Hillary is an enemy of Israel

By Ted Belman

Hillary Clinton is not a friend of Israel. As Secretary of State, she was the architect of the policy of the most anti-Israel president since the rebirth of Israel in 1948. She helped Barack Obama craft his anti-Israel positions. Obama reoriented America’s Middle East policy in favor of the ayatollahs and the Muslem Brotherhood, to make Iran the regional superpower, disadvantaging America’s traditional allies: Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the other Sunni Arab monarchies. Clinton shared the same flawed vision of the world as Obama.

Hillary Clinton has NEVER disavowed the statements made by Suha Arafat. Clinton made an official visit to the Middle East in November 1999, During the visit, Suha Arafat, the wife of Palestine leader Yasser Arafat,claimed :Our [Palestinian] people have been submitted to the daily and intensive use of poisonous gas by the Israeli forces. Suha Arafat also accused Israel of contaminating the water sources used by Palestinians with “chemical materials” and “poisoning Palestinian women and children with toxic gases.”

Hillary listened to a real-time translation of the accusations without objections. She also hugged and kissed Suha Arafat when she finished speaking. This was widely seen throughout the Arab world as a US endorsement of these accusations.

After becoming the Secretary of State, one of her first actions was to call for the end of construction of new homes for Jews in existing neighborhoods in Jerusalem and the Territories. contravening an existing U.S./Israel agreement made during the Bush administration. First Clinton and then Obama denied that such an agreement existed. When Israel produced the signed copy of the US commitment letter both Clinton and Obama then announced that it was no longer blinding on the United States. [Note that Israel had made concessions to Bush in exchange for the recognition agreed to in that letter.] Elliot Abrams, who negotiated the agreement for the U.S., stated that the agreement was valid.

The Palestinians seized upon the Hillary-created settlement issue as an opportunity to avoid negotiations. They used the demands for a “settlement” freeze a precondition to further talks, even though there were negotiations and construction going on simultaneously before she became Secretary of State.

As the end of the “settlement” freeze approached, the U.S. asked Israel to extend the freeze. Israel demanded that any proposal be presented in writing, based on their experience with Hillary denying the deal negotiated by Elliot Abrams during the Bush Administration. The written offer never came; Hillary was not negotiating in good faith.

When the Obama administration claimed that vice president Joe Biden had been “humiliated” by an Israeli announcement of additional housing during what was to have been a make-nice visit in 2010, Clinton called Netanyahu and “dressed him. Down” for 45 minutes. In order to humiliate Prime Minister Netanyahu and Israel the State Department made this “dressing down” public. This signaled to the Arab world that the US had tilted against Israel.

This was an Obama manufactured and orchestrated public beating of Netanyahu and all of Israel. The routine announcement had been made as one of a series [there had been previous announcements, there would be subsequent announcements] of announcements of various stages of approvals by a low level Jerusalem planning administration.

On the same weekend the Palestinian Authority named a square in honor of a notorious terrorist killer of Israeli children and there was not peep of protest from the Obama administration. In this action Hillary demonstrated that she was Obama’s tool willing to engage in public theater to destroy Israel’s image.

Hillary Clinton, during her tenure as Secretary of State , played a very strong and direct role in initiating the US contacts with Iran’s hardliners {Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s then extremist president], to discuss recognizing Iran’s nuclear program { This took place well before the time that the so-called moderates were elected in Iran.] She initiated the nuclear negotiations with Iranian hardliners Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad well before the election of Hassan Rouhani.

As part the deal (which was publicly confirmed by John Kerry, Susan Rice and Barack Obama) , a substantial amount of the unfrozen Iranian resources could be devoted to attacks on Jews everywhere in the world.

The explicit decision of the Obama administration is that the US would not control or condition the release of the money. Kerry stated that “Iran is a sovereign country and one can’t dictate to a sovereign country” and that “it would be foolish Iran to spend this money on terror rather than on infrastructure improvements.”

However, Kerry has publicly stated: the chairman of the budget committee of the Iranian legislature has publicly stated, and the supreme leader has publicly stated ]that a substantial portion of the released funds will go immediately to: increasing worldwide operations against Jewish communities ; to increase the guidance accuracy and warhead effectiveness of Hezbollah’s missiles [the supreme leader today announced that Iran would sell the new 300 mile range Iranian missile to Hezbollah] ; the replenishment of Hamas’s missile supply; to finance Hamas’s tunnel building operations.

