Obama’s Twilight Moves Against Israel May Foreshadow Move to UN Sec’y Gen


President Obama is systematically diminishing the sovereign powers of the United States president by yielding numerous regulatory powers to the office of UN Secretary General. His latest maneuver to strengthen UN regulation of Israeli settlements may not be the finale of his closing months as president but the prologue to years ahead by pushing his legacy to where he can continue to carry it out at the UN. Congressional leaders say Obama is already plotting further action on Israel before he leaves office, according to the Washington Free Beacon.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center put Obama’s refusal to veto the UN resolution at top of its annual list of anti-Semitic acts. One has to acknowledge, regardless of his or her position about Israeli settlements, that Obama is choosing to create an unusual whirlwind of controversy as he leaves office. The resolution (#2334) states that Israel’s settlement activity “has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law,” and calls for an end to all construction beyond the boundaries that existed in 1967 prior to the Six Day War.

Rightly or wrongly, he is certainly kicking the hornets’ nest inside the White House as he heads out the door. It is highly unusual for an outgoing president to initiate a major upheaval in diplomatic relations that runs directly opposed to the direction the incoming president has already said he will take. Trump had insisted that Obama not move the US in this direction. So, the wild ride of the 2016 presidential campaign has become even wilder after the campaign.

Secretary of State John Kerry kicked the controversy with Israel up a notch with his own speech when he said,


If the choice is one state … Israel can either be Jewish or democratic…. It cannot be both, and it won’t ever really be at peace. (The Washington Examiner)


In defending the Obama administration against critics of its UN move, Kerry also said,


Critics “failed to recognize that this friend, the United States of America, has done more to support Israel than any other country. This friend that has blocked countless efforts to delegitimize Israel, cannot be true to our own values, or even the stated democratic values of Israel and we cannot properly protect and defend Israel if we allow a viable two-state solution to be destroyed before our own eyes.”


And then he took the battle even higher when he said,


Washington could not “protect or defend” the country should Tel Aviv continue to balk at two-state peace plans with Palestinians. His comments drew swift and sharp rebuke from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who chided Mr. Kerry by saying Israelis did “not need to be lectured” about peace by the outgoing administration, while President-elect Donald Trump weighed in even before the speech was given with a strong support for Mr. Netanyahu and Israel, and vowing his incoming administration would take a sharply different approach. It was an … extraordinarily public division between two longtime allies, one that could have lasting and incalculable consequences for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Washington’s traditional role as an honest broker and the main outside power in the Middle East peace process. (The Washington Times)


President Obama divides and conquers


Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) says he fears Obama’s actions have emboldened extremists on both ends. While Netanyahu is digging back by withdrawing diplomatic relations with nations that approved the resolution and by withdrawing UN funding, and Palestinians are pushing forward with moves to force a two-state solution, Obama’s move has initiated a diplomatic international war. The US congress, with some bipartisan support, has indicated it could cut off all UN funding in retaliation against the UN. Trump has indicated the same thing. While UN members that cut off funding lose their voting privileges, the United States is the UN’s biggest supporter, so cutting off UN funding will have serious implications at the UN if it happens.

Congress could also choose to expel diplomats of nations that backed the resolution from the US, as Israel did, which may include stripping Palestinians of diplomatic privileges. Congress may also be more supportive of Trump’s initiative to move the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.


“The disgraceful anti-Israel resolution passed by the UNSC was apparently only the opening salvo in the Obama administration’s final assault on Israel,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) told the Free Beacon…. “President Obama … should remember that the United States Congress reconvenes on January 3rd, and under the Constitution we control the taxpayer funds they would use for their anti-Israel initiatives…,” Cruz said, expressing his desire to work with the incoming Trump administration to reset the U.S. relationship with Israel.


The Free Beacon, quoted above, also reported that one congressional member has said,


Members on both sides of the aisle are furious, so our response will be swift and forceful…. With a Trump administration in place, any nation that seeks to delegitimize the Jewish state will need to answer to the United States.


So, a powerful conflict between the US and the UN with fighting terms such as we have not seen before is likely on. Trump will find he has a congress that is largely ready to push back, while Trump’s statements of unequivocal support for Israel and pressure on Palestinians have been clear. However, Obama may have greatly widened a split in Democrats, which traditionally have been as pro-Israel as Republicans. Even liberals like Ted Kennedy were solidly on Israel’s side at every juncture.


