WHAT DO I SAY ABOUT THIS HEADLINE.OBAMAS A FRAUD LIAR.HE DOES NOT
EVEN BELONG IN AMERICA,HES AN ILLEGAL ALIEN.AND HES TRYING TO SAY ISRAEL
DOESN'T KNOW WHATS GOOD FOR IT.OBAMA LETS TRY THAT AGAIN.AMERICA DOES
NOT EVEN KNOW WHAT ITS DOING TOTALLY.HOW CAN YOU-WHEN USE VOTE IN A
FRAUD MUSLIM,COMMUNIST ILLEGAL ALIEN WHO LOVES BEING A CONTROL FREAK AND
WORSHIPPED LIKE OBAMA DOES.
By Gil Ronen First Publish: 1/15/2013, 12:44 PM-Israelnationalnews
Obama: Israel doesn't Know What's Good for It'
Jeffrey Goldberg: Obama said repeatedly, “Israel doesn’t know what its own best interests are.”
Barack Obama-Reuters
The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg, writing in Bloomberg View,
has revealed that U.S. President Barack Obama said repeatedly
recently that Israel does not know what its own best interests are.When informed about the Israeli decision to approve construction plans in the E1 area, "Obama, who has a famously contentious relationship with the prime minister,
didn’t even bother getting angry," wrote Goldberg. "He told several
people that this sort of behavior on Netanyahu’s part is what he has
come to expect, and he suggested that he has become inured to what he
sees as self-defeating policies of his Israeli counterpart."In the weeks after the UN vote, Obama said privately and repeatedly,
'Israel doesn’t know what its own best interests are.' With each new settlement announcement, in Obama’s view, Netanyahu is moving his country down a path toward near-total isolation."
According to Goldberg, Obama "has become convinced that Netanyahu is so captive to the settler lobby, and so uninterested in making anything more than the slightest conciliatory gesture toward Palestinian moderates, that an investment of presidential interest in the peace process wouldn’t be a wise use of his time.""For Israel," Goldberg predicts, "the short-term consequences of Obama’s frustration are limited. The U.S. won’t cut off its aid to Israel, and Obama’s effort to thwart Iran’s nuclear ambitions will continue whether or not he’s fed up with Netanyahu."But it is in terms of American diplomatic protection – among the Europeans and especially at the UN – that Israel may one day soon notice a significant shift."Goldberg warns the U.S. may not support Israel in U.N. votes like the one that recently affirmed the PLO's nation status, and that Obama may eventually offer "a public vision of what a state of Palestine should look like," in which he will affirm that it should have its capital in East Jerusalem.
According to Goldberg, Obama "has become convinced that Netanyahu is so captive to the settler lobby, and so uninterested in making anything more than the slightest conciliatory gesture toward Palestinian moderates, that an investment of presidential interest in the peace process wouldn’t be a wise use of his time.""For Israel," Goldberg predicts, "the short-term consequences of Obama’s frustration are limited. The U.S. won’t cut off its aid to Israel, and Obama’s effort to thwart Iran’s nuclear ambitions will continue whether or not he’s fed up with Netanyahu."But it is in terms of American diplomatic protection – among the Europeans and especially at the UN – that Israel may one day soon notice a significant shift."Goldberg warns the U.S. may not support Israel in U.N. votes like the one that recently affirmed the PLO's nation status, and that Obama may eventually offer "a public vision of what a state of Palestine should look like," in which he will affirm that it should have its capital in East Jerusalem.
Israel renews contacts with UN Human Rights Council
Jerusalem envoy speaks with president of Geneva-based group, with which it broke ties in 2012; Venezuela chosen to oversee review of the Jewish state
January 15, 2013, 2:08 pm
6-The times of Israel
Israel has taken steps that
appear to be aimed at restoring its relationship with the United Nations
Human Rights Council, 10 months after Jerusalem cut ties with the body
over a planned fact-finding mission into the West Bank settlement
enterprise, The Times of Israel has learned.Israel’s permanent representative to the
Geneva-based UNHRC, Ambassador Eviatar Manor, last Thursday spoke to the
council’s president, Remigiusz Henczel, in what is believed to be the
first senior-level official dealing between the two parties since Israel
unilaterally severed ties and ceased cooperating with the body last
March.In a meeting of the Human Rights Council
Bureau, Manor asked Henczel to postpone a routine review of the human
rights situation in Israel. Manor “also stated that Israel respected all
human rights mechanisms, although it had a complex and difficult
relation with the Council and OHCHR [Office of the High Commissioner for
Human Rights],” according to the official minutes of the meeting.“Members of the Bureau took positive note of
this development, a first in many months,” the minutes read, adding,
however, that UNHRC officials believe Israel’s step “deserved to be
complemented and clarified.”UNHRC officials also expressed hope that last
week’s conversation “would soon be complemented by a written note,”
which would explain why Israel requested a postponement of the review
and for how long.Foreign Ministry spokesman Paul Hirschson said
there is “no change in Israel’s policy regarding the Human Rights
Council.” Yet he did not state whether Israel would participate in the
routine review and declined to explain why Manor request a delay of the
procedure.Israel’s relations with the UNHRC were never
good, yet reached a nadir in March 2012, after the council decided to
dispatch an independent international fact-finding mission to
“investigate the implications of the Israeli settlements on the civil,
political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Palestinian
people” throughout the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Incensed about the
council’s apparent obsession with Israel, the government in Jerusalem
decided not to allow the council to carry out the probe and canceled any
cooperation with it.“From now on, we will no longer work together
in any way, shape or form with any officials from the council, including
High Commissioner [Navi Pillay],” a top Foreign Ministry official said
at the time. “If anyone from the council calls us, we just won’t answer
the phone.”Analysts suggest last week’s apparent rapprochement could be linked to last month’s resignation of foreign minister Avigdor Liberman, who was behind Israel’s boycott of the UNHRC.The Israeli ambassador’s conversation with the
UNHRC president last week centered around Israel’s participation in the
so-called Universal Periodic Review (UPR),
a standard assessment of the human rights records of all UN member
states overseen by the council since its founding in 2006. Israel
participated in the first round of reviews, which was concluded by
October 2011, but has so far failed to indicate whether it would
participate in the second round, which is currently ongoing.
Each country’s UPR is overseen by three nations, drawn from a lot by a
representative of the country under review.But since Jerusalem did not
send any delegate
to a session Monday during which Israel’s so-called troika was to be
selected, Henczel, the Council’s president, drew the countries to
oversee Israel’s review: Maldives, Sierra Leone and Venezuela. Since the
government in Caracas is known to be hostile toward Israel, cutting
ties in 2009 in the wake of 2008-09 Operation Cast Lead, “commotion and
laughter” erupted in the room when Venezuela was drawn, according to
notes taken by UN Watch, a Geneva-based watchdog and human rights
group.Pakistan’s representative slammed Israel over
its failure to appear at the meeting, urging the council to do
everything in its power not to let Israel skip the review, as this could
compromise the entire UPR mechanism, which is based on universality.
Representatives of other countries also urged Israel to return to the
fold and comply with the UNHRC’s review processes, but refrained from
calling for punitive action.“The member accusing Israel of violating the
founding principles of the UN human rights system was newly elected
Pakistan, a savage land where women are gang-raped by tribal edict,”
said Hillel Neuer, UN Watch’s executive director. “And the one chosen,
by a draw of lots, to be one of three overseers of Israel’s council
review is another newly elected member, the Iranian-allied dictatorship
of Venezuela. A jury of rapists and brigands is not justice, it’s a
travesty.”After Manor’s conversation, the council
decided to suspend the discussion of Israel’s participation until
January 29. If by then Israel has not confirmed that it will comply with
the review, the council will decide on a “course of action to be
taken,” according to UN Watch notes.
“A chorus of reflexively pro-UN voices, from
European diplomats to radical left NGOs… have lashed out at Israel’s
apparent decision to skip the UPR, accusing the Jewish state of wreaking
apocalyptic damage upon a supposedly precious world institution,” Neuer
told The Times of Israel. “In reality the UPR is, for the most part, a
mutual praise society. Qaddafi’s Libyan regime came out of its review
with top marks. It’s not for nothing that despots walk into this court
with confidence and ease.”The UNHCR did not respond to a query for comment before the article was posted.