Trending Topics:

‘New sheriff in town’ Nikki Haley is gonna kick anyone who objects to latest Jewish settlement

on 20 Comments

“There’s a new sheriff in town,” said US Ambassador to UN Nikki Haley at the AIPAC convention last week.

Haley’s quarter-of-an-hour talk at the convention was a rather unbelievably bellicose, chauvinist, bigoted and racist run. If you look at the words, you could easily think it was Trump. But with the external finesse, with the supposedly witty quips, Haley managed to pack her horror show inside a cloak that looked pretty. And for Zionists, cloaking racism and chauvinism inside an attractive cloak is very important. It needs to look good, not coarse. It needs to sell. So Haley managed to radiate a charm that got the AIPAC crowd cheering and giving countless standing ovations. As the host said in the end (confirmed by crowd cheers), these people could easily have listened to her for hours, days, weeks…

Haley also won the hearts of the AIPAC Jews by relating her background, with its supposed goods and bads, to ‘Israeli culture’ (and by that she obviously means ‘Jews’). Noting that she was a daughter of Indian parents, she noted

“so many similarities between Indian culture and Israeli culture. We’re very close knit, strong work ethic, we believe in professionalism and philanthropy, in giving back”…[ovations and warm smile from host]…”it’s very true”.

But that was too pink. You need to put in some ‘chutzpah’ to bond with Jews, certainly with those conservatives who support Israeli belligerence. So she inserted

“So that’s all the good things… We’re aggressive, we’re stubborn and we don’t back down from fight!”

They loved it. She managed to affirm the chutzpah in such a charming way. Now we can regard Israeli belligerence and Zionist state-terror as a mere ‘fight’. A mere chutzpah by extension. 

But there was much more than just ‘culture’ in Haley’s talk. Her political stance was uncompromisingly hawkish. 

She bemoaned the fact of the US abstention  (rather than veto) on UN Security Council Resolution 2334 stating that Israeli settlements are a flagrant violation of international law, although it simply stated the obvious. She promised a “never again” on that, repeatedly, as if it was a Holocaust, promising that “the days of Israel bashing are over”. She vowed to defend Israel with her heels:

“I wear heels. It’s not for a fashion statement. It’s because if I see something wrong, we’re going to kick ’em every single time”.

On the Iran deal, she said:

“All it did was it empowered Iran and it empowered Russia. And it emboldened Iran to feel like it could get away with more. You’re seeing a lot of love for the Iran deal in the [UN] Security Council, and that’s unfortunate why that was even allowed to go through, why that was ever passed is beyond me. I mean it was terrible”.

Haley unfurled her racism when she literally boasted about her recent blocking of the appointment of former Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad (whom Gideon Levy marks as “the most moderate Palestinian on earth”) from being appointed as head of the UN political mission in Libya – simply because he is Palestinian:

Salam Fayyad

“So when they [UN] tried to put a Palestinian at one of the highest positions given at the UN, we said ‘no’, and we had him booted out”.

Imagine that. She literally boycotted a Palestinian just because he’s Palestinian. And what language. How would Haley respond if an Israeli were blocked in such a way, on such a basis? It would no doubt be just awfully anti-Semitic. She tried to explain away her racism and bigotry in the following:

“That doesn’t mean he wasn’t a nice man, that doesn’t mean he wasn’t good to America. What it means is, until the Palestinian Authority comes to the table, until the UN responds the way they’re supposed to, there are no freebees for the Palestinian Authority anymore”. [ovations]   

Of course when it comes to boycotting of Israel she has a completely different stance:

“I think we have to show how absurd it [BDS] is…. If you want to boycott North Korea, I get it. If you want to have a divestment and pull something away from Syria, do it…. But Israel??”

Haley’s face at this point, when saying ‘but Israel??’ (minute 15:23), is a mixture of bewilderment with a hint of disgust, as if saying ‘how could anyone possibly even conceive such a thing??’. 

But Israel? Haley asks.

Her next boasting was about how she supposedly ‘booted out’ UN Under-Secretary General Rima Khalaf who was also head of the UN agency which had commissioned the recent report on Israeli Apartheid. Here Haley says:  

“So then they [UN] tested us again. And a ridiculous report came out, the [Richard] Falk [and Virginia Tilley] report. I don’t know who the guy is or what he’s about, but he’s got serious problems…” [massive laughter in audience, including host]. “…goes and compares Israel to an Apartheid state. So the first thing we do is we call the Secretary General and say ‘this is absolutely ridiculous, you have to pull it’. The Secretary General immediately pulled the report and then, the director has now resigned!” [cheers from the crowd and a thumbs up from the host].  

The implicit operative message of all this to Israel was: build on, and we’ll watch your back. We’ll kick anyone who opposes you.