Our alliance with Israel is an alliance based on common democratic ideals and mutual benefit. We must never barter the freedom and future of Israel for a barrel of oil — or foolishly try to align the Arab world with us, no matter what cost. (Ted Kennedy)


The congressional divide began to materialize when Netanyahu, in the opinion of many (to the delight of Republicans and disdain of Democrats) poked the Democratic president in the eye by sidestepping him in a unique move to take his Iranian petition directly to congress. Until Netanyahu’s highly unusual move, Israel had worked long and hard to stay out of US politics in order to do all it could to maintain bipartisan support for Israel; and this is why. Netanyahu was strongly criticized at home by many who feared the risk would lead to something like this.

As a result of Netanyahu’s agreement to accept Speaker Boehner’s speech invitation, sixty Democrats, including presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, VP candidate Tim Kaine, and likely future presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren boycotted that congressional meeting. Senior senator Sen. Patrick Leahy from Bernie’s home state, called Netanyahu’s speech a “tawdry and high-handed stunt.” Charlie Rangel, who was was a Democratic representative from New York at the time, tweeted, “Bibi: If you have a problem with our POTUS’s foreign policy meet me at AIPAC but not on the House floor.”

Netanyahu and Obama both denied that this incident had damaged their relationship and Israel’s bipartisan support in the US, but anyone could plainly see from their body language the icy barrier that had frosted its way between the two from that point forward. Now Obama has tapped the ice wedge a little deeper, knowing full well that Democrats in congress wish to oppose Trump wherever they can anyway.

This may be a divide-and-conquer move that will further imperil the once fully bipartisan congressional support Israel has long enjoyed. Many in Israel who worried that Netanyahu had poisoned relations with the president by that move now say this appears to be payback time … to the extent that the White House has had to formally deny that it is.

As for Trump, he tweeted, “Stay strong Israel. January 20th is fast approaching!”

The Israeli ambassador to the US responded to Trump’s various statements of support by saying that Israel…


was very heartened that President-Elect Trump was against this move at the UN Security Council — that he wants to work closely with Israel moving forward to strengthen this alliance….. I do not think there will be daylight between the US and Israel, and we look forward to having that conversation and seeing what we can do to reverse this resolution. (Fox News)


Once Trump is president, backing Israel 100% is one campaign pledge he is likely to keep. Notes, the Washington Examiner,


White evangelicals, who supply about a third of the Republican vote in presidential elections, are more than twice as likely than Jews to believe God gave Israel to the Jewish people. Only Orthodox Jews are slightly more likely to believe this.


Many liberal Jewish organizations, on the other hand, side with Obama, believing the only way for Israel to move forward at this juncture is to negotiate a two-state solution with the Palestinians. One thing is certain, cracks are deepening all over the American political landscape regarding support for Israel and how it is best shown, but Christian conservatives would like to quickly repair the growing divisions in Israel’s best interest:


“Our hope at Faith and Freedom Coalition is that reasonable Democrats like Sens. Menendez, Schumer, Manchin, Casey and others will reject these feckless flailings of an expired political regime on its way out of office,” said Tim Head, executive director of a pro-Israel Christian conservative group. “These latest antics at the U.N. are little more than the waning afterglow of a setting foreign policy agenda that soon will be corrected and discarded. But it will take a unified effort by Republicans and Democrats alike to rehabilitate the global reputation of the United States.” (The Washington Examiner)


That may prove to be a bit naive or wishful at best because Netanyahu’s approach already badly grated on Democrats, and Netanyahu has only become even more outspoken against the Democratic president in the aftermath of this UN resolution. (As Schumer said, positions are becoming more extreme on both sides.)


Netanyahu’s Obamabattle


Netanyahu claims Israel will present solid proof to the new Trump administration after the inauguration that the Obama administration took a very active role in forming the new UN Security Council resolution. Pushing the issue defiantly, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says,


We have no doubt that the Obama administration initiated it, stood behind it, coordinated its versions and insisted upon its passage.


