The American Leaders Obsess Over Israel Protocol of the Elders of Zion —13, para 6 says: “Who will ever suspect then that ALL THESE PEOPLES WERE STAGE-MANAGED BY US ACCORDING TO A POLITICAL PLAN WHICH NO ONE HAS SO MUCH AS GUESSED AT IN THE COURSE OF MANY CENTURIES?” American presidential candidates almost always rush for Jewish (Zionists) funds: That is why facts speak for themselves objectively and correctly that every US presidential race almost always becomes a big political event for American leaders from both Republican and Democratic parties to take part in a “formula competition” to serve the Zionist Israel better! Shmuel Rosner in his article titled “Debating Israel” published in latitude.blogs.nytimes October 26, 2012, wrote that “At the end of the third U.S. presidential debate — the one in which Barack Obama and Mitt Romney clashed at times over actual foreign policy issues — I had to reconcile two competing feelings. As an Israeli, I can’t help but have a childish glee over the frequent mention of my country, a reminder of its important place in U.S. foreign policy. At the same time, I can’t help but wonder: Is this attention not a bit too much?” The candidates referred to Israel over and over again. Romney called the country ‘‘our ally’’ and bragged of his relationship with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Obama vowed to make Egypt abide by the ‘‘red line’’ of keeping its peace treaty with Israel (apparently, in some cases, the U.S. president does believe in red lines). Romney criticized Obama for suggesting that a bit of ‘‘daylight’’ between the United States and Israel is a good thing. Obama reminded us that ‘‘Israel is a true friend.’’ And, of course, both promised to stand by Israel if the country were ever attacked. On and on they went. There were more than 30 mentions of Israel. The word Europe was uttered once, India got not a word. Yes, Iran was mentioned even more times than Israel, but it was in the context of a threat. (In fact, that Iran was mentioned so many times is yet another victory for Israel.) “One Israeli newspaper called my country the “big winner” of the debate. This is right, in some ways. Giving Israel such prominence in a discussion of U.S. foreign affairs makes the country stronger and seem larger than it really is, thereby deterring enemies who notice how far American leaders are willing to go in stating their allegiance to an old ally,” Shmuel Rosner, an editor and columnist based in Tel Aviv. “But all this support has a down side as well: It can make Israel a target for all those wanting to hurt America without actually making war against the United States. And, more importantly, it has the potential of making Israel seem like a burden to some American voters — which of course wouldn’t serve Israel’s interests in the end. When I start to think of it this way, the spotlight on my country becomes unnerving,” he said. There’s nothing new about this obsession with Israel. It was not much different four years ago, when Obama ran against Senator John McCain, or in the decades of presidential races before that. In the first 2008 presidential debate, Israel was mentioned seven times. Like Romney today, McCain criticized Obama. “What Senator Obama doesn’t seem to understand [is] that if without precondition you sit down across the table from someone who has called Israel a ‘stinking corpse,’ and wants to destroy that country and wipe it off the map,” McCain said, referring to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, “you legitimize those comments.” Just as he is doing today, Obama in 2008 had to reassure the audience that Israel is “our strongest ally in the region and one of our strongest allies in the world.”
Posted on: Sun, 22 Sep 2013 13:08:59 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015