As if running a script, the Israeli government approved a new Jewish settlement just a couple of days later. This was a move that was not made for over 20 years. In these recent decades, Israel was mostly expanding its ‘settlement blocs’. The recent move, promised almost a year ago, uses the pretext of the recent Amona Jewish settlement evacuation as a kind of ‘relocation’. The Amona evacuation sanctioned by the Supreme Court was considered a setback for the settlement enterprise. But the dramatic setting of the evacuation of a few dozen families, carried with it fruits too: Israel passed its ‘theft-law’ which retroactively legalizes Jewish settlements on private Palestinian land, which previously were considered illegal even under Israel’s own creative legal standards (which themselves defy international law). 

‘Expansion of settlements’ is like the famous ‘boiling a frog slowly’ metaphor. As long as the settlements just ‘expand’, the frogs of the international community can be expected to keep swimming around and not notice the impending doom. The moment Israel throws in a new settlement, they jump. So naturally, with the new declaration of the settlement, the German, British and French frogs jumped. In coordinated condemnatory statements, Germany said that it “will not recognize any change in the 1967 lines, which has not been agreed between the parties”, UK said that “these announcements are contrary to international law and seriously undermine the prospects of two states for two peoples” and France even used the C word – Colonization:

France recalls that colonization is illegal under international law, in particular UNSCR 2334.

But Israeli leaders appear to be laughing their socks off. Because they’re not playing ball with Europe, only with USA. While flouting international law and giving European nations the finger, Israel puts on a theater of “restraint” towards the USA. After President Trump recently expressed ‘concern’ about Israeli settlements, Netanyahu responded with ‘good will’ by notioning a policy of ostensible ‘restraint’ last week: “This is a very friendly administration and we need to take his requests into consideration,” he said at the cabinet meeting. ‘Restraint’, that is, after the establishment of the new settlement…

But a short overview of the ‘restraint’ points agreed upon at the cabinet meeting reveals that these are just words:

1. Israel will continue construction, when permissible, within previously developed areas.

2. Where this is not permissible, Israel will allow construction in areas adjacent to those already developed.

3. Where neither of these criteria are met, due to legal, security or topographical constraints, Israel will allow construction on the closest land possible to developed areas.

4. Israel will not allow the creation of any new illegal outposts.

Point 3 shows mostly that this is just more ‘frog boiling’. Israel is ostensibly pacifying ‘concerns’, and creating an alibi for itself with its continued settlement project.

The European leaders are bound to quiet down again, as Israel adopts a supposedly “moderate, reasonable policy”, as one of the Israeli cabinet ministers said.

And Nikki Haley just promised that there will be no more Israel bashing at the UN. So the Europeans would have to head a campaign against Israel without USA’s backing, with all the Holocaust guilt that would involve. In other words, we shouldn’t expect any changes from world leaders. The Europeans can jump, but Sheriff Haley will kick ‘em with her high heels.  

Jonathan Ofir

Israeli musician, conductor and blogger / writer based in Denmark.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

20 Responses

  1. eljay on April 4, 2017, 1:05 pm

    (Pro-)Zionists like Haley are astounding hypocrites for advocating, justifying, defending and upholding a preferred brand of evil. And their constant undermining of international laws and human rights and the protections they are meant to afford all people makes me wonder why they hate Jews so much.

    • Atlantaiconoclast on April 4, 2017, 1:35 pm

      Huh? Who hates Jews so much? Certainly not the Christian Zionist camp that Haley comes from. You guys need to stop pretending that the problem is hatred toward Jews.

      Haley is one of three things, stupid, ignorant, or a typical craven politician. I say she is the latter.

      • eljay on April 4, 2017, 1:44 pm

        || Atlantaiconoclast: Huh? Who hates Jews so much? Certainly not the Christian Zionist camp that Haley comes from. … ||

        I don’t see any love for Jews in continually and deliberately:
        – anti-Semitically conflating Israel with all Jews and all Jews with Israel; and
        – undermining the laws and rights that are intended for and to protect all people including Jews.

  2. Maghlawatan on April 4, 2017, 4:37 pm

    Haley is a moron. Settlement is not rational. Neither is it supported by the ethical principles that are the foundation of Judaism. It forces Israel to run apartheid. The Holocaust card cannot be played against apartheid.

  3. JLewisDickerson on April 4, 2017, 6:45 pm

    RE: “There’s a new sheriff in town,” said US Ambassador to UN Nikki Haley at the AIPAC convention last week.

    MY SNARKCASM: Oh great, a new rootin’ tootin’ sheriff to enforce American hegemony! Just what the world needs.

    ■ DAF – “Der Sheriff” (unzensiert) with English Subtitles
    A searing and pithy allegorical statement about U.S. imperialism by Deutsch Amerikanische Freundshaft (DAF).
    P.S. FROM WIKIPEDIA: A few months before the 2003 invasion of Iraq D.A.F. released “The Sheriff” . . .