Israel claims it has “ironclad” information from Arab sources about the Obama administration’s overt efforts to push this agenda in the UN. Reports in a couple of Middle Eastern newspapers seem to corroborate Netanyahu’s claims, according to the Times of Israel:


An Egyptian paper published what it claims are the transcripts of meetings between top US and Palestinian officials that, if true, would corroborate Israeli accusations that the Obama administration was behind last week’s UN Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlements. At the same time, a report in an Israeli daily Tuesday night pointed to Britain helping draft the resolution and high drama in the hours leading up to the vote, as Jerusalem tried to convince New Zealand to bury the Security Council measure. In a meeting in early December with top Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat, US Secretary of State John Kerry told the Palestinians that the US was prepared to cooperate with the Palestinians at the Security council, Israel’s Channel 1 TV said, quoting the Egyptian Al-Youm Al-Sabea newspaper. Also present at the meeting according to the report were US National Security Adviser Susan Rice, and Majed Faraj, director of the Palestinian Authority’s General Intelligence Service. White House national security council spokesman Ned Price on Wednesday told the Times of Israel that no such meeting took place. “The ‘transcript’ is a total fabrication,” he said…. Israel fears that Kerry, who is slated to give a speech Wednesday on the subject, will then lay out his comprehensive vision for two-state solution at a Paris peace conference planned for January.


An article in the Israeli Daily Ha’aretz, however states that…


Britain Pulled the Strings and Netanyahu Warned New Zealand It Was Declaring War: A call from Netanyahu to Putin triggered a real drama at the UN HQ just one hour before the vote.


And a more recent Times of Israel report states,


UK officials have stepped up in recent days to say the resolution was theirs, not the White House’s. The Jewish Chronicle quoted an unnamed senior British political source Thursday saying that by the time the text reached the 15-member body, it was “in effect a British resolution.” A day earlier, The Guardian reported Britain “played a key behind-the-scenes role” in ensuring the resolution passed. Another British source told the Chronicle that the “yes” vote for the resolution was part of UK Prime Minister Theresa May’s new strategy toward Israel, according to which the Jewish state’s friends have to take a stand against settlements to garner favor with the Palestinians.


In response, Netanyahu has cancelled a meeting he had scheduled with Theresa May — a move which the British called in their usual understated way, “disappointing.”

As Netanyahu waits for the Trump administration to take the reins in the US before he divulges his own information about the Obama administration, he is taking the battle to other nations. One alternative Israeli news site has given an extensive but unconfirmed report that states Vice President Biden called Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to put diplomatic pressure on Ukraine to vote in the security counsel for the resolution. Biden’s office acknowledges the phone call but denies that anything was said about the UN resolution.

Netanyahu tried to push back ahead of the resolution with his own ineffective calls to Ukraine. The Ukrainian vote has set Ukrainian relations with Israel reeling. Ukraine has a large Jewish population. Even its new prime minister, Volodymyr Groysman, is Jewish, but his first official state visit with Israel next week was just cancelled by Israel in retaliation for Ukraine’s vote.

To retaliate domestically, Netanyahu has ramped up settlement approvals in the territories, threatening thousands of new homes in east Jerusalem.

If Israel is right that Obama intentionally rammed this resolution through the UN in his twilight days as president, Obama has effectively stripped Trump of any ability to reverse this action. Reversing it would require getting China, Russia and others on the Security Council who have long wanted something like this to withhold their own Security Council veto on any measure put forward by the US to rescind the resolution. There is almost zero chance of getting Russia AND China to backpedal on this. Obama has effectively eliminated any possibility for Trump to repair the situation to Israel’s liking.


Is Obama preparing to become Secretary General of the UN?


These sudden moves in the final month of a lame-duck presidency are the most extraordinary all-out rush to get new diplomacy solidly in place before the president-elect gets into office that I’ve ever seen. There would be no point in doing any of this unless Obama believes he can rapidly accomplish something irreversible.


An Israeli spokesman warned that last week’s anti-Israel U.N. resolution may be only the beginning. David Keyes, spokesman for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said his government is concerned that the Obama administration is scrambling to put its stamp on Israeli foreign policy before President-elect Donald Trump takes office…. We actually believe this may be the first of another series of pushes before the Obama administration leaves office…. Mr. Netanyahu fears that Secretary of State John Kerry may seek a Security Council resolution to enshrine the administration’s vision for an Israeli-Palestinian accord before Mr. Trump takes office. (The Washington Times)


On January 15th, seventy nations will converge in Paris to discuss the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Kerry will be there, and there is no question that his seventy-minute speech this week set the table for his plans at that summit.

According to France’s i24News,


Kerry would propose the recognition of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders, and after land exchanges that would allow about 80% of the Jewish residents of the settlements to remain under Israeli sovereignty. The Palestinians will have to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, and Israel will have to recognize the Palestinian state and its capital, East Jerusalem. Kerry is expected to submit this proposal next month, just before the change of administration.


