Prez and V-P are both hostile to Israel.

Joe Biden says---> Israel is Not Allowed to Defend Herself by Sammy Benoit
With regards to Israel, the attention has been on President Obama, questions have arisen like, "is he anti-Israel?" or "How will he change US/Israel relations?" There has been very little attention on Vice-President Joe Biden, who frankly is not a friend of Israel either. Especially when it comes to Israel's self defense.During the recent Presidential campaign season, Biden exclaimed that Israel would have to get used to a nuclear Iran. Yesterday on CNN he warned Israel not to attack Iranian Nukes: With his brief comment Tuesday, Biden became the highest-ranking administration official to caution the Jewish state against a military strike. In the interview, Biden was asked whether he was concerned that Netanyahu might strike Iranian nuclear facilities. "I don't believe Prime Minister Netanyahu would do that. I think he would be ill advised to do that," Biden said. "And so my level of concern is no different than it was a year ago." But many U.S. officials believe Israel is serious. Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of U.S. forces in the Middle East, told senators this month that the Israeli government may be "so threatened by the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapon that it would take preemptive military action to derail or delay it."
Iran is creating nuclear weapons and has threatened to destroy Israel. Does Biden really believe that Israel should not protect herself? Well if you look at the course of his career that answer may very well be yes. Biden's stance on Israel has been consistent---consistently BAD:When Biden was a young US Senator, he was very confrontational on Mid East Issues. At one hearing in 1982 he tried to intimidate Menachem Begin by pounding his fist and raising his voice threatening to cut off US Aid to Israel. During that committee hearing, at the height of the Lebanon War, Sen. John [sic] Biden (Delaware) had attacked Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria and threatened that if Israel did not immediately cease this activity, the US would have to cut economic aid to Israel. When the senator raised his voice and banged twice on the table with his fist, Begin commented to him: "This desk is designed for writing, not for fists. Don't threaten us with slashing aid. Do you think that because the US lends us money it is entitled to impose on us what we must do? We are grateful for the assistance we have received, but we are not to be threatened. I am a proud Jew. Three thousand years of culture are behind me, and you will not frighten me with threats. Take note: we do not want a single soldier of yours to die for us."
Even when the Senate has sent "non-binding letters supporting Israel, Biden support is missing:
* November 2001, Bond/Schumer Letter Urging President Not to Meet with Arafat until the Violence Ends, 89 Signers: Sen. Biden did not sign this letter urging President Bush not to meet with Arafat until Palestinian violence ceased. The letter had 89 signers.
* March 2004, Schumer-Hatch-Clinton-Smith Letter Urging Kofi Annan to Reverse Support for ICJ Hearings on the Security Fence, 79 Signers: Sen. Biden did not sign this letter urging Kofi Annan to reverse support for the International Court of Justice Hearings on the Security fence which ultimately had 79 signers.
* December 2005,Talent/Nelson Letter Urging Pres. Bush to Press Palestinian Leadership to Bar Terrorist Groups from Participating in Palestinian Legislative Elections, 73 co-signers: Sen. Biden did not sign this letter barring terror groups from participating in Palestinian elections which ultimately had 73 co-signers.
* June 2008, Landrieu/Collins Letter to President Bush Supporting Israel’s Quest for Peace, 77 Signers: Sen. Biden did not sign this pro-Israel letter which had 77 signers.
Joe Biden is one more reason for supporters of Israel to be concerned about the Obama Administration. And why in the end, Israel may have to go it alone. .......................................
Obama-Netanyahu Meeting Tense - Body language expert Tanya Rieman analyzed Obama's statement in Netanyahu's presence and noted Obama didn't look at the PM once, even while sitting with him and referring to him. Her conclusion: utter hostility.
http://tinyurl.com/qqy7swAudacity Vs. Reality By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Middle East: President Obama seeks a grand, unlikely reconciliation between Jews, Shiites and Sunnis. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's decidedly undreamy Mideast agenda is about survival. In the Middle East of the early 21st century, the world is challenged by two big facts: one, a problem with no solution; the other, a problem it's been pretending isn't really there.
The first fact is the troubled co-existence of Israel with its hostile Muslim neighbors. It's obvious that the Jewish state will never be accepted as legitimate by a large number of Arabs. There will always be Muslim nations and armed organizations that will never accept its right to exist, and that would try to get rid of it.Yet year after year we hear most of Western Europe, Third World nations and now apparently America insist that a Palestinian state is the key to a lasting Mideast peace.n truth, such an Israeli concession would likely fan the flames of hate toward Israel, make it territorially far less secure, and be seen by radical Muslims as a step toward Israel's eventual destruction. The heat would be turned up on the Jewish homeland.
As the world insists the insoluble problem — harmony between Middle Eastern Jew and Muslim — be given priority, the other fact regarding the region is neglected, even though it has a solution.That second problem is Iran's nuclear ambitions. The options available now for years include concerted economic isolation, an explicit policy of regime change manifested through the material support of Iran's organized dissidents, and joint military action by the major free world powers.****Why Obama proposes, for free, eschewal of regime change in Iran, is beyond understanding.****Instead of any of that, this Islamofascist regime that has called for the destruction of Israel and has sponsored terrorists in Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq has been subjected only to impotent sanctions that have encouraged Tehran's ruling mullahs.It is in this context that Barack Obama and Bibi Netanyahu's two hours together at the White House on Monday must be seen.
The president let it be known in his public remarks that he told the hard-line Israeli PM to "get a serious movement" going.
He also pointedly insisted to the Israeli leader that Jewish West Bank "settlements have to be stopped," and in a remark in which it is difficult not to find condescension, he expressed confidence that Netanyahu "is going to rise to the occasion."An enticing vision of normalized relations between Israel and all Muslim countries was reportedly presented to the Israeli leader. Clearly, Netanyahu is far too sagacious to swallow any such fantasyland scenario.Yet it was this same supposedly hotheaded hawk, the Israeli who during his previous tenure as prime minister is said to have caused Bill Clinton to spew a string of angry profanities, who came to Washington with the real message of unity."There's never been a time when Arabs and Israelis see a common threat the way we see it today," Netanyahu said of the Iranian nuclear threat.When President Obama said "there is no reason why we should not seize this opportunity and this moment," it's too bad he wasn't talking about the opportunity to unite Israeli and Arab against the evil that continues to fester in Iran.
****Why this should be an especially auspicious time to "seize this opportunity and this moment" to establish a Palestinian state is not only unclear, it is farcical. There is no-one to negotiate with: Abbas and Fatah have no power, are corrupt, and are unwilling to make even the slight recognition that one of the "two states" be a Jewish one. The real choice of the Palestinians is Hamas, a proxy of Iran and intransigent about even the existence of Israel. Taken as a concession by the Europeans,Hamas "might" be leaning toward a "hudna" of ten years, a truce after which they would be enthusiastic about taking up the annihilation of Israel again. Actually, in Mohammed's history, he didn't even wait for the end of the hudna to pursue his agenda of annihilating the (Jewish) tribe he had a truce with. The anti-Israel and anti-Semitic message of Palestinian ( and even Egyptian and Jordanian, let alone Saudi ) media has never been more intense. What's this "opportunity"?****