Obama is Complicit in Israeli Terrorism

It can’t be just coincidental that every time Barack Obama wins the White House his friends, nay, his closest allies, in war-mongering Israel celebrate his victory by unleashing wanton terror on the hapless Palestinian victims of an incarcerated Gaza.

Obama’s first win to the White House, in 2008, was followed, within days, by the brutal and unprovoked Israeli invasion of Gaza that killed at least 1400 Palestinians-according to most conservative estimates, while the actual casualty figure was reckoned to be much higher. Most of the victims of Israeli bestiality were women and children. Whole families were wiped out in that barbaric assault, including that of Dr. Ezeddin, who had been working to build bridges of understanding between the Israelis and the Palestinians of Gaza. He has since been living in Canada as a refugee.

Obama’s ‘closest allies’ in Israel apparently dcided to have a bash on his second victory at the polls, in much the same fashion as they did the first time-with mayhem and carnage of innocent Palestinians of Gaza, as was done four years ago.

So Gaza came under assault of Israeli aircraft, missile batteries and tank fire-again within days of Obama’s win to the White House. Of course it should go without saying that all these lethal weapons in the Israeli arsenal, which have opened the doors of hell-fire on the defenceless Palestinians, are courtesy of U.S. which dutifully provides billions in state-of-the-art weapons and munitions to its ‘most dependable ally’ every year, gratis.

Is Israel testing Obama’s resolve and commitment to the cause of Israel? Or is it that a Palestinian-blood-thirsty and Machiavellian Benjamin Netanyahu is paving his own re-election campaign-elections in Israel are to take place in early January-with impunity with Palestinian blood?

A smugly confident and ever so-arrogant Netanyahu didn’t need to worry about Obama’s reaction to his diabolical design to use the prisoners of Gaza-prisoners they are to Israel’s unstinted blockade and siege of Gaza, from the air, from the sea and on land, which has gone on for six years with the full blessings of U.S.-as fodder for his election gambit. Obama and his Republican rival, Mitt Romney, were trying to outwit each other throughout their long election campaign for the White House, with unflinching resolve to stand by their Israeli allies, through hell or high water.

That Obama is standing by his election pledge to never question whatever Netanyahu may decide is evident in his declaration of absolute support to Israel’s murderous assault against Gaza. Not wasting any moment, Obama came out swinging in his unflinching endorsement of Netanyahu’s wanton blood-lust and justified it on the grounds that Israel was attacking Gaza in ‘self-defence’ and was entitled to teach whatever lesson Netanyahu deemed proper to the errant people of Gaza.

Obama granted his cachet to Netanyahu on his way to a first-ever official visit to Myanmar (Burma) by an American President. Anyone doubting Obama’s apparent resolve to outdo his notorious predecessor, George W. Bush’s track record in anti-Muslim policies and tirades need only appreciate the timing of Obama’s safari to Myanmar. He has embarked to accord the western world’s-of which he is the leader-seal of blessings to a regime that has, for months if not years, been aggressively pursuing a policy of virtual genocide of its Muslim population-the so-called Rohingyas, numbering more than a million. Hundreds of thousands of them have been arbitrarily deprived of their Burmese nationality under a decree-issued in 1982 by the Myanmar military junta.

The plight of the Rohingyas at the hands of a repressive regime has received but scant notice from Obama; his focus is on weaning Myanmar away from China. But for the record, he reminded his hosts in Rangoon that the Rohingyas” hold within themselves the same dignity as you do, and I do.” The Rohingyas have been at the receiving end of the Myanmar government’s ruthless persecution and have been killed by the thousands, while tens of thousands of them have been forced to flee for their lives to Bangladesh. It remains to be seen if Obama would go beyond mere lip service to these haunted Burmese Muslims and prevails over the Myanmar rulers to end their nightmare of suffering.

A highlight of Obama’s visit to Rangoon was his meeting with AungSaan Su Kyi, the Nobel Laureate for Peace. But even this Nobel Laureate-a darling of the western news media and governments (her husband was English)---who has been regularly lionised in the western world as a freedom fighter and a fearless defender of her people’s rights, hasn’t said a word either in condemnation of atrocities against the Muslims of Arakan.

