American Jewish Leader Warns U.S Jews To Move To Israel Because Of Looming ‘End Of Days’

An American Jewish leader last week called upon American Jews to immigrate to Israel because of increasing anti-Semitism in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world, but also because she is convinced we are witnessing the end of days.

Lori Palatnik, a Jewish writer and educator who lives in Washington, D.C., and heads the Jewish Women’s Renaissance Project (an international initiative that brings thousands of women to Israel each year from 18 different countries), posted a YouTube video in which she explained that because of increasing anti-Semitism, Jews would be safest in Israel.

But that’s not the only reason she wants American Jewry to move to Israel.

“Returning to Israel is also a fulfillment of a biblical prophecy, she said, marking the ‘end of days,’” the International Business Times reported.

She told Breaking Israel News, a website that reports news from a biblical perspective, that the events of September 11, 2001 had convinced her that the prophecies in the books of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Joel and Zechariah were coming true in our lifetime.

She gave two examples of these prophecies that describe events that will occur at the end of days.

And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke. (Joel 3:3)

And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the peoples that have warred against Jerusalem: their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their sockets, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth. (Zechariah 14:12)

Palatnik says that these verses describe a nuclear holocaust, and is convinced that this will happen soon.

She also referred to what is happening with Jews in Europe, where anti-Semitism is increasing and where religious Jews are being told not to wear a Kippa (Yarmulke) anymore when they go out.

“There’s been a build-up. Anti-Semitism is worse than before the Holocaust. In Paris, you can’t wear a kippah on the street. Is that what we’re waiting for?” she told Israel Breaking News.

“I’m not a prophetess, but the Almighty is starting to make it uncomfortable because being comfortable seems to work against us. I don’t want to wait for that. I don’t think anyone should wait until they’re running for their lives,” Palatnik added.

Palatnik is not the only Jew who thinks we are living at the end of days.

Many rabbis in Israel share this view and point not only to what is written in the books of the prophets, but also to what the Talmud and the Zohar (mystic commentary on the Torah) say about the events that will occur at the end of days.

These scriptures describe events that will take place in the land of Israel at the end of days. Almost all of these events have already occurred.

Rabbi Yechiel Weitzman explores these events in his book The Ishmaelite Exile, which deals with the situation in Israel at the end of days. He cites the Talmudic sage Rabbi Yishmael, who foresaw what the children of Ishmael (Mohammed is descended from Ishmael) would do to Israel at the end of days.

They will measure the land with ropes (to determine the borders of their state)

They will change a cemetery into a resting-place for sheep (and) a dunghill (not allow Jews to access their Holy Sites and desecrate those that fall into their hands).

They will measure with them and from them upon the tops of the mountains (to gain an upper hand on the tops of mountains e.g. the Golan Heights.)

Falsehood will multiply, and the truth will be hidden (Lies will abound, and the truth will disappear).

The statutes will be removed far from Israel (Secularism will run rampant, and Torah will be far from the Jews).

Sins will be multiplied in Israel

Worm-crimson will be in the wool (the thinnest of threads will be seen as thick rope – e.g. the so-called peace process).

And he (Yishmael) will cover with insects paper and quill (all written agreements and treaties will be treated as null and void)

He will hew down the rock of the kingdom (destroy Jewish structures)

And they will rebuild the desolated cities and sweep the ways (Jericho, Gaza, Shechem)

And they will plant gardens and parks, and fence in the broken walls of the Temple (see the pics of people picnicking on the Temple Mount);

And they will build a building in the Holy Place (The Dome of the Rock)

And two brothers will arise over them,’ princes at the end (Hamas and Fatah or ISIS & Al Qaeda ?)

And in their days the Branch, the Son of David, will arise, as it is said, “ And in the days of those kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed ” (Dan 2: 44).

The war of Gog and Magog is another event that takes a prominent place in what Jewish scriptures say about the end of days.

Jewish sages have said that it will be a three-stage war. Two of these stages have already taken place (WW1 and WW2), and we are currently witnessing the final war, which will be completely different from the first two. Virtually all the nations of the world will participate in this last war. This is based on the numerical value (gematria) of the Hebrew words ‘Gog Oe Magog.’ which is 70. The ancient world counted 70 nations.

The Jewish sage Malbim, who lived in the 19th century, wrote: “In the end, of days the army of Gog and Magog which are the nations of Edom (Russia, Europe and the U.S.) will gather together to take Jerusalem out of the hands of the Yishmaelim, and they will fight against each other and kill each other.”