Certainly sounds like an all-out last-minute press to establish solid facts on the ground before Trump can do anything about them. The Guardian reports,


White House races to save Middle East peace process before Trump takes office:… The parameters outlined by Kerry are expected to draw international endorsement at a meeting of foreign ministers on 15 January, just five days before Trump moves into the White House. The meeting is supposed to reinforce a strategy of isolating Netanyahu…. The Israeli government is reportedly fearful that any guidelines agreed in Paris would be turned into another UN resolution before Trump’s inauguration, and it has ratcheted up its rhetoric, presenting itself as the victim of an international conspiracy…. Meanwhile, Israel’s defence minister, Avigdor Lieberman, portrayed the Paris conference as a new “Dreyfus trial”, referring to an outburst of French antisemitism more than a century ago, and urged French Jews to move to Israel…. Aaron David Miller, a former US negotiator on the Middle East and now a scholar at the Wilson Centre thinktank, said Obama’s 11th-hour attempt at legacy building on the Israeli-Palestinian issue could trigger a backlash. “It risks the incoming administration walking away from whatever has transpired in December and early January, and not just walking away from [but] sending unmistakable signals to the Israelis that it would support and favour acts on the ground that go beyond what we’ve seen,” Miller said. “The odds that Netanyahu will now press and Trump will respond positively to a move to push the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, I think have gone up.” He said that if the highly emotive issue of Jerusalem’s status became the focal point of Israeli-Palestinian friction once more, “then I think the prospects for a serious, significant confrontation are high….” Amir Oren, a liberal Israeli commentator, argued that the UN resolution could save the government from itself by bringing closer an end to settlement construction. “Santa Obama delivered a wonderful Christmas present to Israel when the United States opted not to veto Friday’s United Nations security council vote condemning settlement policy,” he wrote in Haaretz. “The passage of the resolution won’t result in the immediate dismantling of any West Bank settlements, but the world is beginning to come to the rescue and try to save Israel from itself.”


Indeed, it appears to be a move in the direction of the world helping Israel save itself (whether it turns out to be “helpful” or not), and I don’t think Obama is just going to throw that on the world stage and then walk away, feeling his legacy is complete. I think he’s putting it there now, while he can, so that he can take it up in the global theater when he is out of office.

The Egyptian article alluded to above — denied by the Obama admin. — quotes Kerry as saying he could present his ideas for a final-status solution if the Palestinians pledge they will support the proposed framework.  Obviously he hasn’t got much time to present them officially to other nations for action outside of this one January 15th meeting.

While a move by Obama to gain the Secretary General position at the UN would be a major blow to Angelina Jolie’s aspirations, I think there is evidence Obama is moving in that direction now that he has no hope of any political power as high as he has become used to.

There is a pattern in all of Obama’s biggest initiatives during his last term. His trans-Pacific trade pact, which he put intense last-hour effort behind, and his months of developing the global environmental agreement sought to strip the US presidency of power and empower the UN Secretary General by ceding extensive regulatory powers to the UN.

Obama clearly favors things being done at the UN, or his treaties wouldn’t move so much regulatory power in that direction. So, why wouldn’t he want to take the position of Secretary General in order to continue to work on these things? Does he appear to be the kind of man to just walk away from power and go fishing for the rest of his life?

All of his proposed treaties had the effect of weakening his own current office. That would certainly diminish the ability of any future president to stand in the way of what Obama would like to accomplish at the UN. The underlying theme of all his treaties may be that he needed to diminish US powers while he could in order to create a more powerful international position for himself in the future with less interference from the US.

Obama may have already secured votes behind the scene at the UN, and delivering this resolution on Israel that the UN has wanted for a long time should gain him many additional votes. He has made it clear for some time that resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a major legacy item for him. With his days now too short in the presidency to accomplish much, he needs to push power to the UN if he is to continue working on that legacy issue. By getting this resolution passed through the Security Council in recent days, Obama reduced some of Trump’s veto power over what the UN can impose on Israel in the future. The resolution strengthens the UN General Assembly’s ability to place sanctions on Israel that don’t need to go through the security council and, therefore, are not something Trump would be able to veto. They also give the UN a firm basis for taking Israel to international court at the Hague if any further settlement activity continues.

