Home How Obama and Kerry Caused the Stabbing Terror Spree in Israel
Home How Obama and Kerry Caused the Stabbing Terror Spree in Israel

How Obama and Kerry Caused the Stabbing Terror Spree in Israel

Before the Muslim terror stabbing spree, Netanyahu had made repeated efforts to meet with the leader of the PLO. And for once, Abbas, the PLO leader, had not been averse to a meeting.  

Instead it was Secretary of State John Kerry who told Abbas not to meet with Netanyahu.

Abbas went to the UN and disavowed the Oslo Accords. The first Muslim stabbings of Jews, with the encouragement of the PLO, began a few days later.

It is unlikely that Kerry had directly told Abbas to escalate the violence, but he had sent him the same effective message by coordinating with the PLO boss at the expense of Netanyahu. The top terrorist came away with the understanding that the administration favored him and was hostile to Netanyahu.

And he was right.

So Abbas decided to see what another outburst of violence would net him.

It wasn’t the first time that Obama and Kerry had unleashed Abbas’ worst impulses.

Obama’s splashy trip to Israel didn’t lead to peace, but it did make the PLO’s Palestinian Authority more dictatorial and corrupt. The closest thing to an accomplishment that the Bush administration’s own failed efforts had to show for them was the appointment of Salam Fayyad as Prime Minister of the PA.

While Fayyad had nothing to contribute to the peace process, and the Palestinian Authority remained a corrupt coven of terrorists subsidized by foreign aid, there were some improvements when it came to financial transparency. Most importantly, Fayyad provided a check on Abbas in an organization which had otherwise abandoned elections and made the PLO boss into a dictator for life.

In 2013, Obama finally followed the advice of his Jewish leftist allies to visit Israel and “make the case for peace” to the Israeli people. This he did to a handpicked younger audience, while snubbing the usual Knesset speech in Israel’s parliament that Bush, Clinton and even Carter had delivered.

"I genuinely believe that you do have a true partner in President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad. I believe that,” Obama told his Israeli audience.

Earlier, Abbas had told a Russian interviewer, "As far as I am concerned, there is no difference between our policies and those of Hamas. So why are they labeled as terrorists?" It was a good question, but not one that Obama was in the mood to address.

Despite Obama’s vote of confidence in Fayyad, it was his visit with its free pass to Abbas that would finish Fayyad’s career. Fayyad’s rise had been a response to growing skepticism by the Bush administration and Congress of Abbas’ mismanagement of the Palestinian Authority.

When Obama arrived, Abbas had already been trying to force out Fayyad. The visit, with the trappings of one president visiting another, sent the message that Abbas didn’t have to worry about democracy. US diplomats scrambled to persuade Abbas to keep Fayyad on, but the damage had been done. Soon Fayyad was gone, leaving Abbas with the Palestinian Authority as his private fiefdom.

Fayyad’s departure fed Abbas’ hubris. There were no more elections and no independent prime minister to get in his way. So Kerry’s attempt at a peace process was met with a crazy demand by the PLO boss that Israel release hundreds of terrorists as a precondition to any negotiations.

Instead of giving Abbas a reality check that Israel shouldn’t have to release dangerous terrorists just for the privilege of sitting at a table with him, Obama and Kerry once again backed up Abbas.  While Netanyahu’s expectation that Abbas should recognize Israel as a Jewish state, according to Kerry was “not going to happen in the beginning”, the release of murderous Muslim terrorists would.

Most of the terrorists were freed, but Abbas just escalated his demands and then made a big push at the UN. Negotiations collapsed, but instead of blaming Abbas, Kerry blamed Israel.  "Israel didn't release the Palestinian prisoners on the day they were supposed to be freed, and another day passed, and another day," he grumbled to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

The worse Abbas behaved, the more Obama and Kerry backed him up.

Even when Jews were being butchered in the streets of Jerusalem, while Abbas’ henchmen and propagandists cheered on the killers, Kerry once again blamed Israel claiming that the violence was caused by Muslim “frustration” due to an imaginary “massive increase in settlements.”

(Settlements being places in Israel where Jews live, as opposed to where Muslims live, which are never damned as settlements even when the land is illegally acquired and when houses are built on land that the Jewish population had been ethnically cleansed from.)