Currently, roughly seventy nations are involved in the fight against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, among them the United States, Russia and a number of European countries.

Rabbi Amnon Yitzchak, the leader of a Jewish outreach movement in Israel, says that the presence of Russia and the United States in Syria will eventually lead to a confrontation between the two countries that will mark the beginning of the final battle in the war of Gog and Magog.

In the end, Israel will supposedly be drawn into this confrontation, and the war will end with a battle for Jerusalem. At that point, God will step in and save Israel, the Rabbi explained in this video:

France Issues An Ultimatum That Could Lead To A Catastrophe For Israel

Just a few days after the Obama administration increased pressure on Israel with the sudden enforcement of 20-year-old guidelines about labeling products manufactured in the so-called West Bank (Samaria and Judea), France stepped in to further pressure the Jewish State.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius announced Friday that France would soon organize an international conference with the aim to break the current deadlock in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The conference should enable new peace negotiations between each side, Fabius hopes.

“France will engage in the coming weeks in the preparation of an international conference bringing together the parties and their main partners, American, European, Arab, notably to preserve and make happen the two-state solution,” Fabius told reporters.

But apparently Fabius is not optimistic about the outcome of such a conference, so he decided to issue an ultimatum. When asked what would happen if his initiative should fail Fabius answered, “Well… in this case, we need to face our responsibilities by recognizing the Palestinian state.”

He added he saw “colonization” continue despite calls to cease these activities by the EU, U.S. and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon. Fabius was referring to Israel’s supposedly “illegal” activities in Judea and Samaria (West Bank), the heartland of both ancient and modern day Israel.

Israeli officials were flabbergasted by the ultimatum and reacted with fury.

“The foreign minister’s statement offers an incentive to the Palestinians to reach a deadlock. It is not possible to conduct negotiations or to achieve peace in such a manner,” an unnamed Israeli official told the Hebrew-language paper Ma’ariv, shortly after Fabius’ announcement.

“The French know their initiative is hopeless, but they’re doing anything to leave their marks and show they’re a relevant player in the international arena,” another Israeli official said sarcastically.

Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu underlined the French threat to Israel during his opening remarks Sunday at the weekly cabinet meeting and said when the conference doesn’t produce the desired results, “France would essentially adopt the Palestinian position.” He added this “gives an incentive to the Palestinians not to come to the negotiations and not to compromise.”

The Israeli prime minister did not rule out Israeli participation in the conference, but said there needed to be some “sobering up” regarding the French intention to recognize a Palestinian state.

“In any event, we will make an effort so that there is a sobering up here, and our position is very clear: We are prepared to enter direct negotiation without preconditions and without dictated terms,” Netanyahu said.

Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas welcomed the French initiative and said the Palestinian people would no longer tolerate the ‘occupation and settlements.’ He accused Israel of robbing the Palestinian Arabs of natural resources and said he would not accept temporary or interim solutions.

“The region will not enjoy security and stability unless the Israeli occupation and settlement activities end,” Abbas declared. “We will stay here on our land and in our homeland, where we have developed our historical and cultural identity and made humanitarian contributions for thousands of years.

It is unclear to which “humanitarian contributions for thousands of years” Abbas was referring. Many have pointed out (among them Joan Peters in her book From Time Immemorial) that the “Palestinians” as a people exist only since the founding of the Palestinian Liberation Organization in 1964 and their “humanitarian contributions” have been mainly the invention and the execution of numerous terror attacks.

Hamas, meanwhile, rejected the French plan as untenable. Hamas spokesman Ismail Radwan said “the calls from the international community to renew peace talks were futile and unacceptable. The world was trying to implement solutions that had previously failed,” he said.

The French initiative has led to speculations in the Israeli media about Fabius’s motivation.

Ha’aretz analyst Barak Ravid wrote the idea for the conference was not even raised during a meeting in Jerusalem between a high-ranking French official and Israeli diplomats last week.

“It almost seems that Fabius raised the idea knowing that it would fail, thus paving the way for other measures. If an international conference on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict does take place, it will be a significant achievement for him. But if it does not come to pass within several weeks, he will be able to say that he tried to restart the negotiations countless times, and now the only way France can save the two-state solution is by recognizing a Palestinian state,” Ravid concluded.

The Ha’aretz journalist could be right. But contrary to what he thinks, Fabius is not merely seeking out a legacy in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

“The French PM is not stupid and neither naïve,” Ravid wrote. Indeed, the French foreign minister knows what he is doing, and it probably has little to do with seeking a legacy.

