Why does Israel own Obama?

So let’s get this straight.  Somali pirates capture an American civilian ship captain, and Obama sends in the Navy Seals to kill the kidnappers.   Obama’s the Big Man for this.

Iran has a near-revolution, and Obama vehemently supports the rioters, talking a big game about human rights, and Democracy, and all that stuff …  

But Israel captures one of our American citizens, kidnaps her right off a boat which is carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza, something Obama recommended we do, and he says not a damn word.

Not only is this woman an American citizen, she’s a former House member and was a Presidential Candidate.  Furthermore, another person kidnapped off this boat, by Israel, was Nobel Laureate Mairead Maguire.

When it comes to Israel, Obama is nothing but a big pussy.

Why is that?  

Paul Craig Roberts puts it nice and bluntly:

As President Obama has called for humanitarian aid to be sent to Gaza, and as the International Red Cross has damned the inhumanity of Israel’s blockade of Gaza, the question that immediately comes to mind is why did not the United States send sufficient US Navy escort to see the “Spirit of Humanity” safely through international waters to Gaza? We send ships against Somalian pirates, why not against Israeli ones?

We all know the answer. The US talks a good “human rights” game, but never delivers–especially if the human rights abuser is Israel. After all, Israel owns the US Congress and President Obama. Israel even has an Israeli citizen and former member of the Israeli Defense Forces as the Chief-of-Staff in Obama’s White House. Israel owns millions of American “Christian Zionists” and “rapture evangelicans.” When it comes to Israel, the American government is a puppet state. It does what it is told.

Macho Americans might stand tall, but not when Israel snaps its fingers.

why is that?  Can someone fill me in here?  

It has nothing to do with Democracy or freedom or any of that crap.  We KNOW that.  American never stands up for that shit unless it happens to coincide with its strategic and economic interests.

So why does the United States kow-tow to Israel?  Why does it give Israel almost unlimited amounts of money to commit atrocities against its neighbors?  Why does it vote almost unanimous support for such atrocities when they occur?

What is America getting out of this severely fucked-up relationship?  A relationship that makes mortal enemies out of millions of people every time Israel drives its bulldozers through another Palestinian olive grove?  

Keep in mind we’re talking about this kind of crap:

The same week that “our” government in Washington told the Governor of California “not one red cent,” President Barak Obama handed over $2.775 billion to Israel.

Imagine that faux outrage, and the macho posturing that would occur, had ANY OTHER COUNTRY ON THE FACE OF THE PLANET EARTH kidnapped these people?

UPDATE:   More on this bullshit here:


With this interesting summation:

This is all reaching a tipping point, a degree of injustice that is becoming increasingly difficult to deny, or to meet with the argument that violence perpetrated by Palestinian militants justifies collective punishment as a matter of government policy. Even members of the DC establishment are decrying the continued expansion of illegal settlements. Foreign Policy magazine just ranked Israel-Palestine as the 58th “most failed state” — beneath a whole host of basket-cases. And, as Ira Chernus recently wrote:

The Israel Project hired pollster Stanley Greenberg to test American opinion on the Middle East conflict — and got a big surprise. In September 2008, 69% of Americans called themselves pro-Israel. Now, it’s only 49%. In September, the same 69% wanted the U.S. to side with Israel; now, only 44%.

This is a blunter than usual post on this topic, because I’m not interested in finessing this conflict anymore. It’s not that people, like me, who  reject Israel’s various claims to to the moral high ground have a singular and mysterious obsession with Israeli abuses, as its apologists would have you believe, but the knowledge that this state’s actions, unlike, say, those of the Iranian regime splashed across our TV screens each night, are defended (and its military supplied) by my government.


Skip to comment form

    • Inky99 on July 2, 2009 at 07:20

    of so many of the world’s, and the United States’, problems.

    Bring on the “anti-semitism” charges.  I’m waiting ….

    • Inky99 on July 2, 2009 at 07:26


    Titled “Precisely Wrong,” the Human Rights Watch (HRW) report focuses on six cases of Israeli drone-launched missile attacks in which 29 Palestinian civilians, eight of them children, were killed. Based on cross-referenced eyewitness accounts corroborated by doctors, as well as ballistics and forensic evidence collected on the attack sites, the report asserts that “in none of the cases did HRW find evidence that Palestinian fighters were present in the immediate area of the attack at the time.”

    Think we’ll hear about that anywhere else?


  1. The rules are quite clear:

    Inflammatory discussion of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is not allowed.

    There are plenty of sites for inflammatory I/P.  This is not one of them.


    • Arctor on July 2, 2009 at 18:44

    Street has its piece, both take precedence over Israel. But I believe it was the day after Hillary pulled out that Obama paid his dues to AIPAC at a forum in NYC, no?  

  2. falls into the category of inflammatory I/P.

    And it seems you do too, Inkster, or why post this.

    Bring on the “anti-semitism” charges.  I’m waiting ….

    Please be inflammatory on other issues!

    • pico on July 2, 2009 at 19:22

    the ship wasn’t in “international waters”, it was in Israel-controlled waters, and was thus trespassing.  Unless Israel is maintaining open borders (which it is not), it has the sovereign right to control what enters and leaves the waters under its control. Whether there should be a blockade in the first place is a more legitimate question, but comparing it to piracy is pretty ludicrous.

    It’s also hard to draw larger conclusions out of this incident, because even the group that organized the trip says that they’ve frequently run this mission without being interrupted.  

    There’s a good conversation to be had about the blockade, but this is neither a good example, nor a productive way to go about it.  

  3. This thread is certainly a great example and reinforcement of the reason for the “No inflammatory I/P essays” policy.

    Thanks folks we need a reminder every oncet in a while!

  4. is that you then get endless discussions about the banning, instead of about the topic.

    The reason I like this place is that up till now, these endless discussions about how you can’t talk about this or that, or about who troll rated who, etc etc have not happened.  

    The topic of a US congresswomen and a nobel winner being in an Israeli jail should clearly not be banned. Anywhere.  

Comments have been disabled.