Since Trump will try to reverse all of this, Obama’s declaration on Israel may prove meaningless unless he gains a position at the UN to catch the ball he is now passing in order to keep running it forward. If nothing else, this action will ingratiate him at the UN, making his friends there feel he has finally earned that Nobel Peace Prize he received for getting elected in 2008.


Other twilight maneuvers by Obama that attempt to strip the incoming president of power.


The Washington Post has announced,


The Obama administration is close to announcing a series of measures to punish Russia for its interference in the 2016 presidential election, including economic sanctions and diplomatic censure, according to U.S. officials… The administration is finalizing the details, which also are expected to include covert action that will probably involve cyber-operations.


Apparently, Obama intends to start a cyberwar with Russia before Trump gets in office in order to establish more facts on the ground that move Russian relations away from Trump’s stated aims before he even gets started:


Administration officials would also like to make it difficult for President-elect Donald Trump to roll back any action they take.


Does that mean “do enough damage to the Russians that they have to retaliate in a mutual cyberwar before Trump takes office?” Start a war and leave it for the other guy to finish? That is from the fake-news-hating, Obama-loving, liberal Post, not the conservative Washington Times.


Besides his actions with Israel and the UN and the upcoming Paris meeting about Israel, Obama has by executive order locked out major areas of the Arctic for oil drilling in a move that is seen as likely irreversible by Trump because of how congress long ago wrote up the law that allows this executive action. (It would take an act of congress to override the president’s move to designate these lands as perpetually off the table for oil drilling.)


The Obama administration has dismantled the legal framework Trump could have used for vetting Muslim immigrants. (Not sure how easily Trump can reinstate that or put something better in its place.)


Presidents like to save their most controversial pardons for their last day in office. Will Obama offer Hillary Clinton a pardon that exempts her from prosecution for any crimes committed prior to the date of the pardon? The precedent for pardoning someone before they are even formally charged with a crime was established by President Gerald Ford when he pardoned Nixon, as his first act in office, before Nixon was even impeached or taken to trial.

Could that be why Trump is backpedaling now on his pledge to put “crooked Hillary” in jail? Is he hoping that, by appearing he won’t go after Hillary, Obama will not pardon her, an action that implicitly says Hillary did something wrong and that Hillary might have to accept in order for it to be effective. Obama may prefer not to pardon if Trump appears to prefer not to prosecute because a pardon would be regarded by many as tacit admission that there was some kind of wrong-doing to pardon her from.


Trump, of course, is all atwitter about Obama’s end-of-term efforts to cut off his options:


Doing my best to disregard the many inflammatory President O statements and roadblocks. Thought it was going to be a smooth transition — NOT!


Obama’s legacy treaties remain works in progress that he would like to see through. As all the above actions are not the motions of someone who is retiring to the sidelines, I don’t think it is unreasonable to suggest that Obama has no intention of ceding power to the next president of the United States and is using his own powers as president to move as much sovereign power as he can … to the United Nations.


BUT there are a couple of major  problems to my theory: The UN has already chosen its Secretary General – Antonio Guterres, former prime minister of Portugal, who starts in just two days. The other problem to this theory is that China and Russia would have to approve Obama’s nomination before the general assembly could even vote for him, which means slapping them around as much as he has virtually assures he’d never get the nod. So, maybe the way things stack up aren’t always what they appear to be, which shows how easy it is to come up with conspiracy theories …. orrr maybe Obama is looking five years further down the road for January 2022, but that would be a looong bet.  Maybe he’s just desperate to run a scorched-earth policy by stirring up as much global chaos as he can before he loses the opportunity to assure war throughout the middle east. Or maybe he’s working for a higher, darker power. Or maybe it really is just a massive temper tantrum — against Netanyahu, against Putin and ultimately against Trump. So, there are other explanations.

One thing is certain: Obama’s actions during his twilight days in office stir up more potential global conflict than any president has ever sought to create on his way out of the doors of the White House. In a single week he has inflamed the Middle East by causing Netanyahu to double down on settlements and terminate diplomatic relations all over the world and has thrown a torch into the Russian woodpile … and a little gasoline for good measure. With this much accelerant and flame throwing, the first twenty days of January could get really interesting.