So if Obama can shower such a profusion of praise on a piddling Myanmar, despite its ruthless persecution of Muslims, one can well imagine his enthusiasm for Israel, which he never tires praising for being the ‘only democracy’ in the Middle East.

In fitness of his abiding commitment to a war-mongering Israel-which has been described by Turkey’s outspoken PM, Erdogan, as a “terrorist state”---Obama didn’t deem his words of praise as sufficient and decided to rush his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton to Jerusalem to assure Netanyahu of his unflagging support to Palestinian persecution. Sharing the podium with a hectoring Netanyahu in full glare of television cameras, Hillary Clinton thanked God that Israel was secure against Palestinian missiles-crude rockets that the Palestinian freedom fighters can at best assemble---because of the ‘high efficiency’ of Iron Dome system of defence.

The anti-missile Iron Dome shield is a joint venture of U.S. and Israel, in the success of which Hillary Clinton took so much pride. And her pride wasn’t misplaced, either. The Iron Dome technology has been honed by active U.S. participation. The Obama administration granted Israel a special ‘gift’ of $ 200 million, in 2010, to develop the anti-missile shield. What more could Obama do to convince his Israeli friends and allies in Israel-and their vociferous and strident supporters in U.S.-that Israel couldn’t hope to get a more ardent and robust supporter than him in whatever pain or punishment they may choose to inflict on the hapless Palestinians of Gaza?

Indeed the U.S. Congress-a bastion of Pro-Israeli policies---couldn’t afford to be seen as lagging behind Obama in rallying to Israel’s unstinted support.  Netanyahu’s blitz against Gaza started on November 14 and two days later, the House of Representatives, passed a resolution-literally in one minute--praising Israel for its robust effort to maintain itself secure in an unruly and rowdy neighbourhood, and assuring it of America’s “ unwavering support” besides calling on the Obama administration to ensure that whatever Israel may need to go on punishing the Palestinians was provided to it on priority basis. The resolution was tabled at 12.04 p.m. and approved at 12.05 p.m. on November 16.

Of course U.S. media doesn’t like to be seen lagging behind the administration or Congress in rallying round the Israeli flag, especially when Israel may be on rampage against the Palestinians. So newspapers and television channels-not just in U.S but in Canada, too-have been trying to outdo each other in their unbridled partisanship of Israel. A common endeavour of these media barons-otherwise claiming to be paragons of honest and unbiased  journalism---is to bury the news of Palestinian casualties in the inside pages, while showing pictures of ‘grieving’ Israeli citizens in graphic details. The outpouring of sympathy for the Israeli’victims’ of Palestinian rockets knows no bounds in this unethical reporting of events from the Middle East.

Callously, Palestinians killed are not reported as ‘killed’ but only as ‘dead.’ On the other hand, Israelis killed by the Palestinians are invariably reported as being ‘killed’ at the hands of the Palestinians, or from crude rockets fired by the Palestinians.

As these lines were being written, breaking news has just reported agreement between Hamas and Israel to cease fire. Netanyahu has been persuaded by Hillary Clinton to call a halt to his carnage of innocent Palestinians. Western sources are reporting at least 155 Palestinians killed in the Israeli savagery, an at least a thousand of them injured. But that, again, may be a grossly under-inflated figure of the Palestinian lives lost in Netanyahu’s incontinent lust for Palestinian blood, especially of children; the last casualty in Gaza of Israeli barbarity was a 4 year-old girl killed by shrapnel from an Israeli missile, before the guns fell silent.

Hillary Clinton is being hailed as the ‘architect’ of the truce. She shuttled between Jerusalem and Cairo-where she convinced Egyptian President Mohammad Morsi to prevail on the Hamas leadership to accept a cease fire, howsoever tenuous that may be.

The whole, grisly episode of mayhem and murder in Gaza points in the direction of Washington, where team Obama virtually micro-managed the blitz against the Palestinians of Gaza, in order to hand to Netanyahu a war trophy for use as his election totem, come January.

The Obama administration’s involvement on the side of the aggressive Israelis apparently covered every facet of the gory operation. Starting with obviously prior clearance of the blitz granted by Obama, U.S. presence loomed large over the whole operation at every step.

