed the President of Egypt Gamel Abdel Nasser's decision of 26 July 1956 to nationalize the Suez Canal, after the withdrawal of an offer by Britain and the United States to fund the building of the Aswan Dam, which was in response to Egypt's new ties with the Soviet Union and recognizing the People's Republic of China during the height of tensions between China and Taiwan. The aims of the attack were primarily to regain Western control of the canal and precipitate the fall of Nasser from power, whose policies were viewed as potentially threatening the strategic interests of the three nations.

The three allies, especially Israel, were mainly successful in attaining their immediate military objectives, but pressure from the United States and the USSR at the United Nations and elsewhere forced them to withdraw. As a result of the outside pressure Britain and France failed in their political and strategic aims of controlling the canal and removing Nasser from power. Israel fulfilled some of its objectives, such as attaining freedom of navigation through the Straits of Tiran. As a result of the conflict, the UNEF would police the Egyptian-Israeli border to prevent both sides from recommencing hostilities.

International reaction

The operation, aimed at taking control of the Suez Canal, Gaza, and parts of Sinai, was highly successful for the invaders from a military point of view, but was a disaster from a political point of view, resulting in international criticism and diplomatic pressure. Along with the Suez crisis, the United States was also dealing with the near-simultaneous Hungarian revolution; as events unfolded, the U.S. decided it could not criticise outside Soviet suppression of the Hungarian revolt and simultaneously avoid opposing outside aggression by its two principal European allies and Israel. Eisenhower may have been appalled by the Israeli invasion of Egypt, but feared losing the Jewish vote if he publicly condemned Israel. Despite having no commercial or military interest in the area, many countries were concerned with what was a growing rift between Western allied nations. In the United States many Democratic and Republican politicians alike openly supported the British, French and Israelis, including the Senate leader Lyndon B. Johnson who urged Eisenhower to give his full support.

On 30 October, the Security Council held a meeting, at the request of the United States, when it submitted a draft resolution calling upon Israel immediately to withdraw its armed forces behind the established armistice lines. It was not adopted because of British and French vetoes. A similar draft resolution sponsored by the Soviet Union was also rejected. On 31 October, also as planned, France and the UK launched an air attack against targets in Egypt, which was followed shortly by a landing of their troops at the northern end of the canal. Later that day, considering the grave situation created by the actions against Egypt, and with lack of unanimity among the permanent members preventing it from exercising its primary responsibility to maintain international peace and security, the Security Council passed Resolution 119; it decided to call an emergency special session of the General Assembly for the first time, as provided in the 1950 "Uniting for Peace" resolution, in order to make appropriate recommendations to end the fighting.

The emergency special session was convened 1 November; the same day Nasser requested diplomatic assistance from the U.S., without requesting the same from the Soviet Union; he was at first skeptical of the efficacy of US diplomatic efforts at the UN, but later gave full credit to Eisenhower's role in stopping the war. In the early hours of 2 November, the General Assembly adopted the United States' proposal for Resolution 997 (ES-I); it called for an immediate ceasefire, the withdrawal of all forces behind the armistice lines, an arms embargo, and the reopening of the Suez Canal, which was blocked. The Secretary-General was requested to observe and report promptly on compliance to both the Security Council and General Assembly, for further action as deemed appropriate in accordance with the U N Charter. Over the next several days, the emergency special session consequently adopted a series of enabling resolutions, which established the first United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF), on 7 November by Resolution 1001. This proposal of the emergency force and the resulting cease-fire was made possible primarily through the efforts of, Lester B. Pearson, the Secretary of External Affairs of Canada, and Dag Hammarskjöld, the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The role of Nehru, both as Indian Prime minister and a leader of the Non Aligned Movement was significant; he tried to be even-handed between the two sides, while denouncing Eden and co-sponsors of the aggression vigorously. Nehru had a powerful ally in the US president Dwight Eisenhower who, if relatively silent publicly, went to the extent of using America’s clout in the IMF to make Eden and Mollet back down. Portugal and Iceland went so far as to suggest ejecting Britain and France from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) defense pact if they didn't withdraw from Egypt.^{[53][not in citation given]} Nehru achieved his objective of protecting Egypt’s sovereignty and Nasser's honour; the Suez War ended in Britain's humiliation and Eden later resigned. Britain and France agreed to withdraw from Egypt within a week; Israel did not.

___________________________________________

The above synopsis from Wikipedia shows the manner in which the satanic state of israel operates, and also shows that the international reaction (USA and USSR pressure) through the UN was a success. 

My point is: Is the USA willing to pressure Israel to accept the 1967 border? As for Israel reaction, it has already rejected the offer. As for the USA; a country totally controlled by the Jews (AIPAC) and a nation being brain-washed by the Jewish owned and operated media, and a gutless president who whose advisers are Jews, There is no shadow of doubt in my heart that the USA duplicity is stronger than ever. 

Benjamin Netanyahu meets and discusses things with Obama (God know what!) Obama talks (in his speech) about the 1967 borders. Bibi rejects the offer. 

It is a game played again and over again. Example: Obamas Cairo speech in which he mentioned that construction of settlements in Israel must be frozen. And it never happened. On the contrary Obama was mocked by the Jews. He was called "nigger", "slave", "Muslims lover"; anything that is mentioned in the Jewish book of insults.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Mr. President, go to hell!