    • JLewisDickerson on April 4, 2017, 7:34 pm

      P.P.S. RE: She vowed to defend Israel with her heels: “I wear heels. It’s not for a fashion statement. It’s because if I see something wrong, we’re going to kick ’em every single time”.

      ■ image
      ■ image
      ■ image

    • Boomer on April 6, 2017, 8:13 am

      Thanks for the link to “Das Sheriff.” I hadn’t seen it. Powerful, a good reminder. But I think that thanks to Trump, the US is destined to be more global clown than sheriff. Of course, a psycho clown can cause some damage.

  4. JWalters on April 4, 2017, 8:10 pm

    What happened to Nikki Haley? How did she morph from a compassionate governor who took down the Confederate flag into a caricature of an old-time, racist Southern sheriff? Is she auditioning for a role in a Haim Saban cartoon?

    • Citizen on April 5, 2017, 8:38 am

      Nothing happened to her. She’s consistent: my thumb says the wind, power, money is blowing more this way, so that way I will go. Indian immigrants to USA mostly come from the upper class in India, don’t they?

    • Keith on April 5, 2017, 7:43 pm

      JWALTERS- “How did she morph from a compassionate governor who took down the Confederate flag….”

      Prior to the Charleston church shooting in 2015, Haley supported flying the Confederate flag on state grounds. After the massacre, Haley supported removing the flag for obvious reasons. I am unaware that she is either progressive or compassionate in any meaningful sense of the terms. I am not sure how much “morphing” was required, however, her current performance as the US UN ambassador is so far beyond the pale that one would think that some adjustment was necessary. Who could have predicted that she would turn out to be a Samantha Power clone?

      • just on April 5, 2017, 8:12 pm

        Who could have predicted that she would turn out to be a Samantha Power clone?

        I did.

        Look at the former US ambassadors to the UN and their collective miserable and unforgiveably & horribly wrong stance, pronouncements, and vetoes while always being the protector and enabler of all things Israel!

        Remember this as well:


        Haley has been described by South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham as a “strong supporter of the State of Israel”.[70] As Governor of South Carolina, she signed into law a bill to stop efforts of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.[70] This legislation was the first of its kind on a statewide level.[70] Haley also stated that “nowhere has the UN’s failure been more consistent and more outrageous than in its bias against our close ally Israel”.[71]”

        Thanks for this, Jonathan. Perhaps Haley can use her heels to kick herself to the proverbial curb, because ‘a change gonna come’.

      • Sibiriak on April 6, 2017, 7:46 am

        Haley has said she doesn’t trust Putin, while Trump regularly praised Russia’s leader throughout the 2016 U.S. presidential election. During a February call with Putin, Trump denounced actions taken against Russia by former President Barack Obama, according to Reuters.

        “The president has not once called me and said, ‘Don’t beat up on Russia.’ Has not once called me and told me what to say,” Haley said.

        “He’s got a lot of things he’s doing, but he is not stopping me from beating up on Russia,” she added.


        And just when things were cooling down in Syria– new accusations of a chemical weapons attack with Haley putting on quite a show in the UNSC.

        Trump has reversed policy on Syria and may very well authorize direct U.S. military action against Assad–regime change once again the goal. (Bannon sidelined?)

        The “White Helmets” back at it as well:

        Assad has unleashed horror on Syria. The EU must not make a deal with him”

        by Raed Al Saleh (head of the “White Helmets”)

        Cf. “Is Trump Going to Commit the Next Great American Catastrophe in Syria?”

      • Keith on April 6, 2017, 5:37 pm

        SIBIRIAK- “Trump has reversed policy on Syria and may very well authorize direct U.S. military action against Assad–regime change once again the goal. (Bannon sidelined?)”

        Can we now look forward to lproyect making additional comments that those who don’t support a “humanitarian intervention” in Syria are Assad loyalist war criminals? Hey, what about the US/Saudi murderous assault on Yemen? Seems to me the way to end the violence and bloodshed is to insist upon humanitarian non-intervention. US, Britain and France out of the Middle East! End the support for Israel! Finally, I can’t resist the opportunity to link to John Pilger on Syria.

      • just on April 6, 2017, 8:27 pm

        Thanks for linking Prashad’s Alternet article, Sibiriak. I especially appreciated this:

        “With Turkey now drifting toward the Russian-Iranian narrative and Jordan dragged into chaos by the refugee crisis, easy borders to resupply the rebels are no longer available. The defeat of the armed opposition, including the al-Qaeda proxies and others, in Aleppo was the greatest blow.