Any anticipated peace-making role by UN-mandated under its charter-was stymied by American feelers to members of the Security Council that it would veto anything unfavourable or unacceptable to Israel. Of course there was nothing new in this charade; over the past two decades, Washington has wielded its veto with impunity to brazenly shield Israel against any ‘meddling’ from UN. So whatever little ‘flying’ or ‘shuttling’ diplomacy enacted by UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, was as good as cameo appearance by a bit actor. UN, in any case, has been rendered helpless by Washington’s unremitting antics on behalf of Israel in the context of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

A U.S. sponsored truce or cease-fire was a foregone thing, given the hand-in-glove nature of collaboration between U.S. and Israel-ranging from the development of Iron Dome batteries to Washington ide-lining any other country with the potential to emerge as a deal-maker. The reason for it is obvious and quite understandable: the Americans don’t want any initiative to come into play that might inconvenience its ‘partner’, Israel.

What convinced, or forced, an Israeli-partisan U.S. to prevail over a blood-thirsty Netanyahu to accept the idea of a truce-temporary though it may prove to be-with Hamas is not a brain-teaser. Obama feared the consequences if Netanyahu was given the green-light to invade Gaza by land, as Israel did back in 2008.

The political landscape of the Arab world has changed-and changed radically, too-from what it was four years ago. Gone are some of those-though not all of them-repressive dictators whom Obama could count upon to sign on the dotted lines and, in addition, keep their people’s voices suppressed. The Arab Spring has changed the Arab calculus and accorded dignity and voice to the erstwhile dis-enfranchised Arab peoples.

Anger and strong resentment was already in evidence on the Arab-street, especially in Tunis, Egypt and Jordan. Pro-Israeli pundits manning the think-tanks of Washington and looming over its power-corridors feared the people’s anger going out of control if Israel was allowed to go ahead with Netanyahu’s heart-desire to mount another land invasion against his quarries and preys in Gaza. Obama obviously got cold-feet at the prospect of a wider conflict in the Middle East if an unbridled Netanyahu was allowed to run berserk over its landscape.

It would take a very naïve person to believe that this truce, realised at the cost of so much of innocent Palestinian blood, would lead to an end of the nightmare that the people of Gaza have been subjected to for so long. U.S. doesn’t have the will to play the role of an honest referee between the Palestinians and the Israelis. Israel, under Netanyahu or whoever, doesn’t have any intention of letting loose its choke-hold over Gaza or any other part of the Occupied Palestine. For any Israeli leader, the sole interest is in extending Israel’s illegal occupation, building as many new settlements as possible-with American money, no doubt-and keep the resolution of decades-old dispute as distant as it can.

However, for the people of Gaza the truce is a victory of sorts. No matter how stiff a price in blood they have been made to pay, they have not allowed their will for freedom from Israeli-American slavery to wither. They have defied a war-mongering Israel-armed to the teeth by its American mentors---and, armed with only crude rockets-as good as squibs---managed to sow terror in the hearts of Israeli leaders and citizens alike. On top of it all, they have the satisfaction that all freedom and peace-loving people in the world stand fully behind them and their inalienable right to emancipation from Israel’s colonial yoke.

Will Obama draw any lesson from this, yet another blood-bath of the Palestinians of Gaza at the hands of a blood-thirsty Israel, and position him on the side of justice is a moot question, given his dismal track-record of the past 4 years. Every time he’s up against a test of his leadership he buckles under relentless Israeli and Zionist pressure. But if he wants to record his name in history as a peace-maker Gaza can be a litmus test. Obama doesn’t have to face an election, ever again; he doesn’t have to kowtow to Zionist lobbies in U.S. and bullies like Netanyahu in Israel. History is beckoning him to show some back-bone and take the bull by its horns. Will he do it, is anybody’s guess.

This article appeared in The Milli Gazette print issue of 1-15 December 2012 on page no. 18

We hope you liked this report/article. The Milli Gazette is a free and independent readers-supported media organisation. To support it, please contribute generously. Click here or email us at

blog comments powered by Disqus