Jews following the haters of Israel. Conservative Judaism incuded

The leftist jews are waging a war against Bibi, with the collateral damage being the strength of Israel. This includes now the leadership of Conservative rabbis.  The organization of Conservative Rabbis, the Rabbinical Assembly, is not conservative. They have thrown their lot in with the haters of Israel. So have many Jewish organizations. The name Conservative has NOTHING to do with conservative political views. Instead of congratulating one of the seminal leaders of modern state of Israel, They just issued a statement condemning Netanyahu, 2 days after his landslide victory. They condemned what he said about Arab voters. Read the disgusting statement here from them and other jewish groups. The left is doing everything it can, Obama leading them, to undermine israel and these groups are aiding and abetting the enemies of israel.

http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/breaking/conservative-rabbis-break-ranks-rip-bibi-arab-comments

This is why Bibi said what he said  

“I’m very proud to be the prime minister of all of Israel’s citizens — Arabs and Jews alike. … I met a few days ago with many Arab supporters of Likud. I met them in the north of the country and I said I was concerned about massive foreign money … definitely millions from foreign funders – big NGOs [non-governmental organizations] … .“I said they would try to get out votes for a specific party — an amalgamation of Islamists and other anti-Israel groups. And I said when that happens, make sure we get out our vote. I wasn’t trying to suppress a vote, I was trying to get something to counter a foreign-funded effort to get votes that are intended to topple my party — and I was calling on our voters to come out. And by the way, we got quite a few Arab voters for Likud — and I’m very proud of that. In any case, my governments have funded billions -- billions — into the Arab communities to try to upgrade infrastructure — schools — and I will continue to do that … to have real integration of Arab citizens of Israel into the Israeli economy, hi-tech,  society....”

Conservative Judaism is falling apart rapidly. 250 synagogues have closed. The United Synagogue sold their New York headquarters for lack of funds. Every time a study is done, they lose more and more market share. But it seems all their energy lately has gone into blasting the one man in the world with the moral clarity to try and block Obama's traitorous genocidal deal with iran and fight the terrorist leadership of the Palestinians.  Obama is clearly a pro jihad anti Semite. Read all the proof here.   http://strongandresolute.blogspot.com/2015/03/obama-exacerbates-democrats-and.html and here http://strongandresolute.blogspot.com/2015/03/surprised-obama-is-pro-islamic-jihad.html  

Obama spent millions to get  in Arab israeli pro terror to vote against Bibi, an unconscionable intrusion into Israeli politics. instead of blasting that, these jews blast Bibi. DISGUSTING!

Bibi said this today "http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/11483759/Benjamin-Netanyahu-I-remain-open-to-possibility-of-peace-talks-with-Palestinian-Authority.html

and read about all the efforts israeli leadership have made to facilitate a a Palestinian state in the last 15 years and how the Palestinians have thwarted it at every step. http://strongandresolute.blogspot.com/2015/03/palestinians-do-not-want-peace.html

Shame on all these jewish "leaders" aiding and abetting islamic jihad and terror and weakening israel. 

Will Democrats Challenge Obama on Israel?

Jonathan S. Tobin | @tobincommentary03.20.2015 - 2:00 PM

During the weeks leading up to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to Congress on Iran, the White House orchestrated a media campaign to persuade Democrats that the speech was an effort to inject partisanship into the U.S.-Israel relationship. Though Netanyahu was foolish to walk into that trap, the charge was somewhat misleading since it was President Obama who used this as a wedge to break up an otherwise solid bipartisan consensus in favor of more sanctions on Iran. But now that the administration is threatening to isolate Israel in the wake of Netanyahu’s re-election victory, the question arises whether the president’s efforts to rally Democrats behind him on Iran will stop them from criticizing his decision to escalate tensions with the Jewish state. The answer to that question will tell us whether the Democrats, once a wall-to-wall stronghold of pro-Israel sentiment, have been sufficiently influenced by the president’s stands to the point where he needn’t worry about any significant pushback about his threats from within his party or its likely next presidential candidate.