Kerry was once again sending the message that Abbas and the PLO could do no wrong.

The recent roots of this violence can be found in how Obama and Kerry chose to feed Abbas’ hubris.

Abbas has learned that he can do just about anything and his pals in Washington D.C. will blame Israeli settlements or the manic depressive frustration and desperation of terrorists instead of the PLO leader.

Obama’s overhyped visit didn’t set the stage for peace, but for an escalation of the conflict. The meeting of the two men only nourished Abbas’ grandiose delusions and totalitarian itches. The Bush administration made an effort to set some expectations for the PLO. Those expectations weren’t met, but at least they existed. The Obama administration has zero expectations for Abbas.

Those zero expectations have translated into an unapologetic dictatorship subsidized by US taxpayers, an international diplomatic campaign whose only real purpose is the self-glorification of that dictator and a campaign of violence and terror so that the dictator can feel like a player on the world stage.

Not only did Obama and Kerry fail to do the right thing, but at every turn they managed to make things worse. Their determination to blame everything on Israel told Abbas that he could do anything. Even when Abbas might have actually met with Netanyahu, Kerry insisted on sabotaging the meeting.

None of this was an accident. There was a lot more at stake here than another failed peace deal.

Obama views Netanyahu as a political enemy and stirring up violence in Israel is one way of hurting him.

It’s no coincidence that the peace push followed Netanyahu’s Iran speech at the UN and growing worries by Obama’s people that Israel would carry out its own strike against Iran’s nuclear program.

While the PLO peace circus was in town, negotiations with Iran were moving forward and being kept secret from Israel. Forcing Israel to negotiate with the PLO terrorists was meant to distract it from the other negotiations with the Iranian terrorists that the Jewish State wasn’t supposed to know about.

And making those negotiations as difficult and disastrous as possible was one way of diverting a good deal of Israel’s diplomatic and intelligence capabilities to coping with a growing threat at home.

Obama and Kerry may not have understood that their gambit would end in violence, that an arrogant Abbas would escalate the conflict with a new wave of terror that would lead to Jewish men, women and children being murdered by Muslim terrorists emboldened by Abbas’s martyrdom rhetoric.

It’s more likely though that they just didn’t care.

Giving Israel a domestic security crisis to deal with it is one more way of preventing a last ditch effort to take out Iran’s nuclear program. Whether or not Obama and Kerry had that particular outcome in mind, it clearly benefits their agenda and they have shown no sign of cracking down on Abbas’ incitement.

Obama and Kerry want Netanyahu out. They want to see a more pliable government in Israel. Their efforts at influencing an Israeli election failed. But it did incrementally yield a weaker and less conservative government coalition. Abbas’ combination of diplomatic and terrorist attacks also yields incremental results by denying Netanyahu the breathing room to make considered decisions.

The White House may not be directing Abbas’ violence, but it benefits from it and it is unwilling to shut it down because even if it doesn’t bring down Netanyahu, it will weaken him and limit his options.

Obama could quickly send the signal to Abbas that the free ride is over. He could call for Palestinian elections, political reforms and use foreign aid to force an end to the PLO’s promotion of terrorism.

None of that is happening. Nor will it. Instead Kerry is taking great pains to avoid saying anything that could be characterized as singling out Abbas for blame. And that is a covert message of approval.

Abbas’ PLO terror will only escalate as long as he senses that he has the support of the White House. And as long as the White House continues to support him, the blood of his victims is on Obama’s hands.


  1. No, the blood is on our hands, because we did not authorize someone to put a lead bullet through Abbas' head.

    This entire problem could be over in 48 hours if we had the will to deal with reality.

    But we are safely ensconced in our delusional bubble and so we put off what should have been done 18 years ago.

    Well now that problem has metastasized. Instead of stable Arab governments run by ensconced dictators who enjoy living more than they enjoyed fighting us, we are now surrounded by destabilized regimes filled with fighters and war, instead of a region consisting of only us and the Arabs, we now have to contend with Russian tanks, planes, surveillance and electronic warfare assets sitting right on top of our border. Instead of having to deal with an Iranian government that was unsure of the future, we are now dealing with an Iranian government that has made it's top priority our annihilation via nuclear weapons.

