Both have publicly stated that they consider Israel and its leadership to be sponsors of terroristic acts. on right, 20 years ago he and michelle ate with Rashid Khalidi and Edward Said.
More diplomatic jihad when he denies being an anti-Semite
Obama, in an interview with the Jewish newspaper "Forward," was asked whether it hurt him personally when people say he's anti-Semitic."Oh, of course," Obama said. "And there's not a smidgeon of evidence for it, other than the fact that there have been times when I've disagreed with a particular Israeli government's position on a particular issue."
Dr. Ben Carson said Obama is an anti-Semite. Some Democrats
say this is just Republican propaganda.
Is he right?
Follow the evidence.
1. Obama attends church of anti Semite reverend for 26 years (1).
2. Obama uses anti-Semitic rhetoric in battle over Iran deal(2)
3. Obama tries to have Moslem Brotherhood terrorist
anti-Semite Morsi lead Egypt and financed hi with $1.5 billion and f16s (3)
4. Obama does nothing to weaken Isis in one year as they spew
anti-Semitism in new treatise compared to Mein kampf. (4)
5. Iran, worst terrorist nation on earth, already responsible for 5000 dead Jews, daily calls for "death to israel" and Obama just promised $150 billion which they will use to spread more terror vs israel and Obama provides legitimacy for their nuclear enriched uranium (5)
6. Obama long anti-Israel timeline of activities (6)
7. Obama loves to dine with Israel haters 20 years ago this
and last month this http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/06/23/obama-hosts-israel-haters-at-iftar-dinner-presidents-table/
EVIDENCE here http://strongandresolute.blogspot.com/2015/08/are-you-wondering-how-jew-could-support.html
1. Jeremiah Wright: Messenger of Intolerance .Jeremiah Wright, the pastor emeritus at Trinity United Church of Christ (TUCC) in Chicago, is once again at the center of a controversy after making inflammatory statements about Jews and Zionists. Wright blamed Jews for the fact that he has been out of touch with President Barack Obama in an interview with the Daily Press, a Newport News, Virginia-based newspaper, on June 9. Wright noted that "them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me."In the same interview, Wright asserted that Israel is committing ethnic cleansing in Gaza, which he described as "a sin and a crime against humanity," and expressed his belief that the Obama Administration would have sent a U.S. delegation to the 2009 Durban Review Conference in April if not for fear of losing "the Jewish vote, the A-I-P-A-C vote, that's controlling him."Wright later stated that he misspoke and that he did not mean to refer to Jews, but rather Zionists. "I'm not talking about all Jews, all people of the Jewish faith, I'm talking about Zionists," Wright said. Wright's initial comments and subsequent effort to distinguish between Jews and Zionists is reminiscent of his past inflammatory comments, which propelled him into the spotlight during Obama's primary run, and which he maintained had been taken out of context by the media and others.
(2) Gutter Politics'Simon Weisenthal Center accuses
White House of legitimizing hate and antisemitism
8:39 AM on Thursday, August 13, 2015 - Av 28, 5775 In an unusually strongly worded statement, the Simon Wiesenthal Center denounced White House attacks on opponents of the Iran deal as legitiming antisemitism and hate.In particular, the Jewish group singled out against Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, who announced last week that he opposes the deal.
“The spectacle of labeling Senator Schumer and other opponents of the controversial Iran nuclear deal as ‘warmongers’ who are more loyal to Israel than America is the lowest form of gutter politics seen in our country since Joe McCarthy.” “Instead of passionate and reasoned debates based on objective analysis of facts, we are increasingly witness to eblasts, political cartoons, and sound bites that outrageously call into question people’s loyalty to our nation. "We fear that such hateful rhetoric between now and next month’s historic vote will legitimize mainstream hate and anti-Semitism and falsely reduce an important policy decision that impacts on international terrorism, our Arab allies and the future of the Middle East, to a disagreement between the US and Israel.”The center's statement comes on the heels of a Tablet editorial that strongly condemned the White House's tactics as "bigotry," as well as an ADL statement condemning hate speech.
Of course, Obama himself griped about pressure from “lobbyists” — i.e., Jewish and pro-Israel activists — spending “tens of million of dollars” to stop the deal. He reportedly blamed “the pro-Israel community” for stirring up a fight.
Iran Deal: Jewish Mag Calls out Obama’s Anti-Semitic Rhetoric
AUGUST 7, 2015 7:23 PM
• OBAMA NATION
(Breitbart) – Tablet Magazine, an online Jewish publication, published an editorial Friday calling out President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party for their use of anti-Jewish rhetoric in an effort to whip up public support for the Iran deal.
The editorial was published a day after Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY)announced that he would oppose the deal, and was immediately greeted by a wave of vitriol–including political threats from former White House aides.
Tablet pointed out the president’s repeated use of terms associated with anti-Semitic accusations of nefarious Jewish wealth, influence and control, which Obama has used throughout the debate. It concluded (original links):
What we increasingly can’t stomach—and feel obliged to speak out about right now—is the use of Jew-baiting and other blatant and retrograde forms of racial and ethnic prejudice as tools to sell a political deal, or to smear those who oppose it. Accusing Senator Schumer of loyalty to a foreign government is bigotry, pure and simple. Accusing Senators and Congressmen whose misgivings about the Iran deal are shared by a majority of the U.S. electorate of being agents of a foreign power, or of selling their votes to shadowy lobbyists, or of acting contrary to the best interests of the United States, is the kind of naked appeal to bigotry and prejudice that would be familiar in the politics of the pre-Civil Rights Era South.