  1. Ping from Morris Kaplan:

    the new honcho(secretary general) of the old world order
    onioknighted nay shuns was sworn in 12dec2016. so he cannot
    be u.n. honcho until he eliminates the current communist thug.
    what amabo will do…nobody knows. that it will be evil
    should be obvious from his track/hack record. as the bible says;
    “and the dragon(devil) gave him his power…”
    he will raise himself high as if he is holy but he is wholly evil!
    he is not black…3/4 white confirmed! royal blood line genetics…
    AB negative blood…which means both parents carried the
    alien negative alleles. african bloodlines are absent negative alleles!
    this proves that his real/biological father could not be B.H.O. Sr.
    but the father of lies could be. may father and son enjoy the fruits
    of their labors in hell forever! the maggots needs to be Quarantined!
    the cia did a dna test on his bio material and found that he is not related
    to any/either of his supposed grandparents!
    how can an illegal alien manipulate the system in the face of proof
    that he is a criminal alien? 5 years ago the so called birth certificate
    was presented and quickly shown to be a fake/fraud/forgery!
    trump forgot the punchline when he famously said;”he was born
    in the united states!” maybe or maybe not. issue was/is the birth
    certificate is phony like baloney made with fetal remains! Trump
    missed the mark by not attacking the obamamen(barry&michael)
    at every opportunity of which there were/are many. playing
    defense at this late stage of the game will not succeed.
    the long trail of murders is evidence of the bush-clinton-obama
    suppression of truth about them and their criminal syndicate.
    killed or threatened into submission…that is what we all face!
    take heart…the darkest hour is just before the dawn!

  2. Ping from Shadow Patriot:

    Obama is the son of perdition.

    The antichrist, will rise from babylon, and because of his hatred for it destroy babylon before his rise to power…
    Well if he leaves Babylon for the UN as its HNIC….

    America …the NATION of Babylon is fallen

    NYC…the end times CITY of Babylon will burn

    • Ping from Knave_Dave:

      I’ve heard many people say Obama is the antiChrist since he first took office. Some said that just because he’s a liberal; but if every liberal candidate were to be THE antiChrist, there would be a lot antiChrists. Many seem to have said it just because he was the nation’s first Black president. I don’t understand the sense of that because many others say the antiChrist has to be a Jew because he has to appear to be the returning Jesus, and Jesus was a Jew. Now, you can be a Jew and be Black or half Black, but I don’t know anything about Obama that indicates he’s a Jew.

      If there is one thing I have found admirable about Barrack Obama (and clearly I don’t like the job he’s doing as president), it’s how much hatred he has withstood just for being Black or half Black without ever showing any anger toward any of it. People accuse him of fomenting a lot of racial hatred, but it seems to me he has withstood mountains of racial hatred and tried his best to return very little of it.


  3. Ping from Christian Gains:

    Well stated!

    And, what MOST impresses me is your willingness to admit that MUCH of your SPECULATION is not supported by the “on ground details” — Such as the U.N. has already chosen another head, AND, the credibly weak position B.O., [duh stink’a uh D.imwit C.ity] has put himself in with BOTH Russia AND China! I’ve always found humility a GREAT revelation of an Author’s genuine self.

    But also, I agree with the suppositions that you’ve raised!

    B.O. is DEFINITELY not interested in doing the “IKE routine”, and golfing his life away after his Presidency is ended.

    ALSO, he is sooooo extremely arrogant that I cannot imagine his giving up on expanding “his legacy”, [what there is of it — it definitely NEEDS expanding!] — and, as well, I agree that he’s OBVIOUSLY stripping the authority & power of the Presidency, (which says volumes about his opinion of the Presidency of America)…in order to nullify Trump’s capabilities & authority.

    And, LASTLY, (but PROBABLY MORE SIGNIFICANTLY), your reference to his possibly “…working for a HIGHER & DARKER POWER…”; is PROBABLY MUCH MORE A CENTRAL REALITY than we’d really like to believe of our President, but, is DEFINITELY supported by his continual lying, deception, and deceit…(St. John 8:44)…


    • Ping from Knave_Dave:

      Well, thanks. It was as I was as I was finishing the article — something I had been thinking about for some time — that I saw where the holes were in my own thinking, so I added the final part and scratched my head a lot as to why it looked for so long like he was certainly headed that way and then everything turned on a dime.

      And then, after adding the last part in boldface, something dawned on me: Obama, like everyone else, was fully expecting Hillary to win. That would have taken care of any US veto. If he was preparing for a shift to the UN, that hope ended as soon as Hillary lost because a Trump administration would almost certainly veto his nomination. Perhaps Obama wouldn’t have gone off on this self-destruct track with Russia, except that he is now a raging lion over the fact that in his mind the Russians screwed up the election of him, and he has nothing to lose now by ticking them off. (On the other hand, I still don’t know what he would have done about China, which he has been irritating for a long time.)

