╌>

Alan Dershowitz calls out Obama's 'deep hatred of Israel': 'He should be ashamed'

  

Category:  Op/Ed

Via:  vic-eldred  •  7 months ago  •  14 comments

By:   by Kristen Altus

Alan Dershowitz calls out Obama's 'deep hatred of Israel': 'He should be ashamed'
"I think he always had a deep hatred of Israel in his heart. He hid it very well. He called me to the Oval Office and he said to me, 'Alan, you've known me for a long time. You know I have Israel's back.' I didn't realize he meant to paint a target on it," Dershowitz said on "Mornings with Maria" Friday.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


E xpressing outrage over former President Barack Obama’s call for an end to Israeli "occupation," Harvard Law professor emeritus  Alan Dershowitz  expanded on why he’s never talking to the Democratic president again.

"I think he always had a deep hatred of Israel in his heart. He hid it very well. He called me to the Oval Office and he said to me, 'Alan, you've known me for a long time. You know I have Israel's back.' I didn't realize he meant to paint a target on it," Dershowitz said on " Mornings with Maria " Friday.

"He's never been supportive of Israel. And finally, his true feelings have come out now that he's no longer president and doesn't have to be elected," the professor continued. "He has contributed enormously to the problem because he is respected among young people. And if he says the occupation is unbearable and that anything can be done to stop it, he is encouraging people to engage in their antisemitic, anti-Israel and anti-American attitudes. He should be ashamed of himself. He should apologize, but he won't."

Dershowitz’s commentary comes after he claimed Thursday that any relationship with Obama is "over" following the 44th president’s  on-stage statements  about the Israel-Hamas war.
Obama spoke at the Obama Foundation's Democracy Forum last Thursday, where he called for a  two-state solution  and an end to the "occupation," while not clarifying what occupation he meant.

"All of this is taking place against the backdrop of decades of failure to achieve a durable peace for both Israelis and Palestinians," the former president told the forum audience.

He continued: "One that is based on genuine security for Israel, a recognition of its right to exist, and a peace that is based on an end of the occupation and the creation of a viable state and self-determination for the Palestinian people."

The Harvard professor on Friday accused  Obama of lying "through his teeth"  about what the former president called an "unbearable" occupation of Gaza.

"To compare those disputed claims with the rapes, beheadings, burnings, kidnappings, it's just obscene and despicable," Dershowitz said. "And what it does is it lends support to those students basically, who are saying, ‘Well, what Hamas really did was not so bad... It was in response to the occupation.’"

"Although he said that the attacks by Hamas are not justifiable," Dershowitz added, "he made them justifiable because if life really is unbearable, as it's not, then you can do anything you want."

Obama is further "pouring gas on the fire" of a serious matter, the Harvard professor argued, which could fuel  more antisemitic sentiment  nationwide.

"What he did was contribute to the risks to not only Israelis, but Americans, because it's coming to a theater near you," Dershowitz told host Maria Bartiromo. "If Hamas is not stopped in its tracks from doing the terrorist acts, they will bring them to the United States."


The Obama Foundation did not immediately respond to FOX News Digital's request for comment.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    7 months ago

I think Alan Dershowitz is a brave man.

It does require bravery to say something that though true is going to cause a lot of repercussions.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
2  Right Down the Center    7 months ago

"He has contributed enormously to the problem because he is respected among young people. And if he says the occupation is unbearable and that anything can be done to stop it, he is encouraging people to engage in their antisemitic, anti-Israel and anti-American attitudes. He should be ashamed of himself. He should apologize, but he won't."

Words matter, especially if  they look up to you.. I used to think obummer knew that. Looks like I was giving him too much credit. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Right Down the Center @2    7 months ago

You've got it!

 
 
 
Colour Me Free
Senior Quiet
2.2  Colour Me Free  replied to  Right Down the Center @2    7 months ago
I used to think obummer knew that. Looks like I was giving him too much credit. 

Ooo he knows.  Obama is mad crazy smart and chooses his words carefully  .. yet he did attend Columbia and Harvard.  : )

Obama is anti-colonialism, and he believes that Israel is a colonizer of the Palestinians land. I do not respect his opinion on the subject, yet alas it is his opinion.

The indoctrinated students on campus are not children, and Obamas words change nothing - they were already radicalized before Obama voiced his opinion.

Peace.....

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3  JohnRussell    7 months ago

There is something seriously wrong with Alan Dershowitz' mind. 

There are articles in Israeli papers every day that are not in basic disagreement with what Obama said. 

Obama is not going to reply to Dershowitz because , why would he?  Dershowitz proved what he is when he joined Trump's impeachment defense team. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3    7 months ago
There are articles in Israeli papers every day that are not in basic disagreement with what Obama said. 

What Israeli papers are implying that a long-ago Israeli occupation of Gaza is the cause of the Oct 7th attack?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    7 months ago

what "long ago" occupation are you talking about?

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
3.1.2  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.1    7 months ago

The one that ended in 2005.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.3  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.1    7 months ago

August 2005  – Israeli forces withdraw from Gaza 38 years after capturing it from Egypt, abandoning settlements and leaving it under the control of the Palestinian Authority.



The question is: What the fuck was Obama talking about?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.3    7 months ago

Will you please stop. First of all , the occupation everyone refers to includes the West Bank. That is common knowledge. Secondly, Israel controls what goes into or out of Gaza, including all the people. That is occupation. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.5  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.4    7 months ago

For the most part the PLO and Hamas ran it. That is the type of leadership chosen by the people whom Yasser Arafat christened as "the Palestinians."

Incidents like the October 7th attack is the reason that Israel controls what goes into or out of Gaza, including all the people.  That is not occupation, nor are Israelis oppressors.

The Palestinians are to blame for their plight.


 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
3.2  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JohnRussell @3    7 months ago

Obama voted to abstain instead of vetoing UN resolution 2334 in Dec 2016.

That resolution favored of the Palestinians, and wasn’t aligned with the Oslo peace process.  It rewards Palestinians for violating their commitment to negotiate directly with Israel and assumes that they can unilaterally impose a settlement through international dealings.  By doing so it decentavized the Palestinians to return to bilateral negotiations with Israel.

The few Palestinians that want a deal with Israel want Resolution 242 recasted so that Israel cannot retain any of the territories east of the 1949 armistice line.

 
 
 
Colour Me Free
Senior Quiet
3.2.1  Colour Me Free  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.2    7 months ago
The few Palestinians that want a deal with Israel want Resolution 242 recasted so that Israel cannot retain any of the territories east of the 1949 armistice line.

Not sure I understand Resolution 242 'recasted' .. especially recast.  The 1949 armistice lines states that Israel cannot move any further east than the armistice lines .. which is Gaza and it was occupied by Egypt at the time.. Jordan occupied the west bank ... or am I thinking of something different? 

Resolution 242 was 1967 or 68 which Egypt and Jordan accepted right away because they got their land back .. Palestinians did not accept it til 1988 or 89 because there was nothing about Palestinian land ...  I may be confusing my dates etc - perhaps I may need to do some research.

 
 
 
Colour Me Free
Senior Quiet
3.2.2  Colour Me Free  replied to  Colour Me Free @3.2.1    7 months ago

okay I screwed up on the 1949 armistice lines .. but not by much   : )

Israel's borders explained in maps - BBC News

... and I screwed up Resolution 242 .. but once again not by much,,   : )

United Nations Resolution 242 , resolution of the  United Nations (UN) Security Council  adopted on November 22, 1967, in an effort to secure a just and lasting peace in the wake of the  Six-Day (June) War , fought primarily between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, and  Syria . The Israelis supported the resolution because it called on the Arab states to accept  Israel ’s right “to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.” Each of the Arab states eventually accepted it ( Egypt  and  Jordan  accepted the resolution from the outset) because of its clause calling for Israel to withdraw from “territories occupied in the recent conflict.” The  Palestine Liberation Organization  rejected it until 1988 because it lacked explicit references to Palestinians. Though never fully  implemented , it was the basis of diplomatic efforts to end Arab-Israeli conflicts until the  Camp David Accords  and remains an important touchstone in any negotiated resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

United Nations Resolution 242 | Definition & Facts | Britannica

 
 

Who is online





43 visitors