This use of anti-Jewish incitement as a political tool is a sickening new development in American political discourse, and we have heard too much of it lately—some coming, ominously, from our own White House and its representatives. Let’s not mince words: Murmuring about “money” and “lobbying” and “foreign interests” who seek to drag America into war is a direct attempt to play the dual-loyalty card. It’s the kind of dark, nasty stuff we might expect to hear at a white power rally, not from the President of the United States—and it’s gotten so blatant that even many of us who are generally sympathetic to the administration, and even this deal, have been shaken by it.
We do not accept the idea that Senator Schumer or anyone else is a fair target for racist incitement, anymore than we accept the idea that the basic norms of political discourse in this country do not apply to Jews. Whatever one feels about the merits of the Iran deal, sales techniques that call into question the patriotism of American Jews are examples of bigotry—no matter who does it. On this question, we should all stand in defense of Senator Schumer.
- Obama met with Jewish community leaders at the White House for two and a half hours to explain the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Agreement. “He spent 45 minutes, laying out deal, speaking without notes,” said one participant in attendance. “He argued why the deal is better than the alternatives, even as he acknowledged that Iran is not a good actor. The meeting was very emotional, everything was out on the table.”
The participant told me that some Jewish leaders in the meeting objected to how the administration characterized the JCPOA’s critics. “Words have consequences, and when they come from official sources, they can be even more dangerous,” he said the president was told. “The community worked hard to keep it from getting personal and didn’t make it specific to him. The president complained about the lobbying, and said some of the same people who brought you Iraq are opposing the Iran deal. He was told those characterizations are not accurate. Jewish lobbyists didn’t support the Iraq war.”
Another participant who also asked to remain anonymous told me that some people expressed discomfort with “how the debate is being framed—framed as, ‘if you are a critic of the deal, you’re for war.’ The implication is that if it looks like the Jewish community is responsible for Congress voting down the deal, it will look like the Jewish community is leading us off to another war in the Middle East.”
Apparently, President Obama wasn’t paying attention because the one point he made sure to drive home in his speech the next day at American University in Washington, D.C. is that there are only two choices: the JCPOA or war. And the only nation in the world that does not think this is “such a strong deal” and “has expressed support” is the Israeli government. In short, if you don’t like the agreement, then you want war and you’re aligned not with the United States and the rest of the civilized world, but with a Jewish pariah state.
A senior official at a Washington, D.C.-based Jewish organization involved in the Iran fight told me: “The President told concerned Jewish Americans that he would turn down the constant refrain of anti-Semitic insinuations from the White House. Then he went out and gave a speech implying that Jews are dragging American boys and girls into war.”
It’s unfortunate that the president of the United States seems to really believe that Israel and the American Jewish community was responsible for taking America to war in Iraq. But Obama is not an anti-Semite and it seems he doesn’t even really want to use anti-Jewish dog whistles, like he did last month on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. But the JCPOA is the cornerstone of his foreign policy legacy and he’s determined to win. AIPAC is leading the countercharge with a multi-million dollar campaign managed by a group called Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran. According to The Washington Post, “The president suggested to AIPAC that ‘if you guys would back down, I would back down from some of the things I’m doing.’’’
Or, as one of the participants told me Obama said, “If you don’t like the claims that are being made, don’t run the advertisements.” In other words, lay off criticizing the Iran deal and I’ll lay off the Jew-baiting.
“Fifty-two years ago,” said Obama, “President Kennedy, at the height of the Cold War, addressed this same university on the subject of peace.” Obama’s political tactics however point not to Kennedy’s Cold War but Nixon’s Southern strategy, which played on the racist fears of white southerners. If the purpose of the Obama Administration’s Jew-baiting is to silence potential critics of the JCPOA, it may also stoke a deeply ugly hatred that is no less dangerous to American society than racism.
Even if the JCPOA turns out to be worse than its critics charge—a deeply flawed inspection and verification regime, billions of immediate sanctions relief that could fuel Iran’s imperial terror throughout the Middle East, etc.—America will survive it, as will Israel. America’s center of gravity is not its position in the Persian Gulf. Rather, it’s our social cohesion. For all of our many flaws, our petty hatreds, our violence against one another: America works because of the fundamental trust Americans have in their neighbors—black and white and brown and yellow, Christian, Jewish and Muslim—throughout the fifty states. Why is the president putting that at risk? For the sake of comity with an anti-American, anti-Semitic obscurantist regime.
4. Intelligence officials are comparing a newly discovered secret Islamic State document to Hitler’s “Mein Kampf,” as it blames Israel for the rise of the Islamic State and crowns U.S. President Barack Obama as the “Mule of the Jews.”Found in Pakistan’s remote tribal region by American Media Institute (AMI), the 32-page Urdu language document promotes an “end of the world” battle as a final solution. It argues that the Islamic leader should be recognized as the sole ruler of the world’s 1 billion Muslims, under a religious empire called a “caliphate.”“It reads like the caliphate’s own Mein Kampf,” said a U.S. intelligence official, who reviewed the document. “While the world is watching videos of beheadings and crucifixions in Iraq and Syria the Islamic State is moving into North Africa the Middle East, and now we see it has a strategy in South Asia. It’s a magician’s trick, watch this hand and you’ll never see what the other is doing.”
+Obama just pretending to fight isis http://finance.yahoo.com/news/crippling-contradiction-obamas-isis-strategy-180238616.html
+stronger than one year ago http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-a-year-of-the-caliphate-have-us-tactics-played-into-islamist-hands-10345905.html