Why Obama and the Democrats Protested Netanyahu: The real source of hatred in the Middle East
If Obama wanted to dispel the belief that he was not a closet advocate in favor of ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, and a radical communist insurgent from Indonesia aligned with domestic terrorists to undo America���he certainly didn���t help his case when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to Congress on March 3, 2015. Democrats at large boycotted the speech, which is strange onto itself, but even VP Biden gave up his seat as a leader of the Senate to protest the speech by the Israeli leader. Why? I can understand that Obama thinks he���s the leader of the free world and is something of a king, but to take matters to this extent is fishy���to say the least.
Netanyahu doesn���t want to get blown up by Iran. Given the radicalism present in the Middle East and considering that he is in a position to know specifically where the threats come from in that region, America should listen to Bibi if the concern was truly peace in the Middle East. But, witnessing the inaction against Syria, the troop withdrawals in Iraq, the continued soft policy regarding ISIS, the support of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the Benghazi scandal���the strangely aggressive objective of killing Muammar��Gaddafi without congressional approval, there is something very radical about the Obama White House that is beyond refute���and now when the most peaceful country of the region is begging for our help���the President and his Democrats are taking a position much more akin to the Palestinians as opposed to the Israelis. Obama���s relationship with Netanyahu has always been strained in the same manner that Obama utters the word ���Christian��� as if it pains him���which his actions seem to confirm. Why?
Before the speech Netanyahu explained his reason for the visit, ���I plan to speak about an Iranian regime that is threatening to destroy Israel, that���s devouring country after country in the Middle East, that���s exporting terror throughout the world and that is developing, as we speak, the capacity to make nuclear weapons ��� lots of them.��� Sounds reasonable enough–as a world leader, America should be concerned about a country that wants to blow everyone up from with a warning from the mouth of a direct ally.���� Where���s the controversy? Why would Democrats not show up to listen to such a warning���even if they thought it was overstated? By attending, they���d be in a position to give press interviews later criticizing Netanyahu. But by refusing to attend they discount themselves from the debate since as representatives, that was their exclusive reason for being in government. Even if they don���t like the direction of the discussion they still have an obligation to participate. That���s what they���re paid for. As public servants, that is their obligation. But they boycotted which indicates an open disdain for Netanyahu himself and a support of Iran���s position.
During the speech Netanyahu stated toward the Obama administration knowing they were watching on television, ���When it comes to Iran and ISIS, the enemy of your enemy ��� is our enemy.��� Meaning, no matter what kind of games Obama and his people think they can play to align good Muslims with bad Muslims who share in common a hatred for capitalism, or even peace on earth because they have their focus on the everlasting damnation of death���they are all enemies if logic is used to determine value. The battle lines between one culture and another demands that a choice be made���that there is no middle ground on the matter. Boycotting a meeting because Obama wants Netanyahu to lose the next election in Israel won���t make the boogiemen go away in the Middle East���it will simply empower them.
My in-laws recently returned from a trip to Israel and the Sea of Galilee region. It was clear to them where the boundaries between the two countries were and the religions in general. The Muslim based Palestinians were living a massively impoverished collectivist existence, the Jew based Israelis were living a largely capitalist lifestyle complete with irrigation and plentiful measures to obtain food. It was clear to my in-laws and the pictures they showed to us during a family gathering just how different the two cultures were���and that was at the heart of the modern trouble. The Old Testament and the Quran have similar beliefs and characters from their religious doctrines which should be a uniting factor among those people in the Middle East. But the hatred that the two sides have for each other has roots that extend into essential philosophy as opposed to religious belief. That much was clear from the values exhibited by the two cultures shown in the personal documentation of the region by my family members. Israel is prosperous, whereas the rest of the Middle East not associated with sales of oil to the West is essentially an armpit of intellectual decrepitude and they are prone toward economic and political socialism���as opposed to capitalism.
I wouldn���t call Israel a capitalist country, they have labor unions, social discrimination that leads to success or failure, and a government that holds way too much property in its possession. But, they do embrace much more capitalism than anywhere else in the Middle East except for maybe the United Arab Emitras. The rest of the entire Middle East is suffocating under socialism and hard-core communism and it uses the religion of Islam to mask that reality. This causes an income inequality readily apparent between Palestine which feeds the anger of the aggressors against Israel with jealousy instead of actual religious differences. If the root cause of the hatred is sought after honestly, the big hatred for Israel, America, and the West in general is that their economies are driven more by capitalism as opposed to socialism, not that Christians believe in the Old Testament over the Quran.
Thus, the same could be said for Democrats and Republicans in American politics, the Democrats identify with their collectivist brothers and sisters in the Palestinian movement, and Republicans identify with those in Israel because the country���s general economic philosophy is more aligned with the GOP. The protest by so many Democrats toward the Benjamin Netanyahu has a lot more to do than hurt feelings, or even fears that it will violate their arms negotiations with Iran���it���s a fundamental philosophy over socialism and capitalism and to them���Israel represents a love of money and the value it represents which they despise���personally.
There is no other explanation for Obama and his Democrats for their desire to protest the Netanyahu speech than to illustrate their innate hatred for capitalism. There is no other rational explanation for the amount of hatred aimed at Israel in general in the modern world. Arabs see the creation of Israel by a deal made by the French and English after World War I as a western intrusion of their homeland, and I can understand anxiety over it, but not the hatred so prevalent today which provokes a sitting president and his political party to boycott such an important event. Even now, England and France are so openly socialist that they are no longer the countries that they once were���as imperialists global empire builders���so the Arabs have largely forgotten about them. There are currently large sectors of both societies in both England and France who will support the caliphate that is brewing around the Mediterranean and support terrorist activity on behalf of ISIS���so it is Israel and America that holds the most attractive targets for their hatred, not because of a deal made during World War I, but because one side of the Gaza Strip leans toward capitalism and has vibrant gardens and a flourishing economy, and the other side is a dirt pit of impoverished conditions and backwards thinking. It is in that understanding where the whole picture suddenly becomes very clear���Obama and his Democrats have in common with ISIS, HAMAS, and the radical Muslim Brotherhood a hatred of capitalism and money in general���and lean toward the theocracy of belief as opposed to the facts of value. And that is the primary reason for their hatred of the visit by Benjamin Netanyahu.
Rich Hoffman
��CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