    At some point, someone needs to figure out that not dealing with a problem is worse than covering it up.

  2. And if nothing else, Obama and Kerry are fomenting violence and murder against US citizens. Now since Obama already drone murders US citizens w/o the merest hint of due process that probably means nothing to him, but it should to some of us.

  3. gstarr9/11/15

    It used to be Arafat's intifadas. This one rests squarely on Obama and Kerry's shoulders.

  4. Y. Ben-David9/11/15

    Excellent analysis as usual.
    Important to keep in mind the following points.
    (1) Obama (and much of his entourage) believe that Israel is an anachronistic colonialist vestige that has no right to exist and will cease to exist (G-d forbid) just like Rhodesia.
    (2) Obama was born and raised as a Muslim (his Indonesian soujourn). He naturally support the Muslim cause around the world.
    (3) Obama, as a Democrat, is aware of the strong Jewish presence in that party. Thus, he concluded that a frontal assault on Israel would be difficult, so it would be better if he could divide American Jewry.
    (4) This was accomplished, quite successfully, by setting up J-Street and repeating over and over and over that he "loves Israel" while carrying out policies hostile to it and getting most American Jews to accept this situation (largely due to lack of knowledge about what is really going on in Israel and the Middle East)
    (5) Obama learned this from FDR who also convinced Jews that "he loved them" while at the same time doing everything possible to stymie help for Jews facing the Nazi Holocaust machine and then telling King Abdul-Aziz Ibn Saud of Saudi Arabia that he would not support creation of a Jewish state even though he was elected in 1944 on the basis of plank in the Democratic platform supporting exactly this.
    (6) It is repeated over and over that "Obama doesn't understand the Middle East). On the contrary, he understands what he is doing and is succeeding from his pont of view. For instance, both Yossi Beilin and Dennis Ross criticized Obama for demanding a unlilateral settlement freeze from Netanyahu without demanding a concession in return from Abbas, claiming that Abbas now can't back down from this demand in return for continuing negotiations. This criticism assumes that Obama reallly wants negotiations and a peace settlement. This is incorrect. Obama's policy has been to stoke instability in the Middle East (pulling out of Iraq, refusing to honor his "red lines" regarding chemical weapons in Syria, capitlulating to Iran's nuclear aspirations) and so getting the Palestinians to feel "frustrated" and stoking violence is part of the plan.
    (7) All of this is directed to getting Israel and the Europeans to be "Paid back" for their colonialist agression..violence against Israel and massive influx of Muslim refugees to Europe who will take back in welfare payments/jizya dhimmi tax what Obama and the Muslims thinks they are owed.
    (8) I realize this is frightening and I only hope Netanyahu and the rest of the world come to understand what they are up against with Obama and his "progressive" gang determined to "fundamentally change America" and its place in the world.

  5. Anonymous9/11/15

    Well, it is very clear that the left liberal progressives (i.e., the democrats) are not big fans of Israel and have greater sympathy for the PLO / Hamas than the fact that Israel faces an existential threat from their neighbors.
    And wait till Iran goes full speed ahead - WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE DEMOCRATS - to finish developing the nuclear capability and method of delivery to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.
    And how do jewish american voters respond ??
    Oh, that's right; by voting for democrats in overwhelming numbers.
    You wait and see; if the day comes when Israel is extinguished, rest assured that american jewish voters of the liberal persuasion will claim that "Israel had it coming."

    It gets difficult having any sympathy at all for a group that votes for its own suicide.

  6. A minor point only partially related to your again amazing column, one you already touched at, please try and use your journalistic influence in halting the use of the stigmatizing word "settlement" by consistently in all your publications calling these "Jewish villages in Israel's heartland" in the future. We should take the language back from the word-warp of the left"s propaganda machine.

  7. When will Israel publicly acknowledge that Obama, Kerry and their ilk are the enemy?

  8. http://www.science.co.il/Arab-Israeli-conflict/Articles/Eidelberg-2002-04-30.php

  9. BHO & Kerry have plenty of self hating anti-semitic "Jews & Israelis" who give them Ahitofel advice how to deal with Israel and its government.

    Here is an example how we are good at shooting ourselves in the legs:


  10. Why sugar coat it? The U.S. government from the highest levels on down has been compromised by traitors. That will change if we make it to another election. One thing good for Israel. The people attacking them are bringing knives to a gunfight. Still, they're trying to provoke Israel into a mass slaughter so they can blame Israel some more. The PLO are just plain nuts and there will never be peace. We could give Israel a state like New Mexico as their country, and the PLO would follow them there. Israel needs to ignore the U.S. and start kicking butt if they want to survive the current Obama psycho fest. Think Libya and what happened there.

  11. The native European anti-semites are also happy to have Muslims to their dirty work, much as they let the Nazis do it before. Clean hands but guilty as sin.

  12. What do you say about the recent Congressional resolution putting the blame for the violence on Abbas? Do these things mean anything?

  13. Common 'tater11/11/15

    Thank you for stating this so clearly. Unfortunately, it needs to be sent far and wide, and the people that need to hear about this are not getting the truth.

    Our leadership from our one party-one horse (more like horse's derriere) nonsensical political hack factory in DC have been never-ending failures:

    Carter: No reply to an act of war, aiding the establishment of mullah land (AKA Islamic Iran). Republic? Yeah, right.

    Reagan: Failed intervention in Lebanon, failed response to an act of war, lots of dead Marines. Gives aid to mujahideen that will eventually attack us. Thinks he is helping to ruin USSR by doing so.

    Bush 1: US becomes debt collector for KSA and Kuwait. Failed military venture in Iraq. Gives even more help to mujahideen that will turn against us.

    Clintons: Rewards North Korea for building nukes and breaking promises. Rewards China with technology that results in them building ICBMS that can not only hit the broad side of a barn, but hit US, as well as sending over more of our jobs. Refuses to go after state sponsors of terrorism that attack us. Rewards PLO for intifada.

    Bush 2: Protects OPEC friends but makes US citizens criminals in our own country after citizens of said OPEC countries nearly destroy our economy in act of war against us. Refuses to aid Israel in going after Iran's nuclear infrastructure. Refuses to close border and allows millions in unchecked.

    BHO/Clinton/Kerry: Make Keystone cop and 3 stooge predecessors look like geniuses. Opens borders to terrorists even further. Protects our enemies from our friends. Rewards dictators for pouncing on our supposed allies.

    Even if the best of our possible candidates really does get elected, the belt way establishment will see to it that nothing good happens. Unless said candidate has a congress willing to stop self-serving and counterproductive activities and said candidate can replace at least 4 dead head SCOTUS injustices, we will only get more horse hockey out of DC. Good luck to us.

  14. Daniel, I'm sure you're too busy to deal with such trivialities, but shouldn't the "Copyright © 2009 Sultan Knish," at the bottom of your blog be updated to reflect temporal reality{?}

  15. Following Netanyahu's White House and CAP visit, the usual leftist media outlets crept back up to the Jew-hate line screaming he's an inveterate liar and criminal etc. To me it was a good thing because the left will never NOT be openly antisemitic. Netanyahu can speak to CAP or AEI or the President or anyone else and it doesn't matter. And if the Democrats keep the White House it will only get worse.

  16. Fisk Ellington Rutledge III12/11/15

    Obama does the same thing domestically. When criminal third-world savages (U.S. Blacks most famously) are shot or beaten by police because the police have no choice but to do just that, Obama encourages the savages to go on a furious chimp-out and tries to prosecute and otherwise persecute the White police. Obama is a deeply evil man who appears to be fully invested in the Leftist project to utterly destroy civilization.

  17. In the same vein as mindRider...

    [quote]A minor point... please try and use your journalistic influence in halting the use of the stigmatizing word "settlement"[/quote]

    That also goes for the term "Palestinian". There is no such thing, regardless of the PA's use of it in their name. They are just Arabs. The historical flag of "Palestine" had a the Magen David on it.

  18. Anonymous13/11/15

    While arts like Silat, Kali, Krav Maga, Piper's Knife and others have techniques to try to deal with knifes there really is no full proof way of preventing yourself from being stabbed 100%. It sounds like it's time to cull back a few of the savages with an Uzi or a Sniper Rifle.

  19. Obama and the left-wing are not just participating in the 'palestinian knifing spree but in all mooslem violence and bloodshed, including Paris and the Paris's to come


Post a Comment

You May Also Like