In the past few days, the White House temper tantrum about its least favorite foreign leader’s stunning election victory has escalated from mere petulance at the setback to threats about acquiescing or supporting resolutions at the United Nations Security Council. That changes the dynamic about the debate over Israel in a fundamental way.

Throughout the first six years of the Obama presidency it was possible for Democrats to claim with varying success that the administration had not undermined the alliance with Israel. But in the last two years, the president has become increasingly belligerent toward Israel. He wrongly blamed Netanyahu for the collapse of Secretary of State John Kerry’s peace initiative even though it had been the Palestinians who blew up the talks by making an end run around the negotiations to the United Nations and by signing a unity pact with Hamas. The White House not only unfairly criticized Israel for its measures of self-defense during last year’s war against Hamas but also cut off the resupply of ammunition to the Israel Defense Forces during the fighting.

Yet that was just a taste of the bitterness that would come as the president violated his campaign pledges and began an effort to appease Iran that would allow it to keep its nuclear program. If Netanyahu’s Iran speech was the last straw for Obama, the president’s anger about the prime minister’s re-election sent him over the edge. Using Netanyahu’s statements about his unwillingness to create a Palestinian state under the current circumstances, the White House is now openly threatening to “re-evaluate” its approach to the peace process. But by that they don’t mean re-thinking Obama’s obsessive blaming of Israel and absolving the Palestinians of all responsibility for their decisions that have made peace impossible. Instead, they seem to be indicating that in the final two years of the Obama presidency with no need to bow to political pressures, the president will finally be able to vent his hostility to Netanyahu and begin a process of brutal pressure designed to thwart the will of the Israeli electorate and force the country into dangerous concessions even as he barters its security in order to create a new détente with Iran.

At this point it would seem incumbent on leaders of the Democratic Party to speak up to restrain the president from carrying out these threats. Though many of them don’t like Netanyahu and also resent the obvious closeness between the prime minister and some Republican leaders, their complaints about partisanship infecting the U.S.-Israel relationship have become self-fulfilling prophecies. With polls showing a distinct split between the parties in which Republicans are clearly more likely to be strongly supportive of Israel than the Democrats, the Obama-Netanyahu spat has become the wedge by which elements of the anti-Israel left have been able to assert with some justice that they are making inroads against the heretofore bi-partisan pro-Israel consensus.

Particular focus will fall on Hillary Clinton as she prepares for her coronation as the Democrats’ 2016 presidential campaign. In the past she has veered between strident criticism of Israel (a point that was emphasized during her four years as Obama’s secretary of state) and returning to the sort of standard pro-Israel rhetoric that was part of her persona as a senator from New York from 2000 to 2008. Clinton would like to continue to claim that she is strong supporter of Israel without the distraction of having to take a stand on Obama’s actions. But the statements from the White House may have made that impossible.

The bottom line is that neither Clinton nor any other leading Democrat can pretend that their backing for Israel cannot be questioned if they stay silent about Obama’s threats. Even worse, were they to equivocate or back the president as he isolates Israel at the United Nations or cuts back on military aid — a stance that is sure to tempt Hamas or Iran’s ally Hezbollah to resume rocket attacks and other forms of terrorism — it would place them outside the pro-Israel consensus that they have long claimed to uphold.

It’s one thing for them to blame Netanyahu for supposedly being too close to Republicans. It is quite another for Democrats to assert that they can be neutral about an administration that is seeking to isolate Israel while simultaneously embracing a vicious anti-Semitic Iranian regime that continues to threaten the Jewish state with annihilation.

Though there is a growing constituency on the left that is hoping to legitimize anti-Israel stands, including support for boycotts and divestment as well as pressure on the Jewish state to bow to Palestinian demands that have been rejected by the Israeli people at the ballot box, Clinton is making a mistake if she thinks she can avoid having to choose between the pro-Israel community and Obama’s stands. The same applies to other Democrats. If Obama doesn’t step back from the brink, Democrats must decide whether they wish to truly abandon support for Israel to the Republicans or if they are prepared to openly fight a president who appears on the brink of trashing an alliance still supported by the majority of Americans