Hillary Clinton’s announced campaign decision to support and continue JCPOA ,as is , is accepting the shedding of Jewish blood. (There is no politically correct way of softening this.)

Hillary Clinton’ strongly supported Obama’s campaign administration to mislead the US public (partially by demonizing the very justified Israeli opposition to this “agreement”).

Hillary selected Wendy Sherman , Nicholas Burns and the rest of the US State Department team that had originally negotiated the nuclear agreement with North Korea. This is a video of of Bill Clinton claiming great victory in preventing North Korea from obtaining a nuclear weapon {thanks to the skill of Sherman, Burns and the rest of the US State Department team.} http://louderwithcrowder.com/flashback-bill-clintons-korea-speech-scary-close-to-obamas-iran-deal-speech/

Clinton was key to the destabilizing of Libya and to the rise of ISIS there.

Additional materials not covered extensively to keep this note reasonably brief:

1. Putin. Key points from :Why Putin strongly prefers Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump”. Trump’s unfortunate words versus Obama and Clinton’s very specific damaging actions.
Obama [open mic captures Obama statement “tell Vladimir that after the election I can be more flexible”; failure to support Georgia and Ukraine after Russian invasions, invitation to Russia to actively enter Syria;] Clinton: [support of Nancy Pelosi’s and John Kerry’s visits to Assad in Syria in spite of opposition of George Bush State Department . These visits supported the Assad regime and undercut the Bush administration at a time when it was possible that a compromise solution might have been negotiated; support of Obama canceling air defense agreement with Poland in response to the protest of Russia to the agreement which politically undercut the US friendly government of Poland;reset button with Russia.]

2. Hillary Clinton (while Secretary of State) accepted Clinton foundation donations from a crony of Putin and then approved the control of 20% of uranium production [a US strategic resource] by this Putin crony. [A complete description of the Canadian-US Clinton foundation money laundering operation. Pay for play.]

October 4, 2016 | 4 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

4 Comments / 4 Comments

  1. Ted, the sad truth is that the majority of American Jewish voters, just as they didn’t care about Obama’s serial anti-Israelism, don’t care about the truths you speak of Clinton’s anti-Israelism.

    Nor do they care about the truths regarding Hillary Clinton’s 30 year record distinguished by consistent failures, doing nothing in office or acting in office to her own benefit, her serial dishonesty, unscrupulousness and corruption employed for the personal financial and political gain or protection of herself and her husband.

    Obama’s recent speech at Peres’ funeral (which Caroline Glick wrote on) was so shockingly anti-Israel it borders on, if it does not cross the line into antisemitism territory.

    Many American Jewish conservative voters see Clinton as you do when it comes to Israel and like you fear that Clinton will follow closely in Obama’s anti-Israel – pro-Palestinian footsteps.

    With Clinton poised to likely win the Presidency, most American Jewish voters are already squealing with delight.

  2. Great Ted’s review of obama and clinton efforts to destroy Israel.
    The good news is that not even a square inch of Israeli territory will be given to arabs. The Almighty is in control of Eretz Israel; The Land is His, and He allows His Chosen People to live in it.
    Moshiach Ben David will be back in about 67 months. So, cheer up!
    Am Israel Chai

  3. Clinton Parameters or any Palestinian State is danger to the state of Israel. Unlike what she did as Obama’s Secretary of State she try and push Israel behind the scenes. This would entail threats. Since the Pals will not cooperate with her in a meaningful way it will go nowhere.

    The questions is will she keep the building of Jewish Towns in Judea/Samaria and neighborhoods of Jerusalem slowed down? That is the real danger on a practical level. This hurts Israel in a myriad of ways.

  4. Ted, You are correct in this article. Hillary would try and push Israel to the Clinton Parameters. Divided Jerusalem. The following is quote (not what I believe should happen) These are the Clinton Parameters of 2000

    President Clinton:
    Territory:
    Based on what I heard, I believe that the solution should be in the mid-90%’s, between 94-96% of the West Bank territory of the Palestinian State.
    The land annexed by Israel should be compensated by a land swap of 1-3% in addition to territorial arrangements such as a permanent safe passage.
    The Parties also should consider the swap of leased land to meet their respective needs. There are creative ways of doing this that should address Palestinian and Israeli needs and concerns.
    The Parties should develop a map consistent with the following criteria:
    * 80% of settlers in blocks.
    * Contiguity.
    * Minimize annexed areas.
    * Minimize the number of Palestinian affected.