      • Ping from QEternity:

        Obama will possibly make the meddlesome Jimmy Carter look like a mere piker.

        I always enjoyed how ZH would point out how many times Obama referred too himself in his speeches.

        And people worry about Trump

  4. Ping from barbarakelly:

    We must move heaven and earth to make sure obama NEVER BECOMES SECRETARY OF THE UN. —- then you could call him the antichrist or the DESTROYER OF ALL CHRISTIANS. Because this is how he almost destroyed America.

  5. Ping from Country Codger:


    Over a year ago I wrote about Obama and Merkel running against each other in a no holds barred race for the secretary general of the UN and everyone said I was crazy, now everyone thinks it is a novel idea. The UN secretary “should” not be one of the members that has veto powers. This is more or less a “gentleman’s” agreement, not set in stone. We will have to wait and see why Obama has stated that he will not leave Washington, D.C. any time soon. If he or HRC attack Trump I think Trump will have to bury them politically, immediately. Period.


  6. Ping from MH53J:

    I have thought for a few years that 0bama wanted to be head of the UN. His ego was not satisfied with running just the U.S., he wants to run it all because for some reason he thinks he’s the smartest guy around even though everything he touches turns to crap. We need to boot the UN out of the U.S. and quit signing on to all these agreements.

    • Ping from Knave_Dave:

      I’ve been thinking this like both of you for the last 2-3 years because it made sense out of why he wants to strip the presidency of so much power and move it to the UN, but I don’t see how he will ever get around a security counsel veto … unless Russia, China and the US all step out.

  7. Ping from QEternity:

    How is it we elected a ‘community organizer’ and now the whole wold is a mess?

    If they give Obama the UN nod, it would be priceless to see Trump pull out of the UN.

    • Ping from Knave_Dave:

      In fact, I think that’s the only way Obama would get in. Russia and China would have to pull out or stop paying their dues and, thus, lose their vote temporarily, too, for Obama to find a shot for an end-run past the Security Council.

  8. Ping from Zaphod Braden:

    “As for Christianity, there is a dispute among Halachic authorities, but the vast majority consider it idolatry as well. Islam, on the other hand, is not considered idolatry.”

    On the attitude towards gentiles–with sources
    1. Killing gentiles and saving their lives
    1.1) In principle, every person practicing idolatry (whether a gentile or a Jew) should be
    put to death by a court of law. Idolatry is attributing divinity to any object (physical
    or spiritual) other than the one and only G-d, whether this is done through ritual
    (such as prayer, offerings of incense, or the like) or by a mere statement of faith.
    Several contemporary religions, such as Hinduism, Buddhism, and Zoroastrianism,
    are undoubtedly considered idolatry. As for Christianity, there is a dispute among
    Halachic authorities, but the vast majority consider it idolatry as well. Islam, on the
    other hand, is not considered idolatry.
    In a situation (such as we have now) where there is no Jewish court of law which
    can sentence people to death, to corporal punishment, or even to the fines prescribed
    by the Torah, and which therefore can not judge a man for the sin of idolatry:
    It is permissible (and even commanded) for anyone to kill idolatrous Jews (and
    those Jews, including atheists and agnostics, who publicly reject the divine authority
    of Halacha) anywhere and anytime it is possible. However, contemporary Halachic
    authorities have ruled that this law doesn’t apply nowadays.
    While there is no obligation to kill idolatrous gentiles (nor, in fact, any gentiles who
    don’t obey the 7 Noachide commandments), it is nevertheless forbidden to save their
    lives. The exact Halachic status of a gentile who doesn’t practice idolatry as defined
    above (and who also can be considered as fulfilling in practice the other Noachide
    commandments), yet who declares himself to be an atheist or agnostic is not entirely
    clear, though from some sources it appears that he too should be considered an
    Maimonides, Laws of Repentance chapter 3
    Maimonides, Laws of Idolatry chapter 2
    Maimonides, Laws of Kings chapter 8
    Tosephta on Tractate Bava Metziah (Leiberman edition) 2:33
    Maimonides, Laws of Murder and Saving Lives chapter 4
    Maimonides, Laws of Apostates chapter 3
    Maimonides Laws of Testimony 11:10
    Tur Yoreh Deah 158
    Beit Yosef Yoreh Deah 158
    Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 158
    Shach Yoreh Deah 158
    Chazon Ish, Yoreh Deah 13:16
    Rabbi Abraham Isaac HaKohen Kook, Igrot Hara’ayah
    Responsa Tzitz Eliezer part 8, section 15, pamphlet Meshivat Nafesh chapter 5

    • Ping from Mary Brown:

      Except the Jewish people are civilized and do not interfere in the practice of religion!