        For the Syrian government at this time to use chemical weapons in such a public way would not only be foolhardy, it would invite a U.S. attack. It seems only an utterly arrogant and blind leadership in Damascus would have committed such a crime. But the leadership in Damascus has shown it is crafty, using openings of all kinds to ensure its survival. This is not to say it would not have necessarily done such an attack. Eagerness to end the war before it can impose a political settlement on the rebels could have led to the use of such weapons. But this is not considered likely.

        Over half a million Syrians are dead. Half the population is displaced. There is sadness across Syria, from one side of the firing line to another. Aerial bombardment by the Americans, the Russians, the Syrians and others continues to devastate Syria and Iraq. The Americans recently admitted to a major atrocity in Mosul, where 200 civilians have been killed. That attack did not seize the Security Council or bring forth fulminations from the Western press. Hypocrisy is central to the morals at the Security Council. This does not mean one should not be horrified by what has happened at Khan Shaykhun.

        But more than anything, the international community must urge a thorough investigation of these events before rushing either to a forensic judgment about what happened and to a response—particularly a military response—in retaliation. Sober heads need to prevail. War is rarely the answer. Particularly when we don’t as yet know the question.”

        Sad, though not surprising, that he never mentioned Israeli ‘intervention’, though.

        The hypocrisy of the West and its allies is legendary by now. Neither the US nor Israel takes responsibility for any of their violence, calls/action for ‘regime change’, or support for the “rebels”.

        Keith~ thanks for the reminder. Pilger has been indefatigable in his pursuit of the truth and in telling it. The US/KSA/GB killing of Yemenis is beyond abhorrent. It’s criminal.

      • Sibiriak on April 6, 2017, 11:15 pm

        November 2016:

        US President-elect Donald Trump has confirmed that he will most likely abandon the Obama administration policy on Syria to seek a possible rapprochement with Russia on the issue of Assad.

        I’ve had an opposite view of many people regarding Syria,” the 70-year-old Republican told the Wall Street Journal in his first interview since the election. […]

        “My attitude was you’re fighting Syria, Syria is fighting ISIS, and you have to get rid of ISIS. Russia is now totally aligned with Syria, and now you have Iran, which is becoming powerful, because of us, is aligned with Syria… Now we’re backing rebels against Syria, and we have no idea who these people are.”

        April 2017:

        US President Donald Trump spoke from his Mar-a-Lago resort following the airstrikes, accusing Assad of using nerve gas that killed civilians in Idlib. […]

        Trump described the attack as defending a “vital national security interest” and called upon “civilized nations” to help end the “slaughter and bloodshed in Syria.”

        “There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the chemical weapons convention, and ignored the urging of the UN security council,” Trump said. “Years of previous attempts at changing Assad’s behaviour have all failed and failed very dramatically.”

        * * * *
        The Trump administration has reversed course on Syria again, blaming President Bashar Assad for the alleged chemical attack in Idlib province and declaring he has no future leading Syria – just days after publicly abandoning the policy of regime change.

        “There is no doubt in our minds, and the information we have supports, that the Syrian regime under the leadership of Bashar al-Assad are responsible for this attack,” Tillerson told reporters in Florida, ahead of the summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

        “It is very important that the Russian government consider carefully their support for Bashar al-Assad.” Tillerson added.

        Asked if the US will lead a regime change effort in Syria, Tillerson said that “those steps are underway.”

      • RoHa on April 6, 2017, 11:40 pm

        “Can we now look forward to …”

        I’m sure we can look forward to those who have been lambasting Trump for restricting Syrian refugees now being equally vocal about his taking action that will create more refugees.

  5. AddictionMyth on April 5, 2017, 11:59 am

    I thought she would be more principled in this role. I was wrong – I admit. She is doubling down on the Zionist mania. However I believe that she will soon realize she is a tool, and will resent being used. She just needs to hear from the opposite side. Yes, I really believe she’s a good person. The Trumpkin coalition will start to fracture – over Syria for one (Israel hates Assad and Russia/Trump love him). And over other issues like white nationalism. I think maybe she thinks she can get her Indian family on the Zionist boat. Haha good luck.

  6. captADKer on April 5, 2017, 12:16 pm

    just imagine after all your this and that “progressive misogyny”, she soon becomes the first female president of the USA.
    and furthermore for any of you incredulous mw “birthers” , yes- she was born right here in bamberg, sc usa.

  7. Boomer on April 6, 2017, 8:04 am

    Thanks to Jonathan for this depressing-but-not-surprising report. I understand why you call it “unbelievable,” but, unlike so much we hear, it is all-too believable.

    I see little hope for constructive change in US politics until the next election. Perhaps that’s why I get diverted with tangential lines of thought, such as the role and meaning of high heels in Republican politics. Recall the excitement over Sarah Palin’s footwear choices, for example:

    Continuing the “heel” theme, it may not be totally untimely or irrelevant to mention Jack London’s political work, “The Iron Heel,” which addressed his concern with the danger of an unregulated capitalism:

Leave a Reply