As Ravid pointed out, Fabius has been the driving force in the EU to pressure Israel. Could it be the French FM saw the change in long-standing U.S. policy toward Israel’s policies vis-à-vis the Palestinians and decided to increase European pressure on Israel? After all, the French PM knows that when France recognizes the virtual Palestinian state, other European countries will follow suit.

Jerusalem Post analyst Caroline Glick wrote Jan. 21 that the Obama administration coordinates its new policy on Israel with the European powers. The timing of the French move a couple of days after the Obama administration announced the enforcement of the labeling policy indicates she was probably right.

Israel, meanwhile, seems to be aware of the dangers of the current situation. The government in Jerusalem knows the current political offensive against Israel can end in a bid to get the UN Security Council to adopt a resolution that will set a timetable for an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank. When that happens, Israel knows it cannot longer be assured of an American veto to block such a resolution as long as Obama is in office.

The risk of such a scenario is not that the situation on the ground will change except for more Palestinian terror against Israeli targets. The real danger lies in the diplomatic shift this scenario will cause. When the UNSC adopts a resolution setting a timetable for an Israeli withdrawal from the so-called West Bank — and world powers like France recognize a Palestinian state — it will be much harder for Israel to maintain its hold on Judea and Samaria.

The Palestinian Arabs apparently noticed the writing on the wall and stepped up their terror attacks against Israel over the weekend. There were several stabbings and vehicular attacks, and a member of the Palestinian Security Forces staged a shooting attack near an IDF checkpoint in the Beit El area in Samaria. The terrorist was shot dead after wounding three soldiers. He worked as a bodyguard for a PA prosecutor in Ramallah.

Monday the Palestinian Authority police praised the officer who carried out the attack. The police released a statement that said “with great pride, the members of the Palestinian police eulogize the brave martyrdom of their colleague.” The EU and the Obama administration didn’t react to the attack or the statement of the PA police.

Obama Administration Now Officially Joins The Boycott Movement Against Israel

Last week, Western Journalism reported a dramatic change in longstanding U.S. policy toward Israel instigated by the Obama administration, which now appears to side with the European Union on key issues in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and no longer opposes boycott measures against the Jewish State.

Professor Eytan Gilboa, a senior researcher at Bar-Ilan University in Israel, who specializes in U.S. Israel relations, predicted in the report that Obama would not behave like a lame duck president when it comes to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Gilboa said “Obama will probably seek to achieve a comprehensive solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — not by organizing a new round of negotiations, but by trying to get the EU, UN and all sorts of international bodies to pressure Israel on the issue of the settlements in Judea and Samaria”.

One of the measures the EU imposed on Israel to force a change in its policies toward the Palestinians is the differentiation between products manufactured in the West Bank and Israel proper.

At the end of last year, the EU decided to label goods made in Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem as non-Israeli products.

Two weeks ago, the EU adopted a new resolution on the matter that ‘unequivocally and explicitly’ stated no business deals between Israel and European companies can apply to the Jewish communities in these areas.

The Israeli government vehemently opposes both measures and has called them anti-Israel. Some in Israel even called the measures anti-Semitic and reminiscent of steps the Nazi’s took against Jewish entrepreneurs in Germany.

The Obama administration had always said it viewed the labeling measure as a form of boycott against Israel and made clear it opposed such measures. But two weeks ago, the State Department suddenly announced it no longer considered the labeling of goods produced in the Israeli communities in the disputed territories a boycott of the Jewish State.

This announcement marked the beginning of a new era in U.S.-Israeli relations.

On Thursday, news broke that the administration had ordered the enforcement of 20-year-old guidelines about the labeling of products manufactured in Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria. The guidelines had been dormant until last week and were a byproduct of the Oslo accords. They were originally meant to give a boost to the Palestinian economy and certainly weren’t designed as a boycott measure against Israel. Now that seems to have been changed.

The U.S. Customs statement restated the terms of the 1995 guidelines that required products from Gaza and the West Bank be labeled as such.

“It is not acceptable to mark the aforementioned goods with the words ‘Israel,’ ‘Made in Israel,’ ‘Occupied Territories-Israel’ or any variation thereof,” the U.S. Customs statement read.

“Goods that are erroneously marked as products of Israel will be subject to an enforcement action carried out by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Goods entering the United States must conform to the U.S. marking statute and regulations promulgated there under,” the agency warned.

News about the enforcement of the dormant guidelines coincided with unusual sharp condemnations of Israel’s policies in the so-called West Bank by Obama officials and drew a sharp response from Israeli government officials.

The State Department, however, denies the memo had anything to do with a change in policy toward Israel.

“We are aware that the U.S. Customs and Border Protection re-issued guidance on their marking requirements. There has been no change in policy or in our approach to enforcement of marking requirements,” a state department official told the Washington Free Beacon.

State department spokesman Mark Toner said the decision to reissue its labeling policy “had been taken after complaints that some West Bank products had been mislabeled prior to U.S. import.”

But Omri Ceren, the managing director of The Israel Project, didn’t buy it.

“This is an administration that slaps labels on Jewish goods on a Saturday and has the president give a Holocaust Remembrance speech the next Wednesday,” Ceren told the newspaper. “It’s worse than incoherent. It needlessly alienates Israel at a time when the Middle East is falling apart and U.S. allies are looking for signals about whose side the administration is on.”

An analyst at the Jewish Press added the “basis for the original regulation – the one everyone insists is all that is in play – was the Oslo accords and the creation of a new state – one that remains stillborn – and the wrongly anticipated unification of Gaza and the Palestinian Arab governing force in the West Bank.” Those bases were weak back in 1997, but they are now long-decayed legs upon which to place this labeling requirement.

And that’s the reason the regulations have not been enforced until now. There is no viable Palestinian State. There are no enforceable Oslo accords. There is no unity Palestinian Arab government.

If that is all true, the new-old regulations should remain null and void.

Here’s How Obama Tries To Squeeze Israel And Is Heading For Another Mideast Train Wreck

Analysis

Last week, Western Journalism reported about a dramatic change in longstanding U.S. policy toward Israel. The Obama administration now appears to side with the European Union on key issues in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and no longer opposes boycott measures against the Jewish State, the story revealed. The report dealt with recent examples of statements by Obama officials who criticized Israel over its policies towards the Palestinian Arabs in Judea and Samaria (West Bank).

One Israeli expert on U.S.-Israel relations believes Obama will not act like a lame duck president but, instead, will use his last year in office to mobilize the international community for a political campaign that will force Israel to make further concessions to the Palestinian Authority.

The expert, Professor Eytan Gilboa, a senior researcher at Bar-Ilan University in Israel, told a Jerusalem Post columnist that Obama will probably seek to achieve a comprehensive solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — not by organizing a new round of negotiations, but by trying to get the EU, UN and all sorts of international bodies to pressure Israel on the issue of the settlements in Judea and Samaria.

Gilboa said if those international organizations will focus on the issue of the Israeli settlements, “then you can get Israel to make concessions (to the Palestinian Arabs) that will pave the way to an agreement.”

The use of international bodies to weaken Israel’s position vis-a-vis the Palestinians is a strategy first used by the PA and its leader, Mahmoud Abbas. Abbas refuses to return to the negotiation table because he thinks he can obtain more concessions from Israel via international pressure and international recognition of the Palestinian Authority as an independent state. The decision to grant upgraded UN membership to the PA is a good example of this strategy; the admission of the PA to UNESCO is another.

The change in America’s policy towards Israel on the issue of the Israeli presence in Judea and Samaria became apparent when Secretary of State John Kerry delivered an address during the Saban Forum in Washington last year.

Kerry said “continued settlement growth raises honest questions about Israel’s long-term intentions and will only make separating from the Palestinians much more difficult.” Kerry then threatened that if Israel were not willing to change its policies in Judea and Samaria, it would be treated as South Africa under the Apartheid regime.

If Israel retains the West Bank, “would Israelis and Palestinians living in such close quarters have segregated roads and transportation systems with different laws applying in the Palestinian enclaves? Would anyone really believe they were being treated equally? What would the international response be to that, my friends?,” Kerry said while using the false Palestinian claim there would be a form of Apartheid in Judea and Samaria.

Last week, Obama used his envoy in Israel, Ambassador Dan Shapiro, to make clear he has departed from long-standing U.S. policy on Israel’s policies in the so-called West Bank. Shapiro suggested there was already a form of Apartheid in Judea and Samaria when he said “too much Israeli vigilantism in the West Bank goes on unchecked,” while adding “there is a lack of thorough investigations. At times it seems Israel has two standards of adherence to the rule of law in the West Bank — one for Israelis and one for Palestinians.”

Shapiro later apologized for the timing of his comments that were made on the same day a Palestinian Arab stabbed a pregnant woman and a day after another Palestinian Arab terrorist murdered a mother of six in her home in Judea. But he stood by the content of his remarks that led to an outcry in Israel and were harshly condemned by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In fact, the legal situation in Judea and Samaria where Israeli law applies to the Jewish residents — and laws that in majority date back to the Jordanian occupation and Ottoman rule are still applied by the Palestinian Authority — is a direct result of the Oslo agreements between Israel and the PLO. The Palestinian leadership was opposed to applying Israeli law in all of Judea and Samaria because it would legitimize Israel’s presence in these territories.

Jerusalem Post Star columnist Caroline Glick believes the recent remarks by Obama officials are part of a coordinated assault on Israel. She wrote we’re in the midst of a coordinated U.S.-led political offensive against Israel and thinks the Israeli government “should change the focus of its public diplomacy.” Israeli officials should direct their remarks against Palestinian society as a whole that harbors a vicious hatred of Israel and Jews in general, according to Glick.

Two days later, Israel’s acting Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely did exactly that when she wrote a devastating critique of the way the international community prolongs the century-old conflict by funding Palestinian terror and stimulates Palestinian hatred and intransigence by ignoring incitement against Israel. Hotolovely revealed 16 percent of foreign donations to the PA were used to support Palestinian terrorists and their families.

Below are the most important parts of her article in the Wall Street Journal.

“The Palestinian regime in Ramallah pays monthly stipends of between $400 and $3,500 to terrorists and their families, the latter of which is more than five times the average monthly salary of a Palestinian worker.

“According to data from its budgetary reports, compiled in June 2014 by Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the PA’s annual budget for supporting Palestinian terrorists was then roughly $75 million. That amounted to some 16 percent of the foreign donations the PA received annually. Overall in 2012, foreign aid made up about a quarter of the PA’s $3.1 billion budget. More recent figures are inaccessible since the Palestinian Authority is no longer transparent about the stipend transfers.

“Embarrassed by public revelations of the misuse of the foreign aid, in August 2014 the Palestinian Authority passed the task of paying stipends to terrorists and their families to a fund managed by the Palestine Liberation Organization, also led by Mr. Abbas. Lest there be any doubt as to the purely cosmetic nature of the change, Palestinian Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah made assurances as recently as September 2015 that the PA will provide the ‘necessary assistance’ to ensure these terror stipends.

“This procedural ruse apparently calmed the consciences of donor governments that continue to transfer aid. It is difficult to think of another case in which such a forgiving attitude would be taken regarding foreign aid to an entity that sponsors terror.

“This situation is particularly disturbing given the disproportionate share of development assistance the Palestinians receive, which comes at the expense of needy populations elsewhere. According to a report last year by Global Humanitarian Assistance, in 2013 the Palestinians received $793 million in international aid, second only to Syria. This amounts to $176 for each Palestinian, by far the highest per capita assistance in the world. Syria, where more than 250,000 people have been killed and 6.5 million refugees displaced since 2011, received only $106 per capita.

“Aside from funding terrorists and investing in hate speech, the PA stubbornly refuses to remove hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from ‘refugee’ rosters, deliberately keeping them in a state of dependence and underdevelopment for no purpose other than to stoke animosity toward Israel.

“It is difficult to come away from these facts without realizing the deep connection between the huge amounts of foreign aid being spent, the bizarre international tolerance for patently unacceptable conduct by the Palestinians and the lack of progress toward peace on the ground.”

Hotovely advised foreign donors of the Palestinian Authority to rethink the financial aid to the Palestinian Arabs. But Times of Israel editor-in-chief David Horovitz thinks that won’t be enough to force the Palestinian leadership to stop inciting against Israel and supporting terrorists.

Horovitz wrote that a new grassroots approach is needed.

“What’s needed, what has always been needed, to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, is a grassroots approach to peacemaking. An approach focused on education. An approach under which international resources and leverage are utilized to rewrite educational curricula, to marginalize extremist political and spiritual leaders, to promote moderation and peaceful interaction.”

He advised the Obama administration to follow the example of Isaac Herzog, leader of the Israeli left, who last week publicly admitted the Two-State-Solution is not attainable at the moment.

“Perhaps the international community — so insistently led by President Barack Obama in seeking to persuade Israelis that they can afford to take risks for peace when the bloody evidence all around them shows the contrary — will learn Herzog’s lesson. Perhaps it will move to adopt the grassroots approach. Perhaps it will use its immense leverage to gradually help create a climate in which it is not the most natural thing in the world for teenage Palestinians to set out with knives and kill Israeli mothers of six and 23-year-old industrial design graduates,” Horovitz concluded.

Professor Gilboa, however, is thinking Obama will not listen to his Israeli critics and is heading for another train wreck in the Middle East.

Gilboa says Obama’s policy can only backfire.

“I don’t think the Obama administration has ever understood Israeli public opinion and politics. The more the US and the EU apply pressure, the more we will see resistance in Israeli society, and secondly, this will strengthen the Palestinian resistance to make any concession and to make any move that could facilitate negotiations, let alone an agreement.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Obama Is Going After Israel And Now Supports Boycott Measures Against The Jewish State

After finalizing the implementation of the controversial nuclear deal with Iran, the Obama administration is apparently looking for a new foreign policy challenge by going after Israel.

Earlier this week the U.S. ambassador to Israel, Dan Shapiro, launched a blistering attack against Israel’s policies regarding the Palestinians. Shapiro told a local conference on security-related issues the Obama administration is “concerned and perplexed by Israel’s strategy on settlements.”

Shapiro claimed Israel’s settlement policies frustrate the process that should lead to the forming of a Palestinian state and claimed “too many attacks on Palestinians lack a vigorous investigation or response” by Israeli authorities.

Shapiro made this comment on the day Palestinian Arabs murdered a Jewish mother of six and tried to attack a synagogue full of worshippers in Jerusalem. The timing was one of the reasons his statement drew the ire of Israeli politicians.

Shapiro’s attack on the Israeli government during one of the most important conferences in the Jewish State was not the first indication the Obama administration is tightening the screws on Israel over the stalemate that aims to establish a Palestinian state in the so-called West Bank (Judea and Samaria) and Gaza.

Last week, state department spokesman James Kirby and the American Embassy in Tel Aviv criticized Israel over a proposed law that aims to force domestic non-government organizations (NGO’s) that focus on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict to be more open on foreign funding of their (often anti-Israeli) activities. There are more than 170 NGO’s who are engaged in the cognitive and political war as part of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Almost all of these NGO’s receive Western funding and they are predominantly pro-Palestinian.

Kirby criticized the proposed law and rejected Israel’s claim the bill is less restrictive than the Foreign Agents Registration Act in the U.S., but he didn’t offer an explanation why he thought so.

The U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv went even further and issued two rare statements expressing displeasure with the bill and countered Israel’s claim the proposed legislation is “less stringent than those imposed by the United States upon similar types of activity under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.”

The criticism by Obama officials on these issues and the interference in Israel’s internal political affairs are comparable to what the European Union does with Israel.

The EU even provided 30,000 Euro to the Israeli NGO B’Tselem to fight the proposed legislation.

Wednesday it became clear the Obama administration is turning up the heat on Israel over the deteriorating situation in the conflict with the Palestinian Arabs, and that it now sides with the anti-Israel camp in Europe. Some commentators even think Washington is coordinating the effort to squeeze Israel with the EU.

What the EU has done is move to ban goods made in the Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and the Golan Heights from its markets by labeling them as non-Israeli products. This weekend the EU adopted a new resolution on the matter that ‘unequivocally and explicitly’ stated no business deals between Israel and European companies can apply to the Jewish communities in these areas.

The Obama administration has always said the move constituted a boycott of Israel and that the U.S. opposes the implementation of the measure

But Tuesday, state department spokesman John Kirby — after reiterating the Obama administration views “Israeli settlement activity as illegitimate and counterproductive to the cause of peace” and remains “deeply concerned about Israel’s current policy on settlements, including construction, planning, and retroactive legalizations” — suddenly told an AP reporter this about the same European label policy:

“They’ve (EU) made clear that this is not a boycott in any way and that the EU also made clear that they oppose boycotts against Israel. We do not view labeling the origin of products as being from the settlements a boycott of Israel.”

The dramatic change in the policy of the Obama administration was big news in Israel. But contrary to what happened when the EU decided to adopt the measure, there was hardly any condemnation whatsoever from Israeli politicians.

Opposition leader Isaac Herzog had called the European policy a contribution to the campaign of the boycott divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement, but remained silent when news broke about the adoption of the policy by the Obama administration.

Noah Pollak, however, the executive director of the Emergency Committee for Israel in the U.S., did not remain silent and tweeted that Obama now supports the BDS movement.

h/t: Jerusalem Post