      • Ping from Knave_Dave:

        Unfortunately, Mary, they do if they are Halichic. They stone or vandalize Chrisitian home churches, particularly ones with Messianic Jews in them.

      • Ping from Zaphod Braden:

        Today through the ACLU they interfere with evething from Nativities on your own town hall lawn to prater.
        They have ever since they sent Saul of Tarsus AND OTHERS to hunt and kill followers of Christ ….. at every opportunity ….. E. Michael Jones’ The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Effect on History. It is striking to read his account of Jewish violence against non-Jews in the ancient world, particularly the persecution of Christians whenever Jews had the power to do so. Long before Christians had any influence on Roman policy, Christians’ complaints about Jews were not stereotypes based on historical memory but resulted from direct experience with Jews: “Origen understood that Jewish calumny helped to cause Christian persecution, and that Jewish hatred was a fact of life for the Christians, continuing unabated after the repeated defeats of Messianic politics” (i.e., the defeats of Jewish rebels at the hands of the Romans in 70 and 135 ad) (p. 69).
        HOLODOMOR : The famine-genocide of Ukraine, 1932-1933. In June of 1933, at the height of The Holodomor, 28,000 men, women and children in Ukraine were dying each day. The intentions were clear, genocide of the CHRISTIAN peasants. Holodomor is the name given to the mass starvation in the Ukrainian Famine of 1932-33. Occurring between the Russian Revolution and the Second World War …
        The Great Purge under Stalin 1937-38. … the Great Purge encompassed the entire Soviet Union and all categories of people. Out of 388 members of the new revolutionary government in Russia, only sixteen were real Russians. “Apart from one negro,” we are told, “the rest were Jews.”
        Of the 502 highest officers of the 1917 First Soviet Socialist Government, 467 were Jews. Alexandr Solzenitzyn writes in his last book on the history of Russia that the Jews murdered over 66 million Russians. Marx, Engels, Trotsky, Bakunum, Lenin, Stalin, Kruschev, and others were all Jews by two or at least one parent. All the prison camps, torture chambers, gulags, etc were all commanded and run by Jews.
        The Jews’ 1933 declaration of war on Germany was no mere bluff or empty threat. Jews were an active internal enemy. At home, alert Germans had already seen the bloody Jewish revolution of 1918-1919 that installed the secessionist Judeo-Communist Bavarian Soviet Republic. While Germany was trying to fight World War 1, subversive Jewish revolutionaries like Kurt Eisner, Gustav Landauer, Ernst Toller, and Eugen Leviné were murdering innocent Germans at home. By the time the Jews formally declared war on Germany in 1933, Germans had already seen millions die in the Jewish-led-and-funded Communist revolutions of the early twentieth century in Russia, Hungary, Bavaria, and elsewhere in Europe. There was a holocaust of over 60 million at the hands of Judeo-Bolshevism.
        To understand the ancient historical pattern of Jewish subversion and treachery, see Dr. E. Michael Jones’ thoroughly referenced and authoritative 1,200 page book The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History, ISBN 9780929891071.
        Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, “You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They Hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse…More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their blood- stained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history. It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of its perpetrators.”

        • Ping from Knave_Dave:

          Stalin was a Jew? He tried to have all Jewish doctors killed. Jewish mothers want their sons to become doctors, not kill Jewish doctors. His mother wanted him to be an Orthodox Christian priest, and so he went to seminary. (Hmm early Russian Jews for Jesus movement?) What evidence is there that he was a Jew? Stalin rabidly HATED Jews and even used Trotsky’s Jewishness against him politically.

          I have no idea on many of the names you give, but I would suspect that the evidence is pretty thin for a number of them. Where does the idea come from that Nikita Khrushchev was a Jew? I don’t know of a shred of evidence. Engels was a Jew? Marx almost certainly was a Jew because his paternal grandfathers going way back were rabbis.

          Regardless, what does ANY of that have to do with Obama?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *