Israel Celebrates Hanukkah, Weathers an Obama Betrayal

As Hanukkah began, President Obama and his administration did not give their well wishes, but instead gave Jews all over the world the finger.  People should not be surprised, considering their previous actions.  But fear not, because the holiday itself is a reminder of how the Jews have stood up to their enemies under adverse conditions.

A recent film, On the Map, signifies how Israelis have fought the David versus Goliath story.  It tells the against-all-odds story of Maccabi Tel Aviv's 1977 win of the European Basketball Cup.  Moments after this highly charged and historical win, Israeli-American basketball hero Tal Brody stated, "Israel is on the map – not just in sport, but in everything."  Unfortunately, not if the Obama administration has its way, because their recent actions have shown they want Israel off the map, replaced by a Palestinian state.

The U.N. resolution, put forward by New Zealand, Malaysia, Venezuela, and Senegal, passed with fourteen members of the council voting in favor and the U.S. abstaining.  It states that the Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories have "no legal validity" and constitute a "flagrant violation under international law."  In addition, they are a "major obstacle to the achievement of the two-state solution" and a "just, lasting and comprehensive peace."

The Obama administration's and the U.N.'s actions should come as no surprise.  For years they have touted anti-Israeli if not anti-Semitic sentiment.  Let's not forget the 2009 U.N. speech where the president said, "We continue to emphasize that America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements."

Remember also Obama's anti-Israel agenda during the week of September 23, 2012, when Israel's Prime Minister Netanyahu requested a meeting with Obama for that week, since both would be in New York, but Obama refused the meeting.  Then, when Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke to the U.N. General Assembly, Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., walked out just before his talk.  Regarding the U.N., there have been at least twenty anti-Israeli General Assembly resolutions, with one of the most outrageous ones being UNESCO's erasing Jewish links to Judaism's holy sites, including the Western Wall.

Brooke Goldstein, the director of The Lawfare Project, a think-tank that raises awareness of human rights violations, thinks many practices at the U.N. are a joke.  She believes that this resolution "expresses the overt and racist desire to create a Judenrein Arab state.  Why should that be given any credibility? Why should Israel, a sovereign nation with a legal right to protect its own citizens, be forced to create another Islamist state in a sea of crumbling Islamist dictatorships?  The U.N. S.C. has voted that Jewish homes in Judea and Samaria are an obstacle to a 'Palestinian state,' which means they must be removed for there to be a 'Palestinian state.'  Should we give any credibility to a resolution that would likewise call for an Arab-free Israeli state?

"We are way through the looking glass with the United Nations, which is clearly being used as a lawfare tool with this umpteenth attempt to delegitimize.  There will be plenty more, too.  The strategy should be to neuter the lawfare tool itself, the U.N., which can't even get humanitarian work right.  Case example: the United Nations Relief Works Agency (UNRWA), which illegally uses U.S. taxpayer funds to build schools that recruit Muslim children to become suicide-homicide bombers.  That's premeditated child murder.  We must use the legal tools at our disposal not only to hold the U.N. accountable for aiding and abetting the infanticide of Muslim children, but to assert our own sovereign legal rights as afforded by treaty law." 

Brooke also pointed out the hypocrisy of "so-called Millenials.  They speak of globalization and no borders.  They preach the right of every Muslim refugee from the Middle East to settle in Europe, the United States, and Canada, yet the only border they want to build is in Palestine, where everyone has the right to settle except Jews.  History is repeating itself, so let's take the opportunity to, at least as a legal community, aggressively challenge this Star Wars-like Senate."

Does this U.N. resolution have any substance, or is it just symbolic?  An expert on the Middle East believes that it is very dangerous, including the president's betrayed of Israel.  "The first paragraph calls the settlements illegal.  Does this mean Israeli settlers and officials are criminals and can be prosecuted in local courts?  The second paragraph implies that all housing construction in East Jerusalem must stop.  This means every construction in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem is in violation.  I guess they want the Jews to go back to the 'wandering people.'  This is an area that has been annexed by Israel, so this is just madness.  The third paragraph treats every territory beyond the 1949 armistice line as illegal.  This begs for boycotts.  It logically means that any product from East Jerusalem, the Golan, or the West Bank be boycotted and prevented from being sold."

This vote gives the Palestinians a free hand to avoid any type of negotiation toward a final peace process.  As a former Israeli official stated, "the resolution would continue to provide excuses for the Palestinians to avoid recognizing Israel's right to exist.  The Council had voted to condemn the State of Israel and the Jewish people for building homes in the land of Israel, and to deny 'our eternal rights' in Jerusalem."  He has a point, considering that the Palestinians refused to come to the table even when Israel undertook a ten-month construction freeze.

Andrew McCarthy points out that territory is needed for "'defensive depth,' a longstanding principle of military doctrine holding that there must be an area sufficient for a defensive force to redeploy after being attacked, and for reserves to enter or counterattack – the territorial space between the battlefront and the strategic interior that any army must have in order to function."

Then there are those in the administration who try to defend their abandonment by calling Israel a good friend and alleging that it was done in the best interest of Israel.  With friends like that, who needs enemies?

Interestingly, the Council called for immediate steps to prevent all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation and destruction, and to clearly condemn all acts of terrorism.  This is a non-starter, considering the Palestinians were not even called out by name.  When had the U.N. ever condemned the Palestinians for their actions or penalized them?  Has anything been done by this administration or the U.N. when Palestinians name parks and schools after murderers?  Simple answer: no.

What this U.N. resolution did is de-legitimize Israel.  By abstaining, this administration legitimized the Palestinian Authority.  As Elliott Abrams, the former adviser to President G.W. Bush, said in his op-ed, "[s]upporters of strong Israel-American relations can only be glad that the 22nd Amendment limits presidents to two terms in the White House."

The author writes for American Thinker.  She has done book reviews and author interviews and has written a number of national security, political, and foreign policy articles.

As Hanukkah began, President Obama and his administration did not give their well wishes, but instead gave Jews all over the world the finger.  People should not be surprised, considering their previous actions.  But fear not, because the holiday itself is a reminder of how the Jews have stood up to their enemies under adverse conditions.

A recent film, On the Map, signifies how Israelis have fought the David versus Goliath story.  It tells the against-all-odds story of Maccabi Tel Aviv's 1977 win of the European Basketball Cup.  Moments after this highly charged and historical win, Israeli-American basketball hero Tal Brody stated, "Israel is on the map – not just in sport, but in everything."  Unfortunately, not if the Obama administration has its way, because their recent actions have shown they want Israel off the map, replaced by a Palestinian state.

The U.N. resolution, put forward by New Zealand, Malaysia, Venezuela, and Senegal, passed with fourteen members of the council voting in favor and the U.S. abstaining.  It states that the Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories have "no legal validity" and constitute a "flagrant violation under international law."  In addition, they are a "major obstacle to the achievement of the two-state solution" and a "just, lasting and comprehensive peace."

The Obama administration's and the U.N.'s actions should come as no surprise.  For years they have touted anti-Israeli if not anti-Semitic sentiment.  Let's not forget the 2009 U.N. speech where the president said, "We continue to emphasize that America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements."

Remember also Obama's anti-Israel agenda during the week of September 23, 2012, when Israel's Prime Minister Netanyahu requested a meeting with Obama for that week, since both would be in New York, but Obama refused the meeting.  Then, when Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke to the U.N. General Assembly, Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., walked out just before his talk.  Regarding the U.N., there have been at least twenty anti-Israeli General Assembly resolutions, with one of the most outrageous ones being UNESCO's erasing Jewish links to Judaism's holy sites, including the Western Wall.

Brooke Goldstein, the director of The Lawfare Project, a think-tank that raises awareness of human rights violations, thinks many practices at the U.N. are a joke.  She believes that this resolution "expresses the overt and racist desire to create a Judenrein Arab state.  Why should that be given any credibility? Why should Israel, a sovereign nation with a legal right to protect its own citizens, be forced to create another Islamist state in a sea of crumbling Islamist dictatorships?  The U.N. S.C. has voted that Jewish homes in Judea and Samaria are an obstacle to a 'Palestinian state,' which means they must be removed for there to be a 'Palestinian state.'  Should we give any credibility to a resolution that would likewise call for an Arab-free Israeli state?

"We are way through the looking glass with the United Nations, which is clearly being used as a lawfare tool with this umpteenth attempt to delegitimize.  There will be plenty more, too.  The strategy should be to neuter the lawfare tool itself, the U.N., which can't even get humanitarian work right.  Case example: the United Nations Relief Works Agency (UNRWA), which illegally uses U.S. taxpayer funds to build schools that recruit Muslim children to become suicide-homicide bombers.  That's premeditated child murder.  We must use the legal tools at our disposal not only to hold the U.N. accountable for aiding and abetting the infanticide of Muslim children, but to assert our own sovereign legal rights as afforded by treaty law." 

Brooke also pointed out the hypocrisy of "so-called Millenials.  They speak of globalization and no borders.  They preach the right of every Muslim refugee from the Middle East to settle in Europe, the United States, and Canada, yet the only border they want to build is in Palestine, where everyone has the right to settle except Jews.  History is repeating itself, so let's take the opportunity to, at least as a legal community, aggressively challenge this Star Wars-like Senate."

Does this U.N. resolution have any substance, or is it just symbolic?  An expert on the Middle East believes that it is very dangerous, including the president's betrayed of Israel.  "The first paragraph calls the settlements illegal.  Does this mean Israeli settlers and officials are criminals and can be prosecuted in local courts?  The second paragraph implies that all housing construction in East Jerusalem must stop.  This means every construction in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem is in violation.  I guess they want the Jews to go back to the 'wandering people.'  This is an area that has been annexed by Israel, so this is just madness.  The third paragraph treats every territory beyond the 1949 armistice line as illegal.  This begs for boycotts.  It logically means that any product from East Jerusalem, the Golan, or the West Bank be boycotted and prevented from being sold."

This vote gives the Palestinians a free hand to avoid any type of negotiation toward a final peace process.  As a former Israeli official stated, "the resolution would continue to provide excuses for the Palestinians to avoid recognizing Israel's right to exist.  The Council had voted to condemn the State of Israel and the Jewish people for building homes in the land of Israel, and to deny 'our eternal rights' in Jerusalem."  He has a point, considering that the Palestinians refused to come to the table even when Israel undertook a ten-month construction freeze.

Andrew McCarthy points out that territory is needed for "'defensive depth,' a longstanding principle of military doctrine holding that there must be an area sufficient for a defensive force to redeploy after being attacked, and for reserves to enter or counterattack – the territorial space between the battlefront and the strategic interior that any army must have in order to function."

Then there are those in the administration who try to defend their abandonment by calling Israel a good friend and alleging that it was done in the best interest of Israel.  With friends like that, who needs enemies?

Interestingly, the Council called for immediate steps to prevent all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation and destruction, and to clearly condemn all acts of terrorism.  This is a non-starter, considering the Palestinians were not even called out by name.  When had the U.N. ever condemned the Palestinians for their actions or penalized them?  Has anything been done by this administration or the U.N. when Palestinians name parks and schools after murderers?  Simple answer: no.

What this U.N. resolution did is de-legitimize Israel.  By abstaining, this administration legitimized the Palestinian Authority.  As Elliott Abrams, the former adviser to President G.W. Bush, said in his op-ed, "[s]upporters of strong Israel-American relations can only be glad that the 22nd Amendment limits presidents to two terms in the White House."

The author writes for American Thinker.  She has done book reviews and author interviews and has written a number of national security, political, and foreign policy articles.

RECENT VIDEOS