Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Caroline Glick: Newt’s comments “a cause for hope”

    Caroline Glick: Newt’s comments “a cause for hope”

    I have linked to posts by Caroline Glick since the early days of this blog.  Glick is one of the clearest voices on the dangers to Israel and the highly negative effects of Obama administration policy.

    Glick has weighed in on Newt’s comments about the Palestinians (h/t LukeHandCool in the Tip Line).

    Glick runs through the historical accuracy of Newt’s comments, and then addresses a number of the criticisms from various sides.  The part I found most interesting was how Glick rebutted and rebuked the argument made by Mitt Romney supporters in the media who tried to score domestic political points by claiming that the comments were irresponsible and would make Israel’s life more difficult.  Glick singled out Jennifer Rubin for particular criticism.

    Glick made the point that rather than make life difficult for Israel, Newt gave hope:

    When Romney criticized Gingrich’s statement as unhelpful to Israel, Gingrich replied, “I feel quite confident that an amazing number of Israelis found it nice to have an American tell the truth about the war they are in the middle of, and the casualties they are taking and the people around them who say, ‘They do not have a right to exist and we want to destroy them.'”

    And he is absolutely right. It was more than nice. It was heartening.

    Thirty years of pre-Obama American lying about the nature of the conflict in an attempt to balance support for Israel with appeasement of the Arabs did not make the US safer or the Middle East more peaceful. A return to that policy under a new Republican president will not be sufficient to restore stability and security to the region.

    And the need for such a restoration is acute. Under Obama, the last three years of US abandonment of the truth about Israel for Palestinian lies has made the region less stable, Israel more vulnerable, the US less respected and US interests more threatened.

    Gingrich’s statement of truth was not an act of irresponsible flame throwing. It was the beginning of an antidote to Obama’s abandonment of truth and reason in favor of lies and appeasement. And as such, it was not a cause for anger. It was a cause for hope.

    Related: Some other posts regarding Glick –  A prayer for 5772, Fear Factor 2012, Quote of the Day (Week, Month, Year, Decade, Century), Suicide Protesters Against Israel.

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Comments



     
     0 
     
     0
    beloved2 | December 13, 2011 at 1:19 pm

    From Joel Rosenberg’s blog:http://flashtrafficblog.wordpress.com/
    “…NETANYAHU TO START BIBLE STUDY IN HIS HOME: Pray that all Israelis follow his lead and begin reading the Word, like in the days of King Josiah…
    I read a fascinating story in the Jerusalem Post this morning and it gave me fresh hope for the nation of Israel. ”Taking a page out of David Ben-Gurion and Menachem Begin’s playbook, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will begin hosting a regular Bible study group in his official residence for researchers, public officials and invited guests, “reports the Post. “Netanyahu announced the establishment of the study circle on Friday at a ceremony marking 30 days since the passing of his father-in-law, Shmuel Ben-Artzi. The study group will be named after Ben-Artzi, a noted poet and Bible teacher. Both Ben-Gurion and Begin, when they each served as prime minister, hosted regular Bible study groups. Netanyahu said he was establishing the class to perpetuate love of the Bible…”
    Such a national reawakening to the importance of the Scriptures has happened before in Israel’s history. Remember men like Nehemiah, Ezra, Josiah, and Joel? These were beloved governors, priests, kings and prophets whom the Lord used to turn the Jewish people back to the Scriptures and the need for national and individual prayer, fasting and repentance. One of my favorite examples is found in 2 Kings 22. I’d encourage you to read it afresh, for it is the remarkable story of King Josiah….”
    Americans: did you know the White House has a Muslim prayer room in the capital building? Did you know Imans opened the congress twice with prayer to Allah? Ever heard of chrislam?
    PM Netanyahu has pulled his ad campaign calling Jews home.
    http://www.forward.com/articles/147298/
    I would move there if I could, Israel will be the safest place for us when Obama gets done.

    It is hard to put much stock in what Caroline Glick has to say on this subject since she begins with this doozy of an amateurish mistake on her “history:”

    His (Newt’s) statement about the Palestinians was entirely accurate. At the end of 1920, the “Palestinian people” was artificially carved out of the Arab population of “Greater Syria.” “Greater Syria” included present-day Syria, Lebanon, Israel, the Palestinian Authority and Jordan.”

    “Greater Syria” is just one of several WESTERN terms applied to the area bounded roughly by Sinai, the Mediterannean, and the Euphrates during the centuries when the region was ruled by the Turks. The most familiar such term is “the Levant” or as the Brits might have said, “the Levantine.”

    You might just as well call the southern portion of the Levant Palestine, as the West did when creating the League of Nations Mandates. (Both terms have ancient roots. The Romans merged the Roman provinces of Syria and Judaea and dubbed the combined entity Syria Palaestina. The late Romans (aka Byzantines) called the Holy Land Palaestina for several centuries up to the Arab conquest.)

    In any case, as of their defeat in 1918, three Ottoman provinces encompassed parts of the territory of the future Mandate of Palestine, none called “Greater Syria.” The heart of that Mandate and today’s Israel was the Ottoman province of Jeruselem.


       
       0 
       
       0
      Milhouse in reply to JEBurke. | December 14, 2011 at 1:51 am

      In any case, as of their defeat in 1918, three Ottoman provinces encompassed parts of the territory of the future Mandate of Palestine, none called “Greater Syria.”

      They certainly did:

      “What, then, was the objective of the Arabs living between the Jordan and the Mediterranean? What political unit did they endorse? To the extent that there was any proto-national unit to the east of the Mediter­ranean Sea, it was not called Palestine but Sham, the historic region of Syria which included the modern states of Syria, Lebanon, Israel, and Jordan. This choice reflected a basic fact about the Levant, now often forgotten: Sham, usually translated as “Greater Syria,” was a truly age-old ecolo­gical and cultural (but not political) unit.”


     
     0 
     
     0
    Milhouse | December 14, 2011 at 1:52 am

    The point is that the “Palestinians” are recent immigrants. They are the white settlers of the area, while the Jews are the native people.


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend