How do you say 'under the bus' in Hebrew?

Richard N. Weltz
For those diehard leftists who still adhere to the cult of Obama to the extent that they cannot/will not recognize his campaign against Israel and for the Palestinians in particular and Muslim Arab causes in general, his latest efforts to "throw Israel under the bus" should come as a wake-up call.

For the first time in memory, the US has announced that it is ready, willing, and able to allow the UN Security Council to pass one of its long string of anti-Israel resolutions -- all of which have previously been vetoed by us -- if the Netanyahu government doesn't yield to Obama's pressure to give in to Abbas's demands (which, incidentally, violate agreements between Israel and the Bush administration and have the effect of trying to predetermine the future of Jerusalem as something other than the undivided capital of Israel).

As reported in Monday's Wall Street Journal:

JERUSALEM-The White House brought Palestinians back on board for derailed Mideast peace talks with a pledge that the U.S. would consider allowing a United Nations Security Council resolution-if one should arise-condemning Israel for building in disputed territory, according to officials briefed on the diplomacy. ...

Withholding a veto from a U.N. resolution critical of Israel...would be a significant reversal of decades of U.S. policy of largely unwavering support for Israel in the body.

The U.S. has vetoed more than 40 U.N. resolutions critical of Israel since 1972-at least three of them explicit condemnations of Israeli construction activity in East Jerusalem.

The New York Times, although minimizing the major policy shift in a brief en passant paragraph, confirmed the cave-in:

Separately, these officials said, Mr. Mitchell's deputy, David Hale, indicated to the Palestinians that if Israel proceeded with the construction of 1,600 housing units in Jerusalem's ultra-orthodox neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo, the United States would abstain from, rather than veto, a resolution in the United Nations Security Council condemning the move.

If that isn't clear enough for the Obama apologists who claim to support Israel, I can't imagine what would be.
For those diehard leftists who still adhere to the cult of Obama to the extent that they cannot/will not recognize his campaign against Israel and for the Palestinians in particular and Muslim Arab causes in general, his latest efforts to "throw Israel under the bus" should come as a wake-up call.

For the first time in memory, the US has announced that it is ready, willing, and able to allow the UN Security Council to pass one of its long string of anti-Israel resolutions -- all of which have previously been vetoed by us -- if the Netanyahu government doesn't yield to Obama's pressure to give in to Abbas's demands (which, incidentally, violate agreements between Israel and the Bush administration and have the effect of trying to predetermine the future of Jerusalem as something other than the undivided capital of Israel).

As reported in Monday's Wall Street Journal:

JERUSALEM-The White House brought Palestinians back on board for derailed Mideast peace talks with a pledge that the U.S. would consider allowing a United Nations Security Council resolution-if one should arise-condemning Israel for building in disputed territory, according to officials briefed on the diplomacy. ...

Withholding a veto from a U.N. resolution critical of Israel...would be a significant reversal of decades of U.S. policy of largely unwavering support for Israel in the body.

The U.S. has vetoed more than 40 U.N. resolutions critical of Israel since 1972-at least three of them explicit condemnations of Israeli construction activity in East Jerusalem.

The New York Times, although minimizing the major policy shift in a brief en passant paragraph, confirmed the cave-in:

Separately, these officials said, Mr. Mitchell's deputy, David Hale, indicated to the Palestinians that if Israel proceeded with the construction of 1,600 housing units in Jerusalem's ultra-orthodox neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo, the United States would abstain from, rather than veto, a resolution in the United Nations Security Council condemning the move.

If that isn't clear enough for the Obama apologists who claim to support Israel, I can't imagine what would be.