The following was posted to my Facebook page.

The message is profound in its simplicity, accuracy and insight:

  • Obama to Israel: You have no right to your borders
  • Obama to Ukraine: You have every right to your borders
  • Obama to USA: You have no borders.

It’s too much for a bumper sticker or I’d start printing them.

Maybe it should be a series of three stickers you could string along the rear bumper.

Think about it.

It’s true that Barack Obama doesn’t think there is anything sacrosanct about Israel’s borders – even though they are considerably reduced from the historical boundaries of the state going back to King Solomon’s era, even though they are considerably reduced from the original mandate for the reformed nation of Israel in the 20th century, even though Israel is constantly under attack from its neighbors, and even though Israel is a tiny speck of land in the vast desert ocean of the Middle East.

Obama doesn’t think Israel should even be permitted to build housing in its own capital without the consent of its hostile neighbors and the “international community.”

Obama calls Israel’s borders “disputed.” He insists Israel give over significant stretches of land to people determined to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth and who insist that no Jews be allowed to live within the confines of its borders.

Everything I have just told you about Israel and its relationship with its Arab Palestinian neighbors are facts – undisputed facts. And Obama has no trouble with any of it. According to Obama’s line of thinking, the central problem in the Middle East conflict is that Israel is too big. Its borders need to be redrawn.


But when it comes time to Ukraine, it’s a different story entirely. Ukraine’s borders are sacrosanct. Even though much of the country once belonged to Russia and Ukraine’s borders have been changed over time, Obama is bugged that some in Ukraine and some in Russia would like to realign.

Why it’s any of Obama’s business, I’m not sure. Normally, as you can see from the Israel example, he’s not much of a respecter of borders. I’ve never seen a reporter ask Obama why Israel’s borders are no good but Ukraine’s are inviolable. My guess is he couldn’t answer the question. He’d probably just say they are two entirely different situations – which, of course, suggests the obvious: Obama has situational ethics.

How about the U.S.?

Experience more of Joseph Farah’s no-nonsense truth-telling in his books, audio and video products, featured in the WND Superstore

Here it gets even more bizarre. In the U.S., the country in which Obama presides over the executive branch of government, the branch that is sworn to uphold the laws of the land, including border and immigration laws, he acts as if the legal boundaries of the U.S. are nothing but a suggestion.

Right now, as we speak, he is orchestrating and countenancing a refugee invasion of his own country. He’s encouraging foreigners to come to the U.S. to seek benefits. And people are listening to him – by the tens of thousands. They are coming in unprecedented waves in recent weeks. There’s no place to put them. Obama invited them, but he didn’t bother to prepare for them. It’s not very considerate to invite guests and have no food for them and no shelter for them, but that’s what Obama did.

So how do you explain, depending on the situation, Obama’s three different positions on borders? Anyone want to try to answer that from his point of view?

Here’s my stab at it: Obama doesn’t really believe in borders at all, unless they are the borders of the White House compound. If you try to cross that border, or even look like you might be thinking about it, you will wind up dead very quickly – as Miriam Carey, the Connecticut mother and dental hygienist, learned when she was gunned down by Capitol Police last October.

So why does he get all exercised about the inviolability of Ukraine’s borders?

The answer is: He doesn’t. He’s only posturing. And the proof is what’s happening right now: Russian tanks are entering Ukraine, and Obama isn’t doing a thing about it. I’m not suggesting he should. I’m just pointing it out. Borders were only an excuse for him to condemn Russia. He only likes borders when he can draw them or ignore them completely, as he does in the case of the U.S.

Have I clarified matters?

Did I miss anything?

Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, please contact [email protected].

Receive Joseph Farah's daily commentaries in your email

BONUS: By signing up for Joseph Farah’s alerts, you will also be signed up for news and special offers from WND via email.
  • Where we will email your daily updates
  • A valid zip code or postal code is required
  • Click the button below to sign up for Joseph Farah's daily commentaries by email, and keep up to date with special offers from WND. You may change your email preferences at any time.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.