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

CAConservative | December 12, 2011 at 9:56 pm

I always thought of Rubin as America’s Caroline Glick. But somewhere in her infatuation with Romney (I wonder how her husband feels about it), Jenny from the Block became totally unhinged.

So why does he still support the establishment of a second Arab state in Palestine?

I am LOVING the freedom Newt has to speak out, with absolute clarity and knowledge, and strike a chord. My God, this has been so long in coming. It is indeed a breath of fresh air, and it is quintessentially what it means to BE an AMERICAN. Forget liberal/conservative/RINO and all the other terms, he is an American, and proud of it, and, I think, makes others proud again, too.

Okay, how about we stop calling these people “Palestinians” and start calling them what they are: Arabs? Better yet, give them the other artificial name: Jordanians. To call them “Palestinians” is to imply that they have some historical claim to the land that predates the Jewish presence. That’s why I never ever call them anything but Arabs. Two can play their nasty little game.

    Darkstar58 in reply to Juba Doobai!. | December 13, 2011 at 2:55 am

    The word Palestinians, if you trace its roots, means Migrant or Invader.

    I, myself, find it ironic they choose to call themselves that and honestly have no problem passing on the terminology they picked 😀

    Now, what we should really do is enlighten people as to where the word comes from!

      Juba Doobai! in reply to Darkstar58. | December 13, 2011 at 8:25 am

      While the etymological study of the word is interesting–I won’t concede your meaning until I do my own grunt work myself– it is what it is, a word study. Doing a word study does not address the problem of the seizure of a regional name and it’s application to an invading horde so that they are seen as belonging where they have no history. These Arabs have, for the sake of Islam, asserted a claim to Australia and America by inserting themselves at certain points into the historical narrative. Somebody even has a legend about an ancient mosque in either South or North Dakota. So, word studies are nice, but being proactive is better.

      One of my early suggestions was that we should all insist of speaking of Judea and Samaria when we talk about the Arab-occupied territories. Maybe someone else had the same idea because it has gained currency. Well, I want to suggest that we stop talking about “Palestinians” and start talking about “invading Arabs” or “occupying Arabs” or just plain ol’ “killer Arabs.”

      There is no point in worrying about offending a bunch of killers who threaten to kill you if you offend them when they will kill you anyway even if you don’t offend them. Instead, let’s focus on reclaiming history by controlling the language. Some people are so stricken with Jew-hatred that they cannot see the destruction of Israel is the destruction of western civilization. After all, the foundational ethos of life as we know it is Jewish.

I wish there were more Caroling Glicks in this world. She doesn’t muck about when zeroing straight in on the truth of a matter. The next time Newt is attacked on this he should cite her endorsement of what he said.

LukeHandCool (Whose daughter finished her finals today, so reading Ms. Glick’s column will be her homework this week as she gets ready for Christmas. Daddy is doing some gradual homeschooling in politics with occasional required readings, including the Professor).

TeaPartyPatriot4ever | December 13, 2011 at 12:56 am

Caroline Glick is one of my favorite columnists, bloggers, writers, and political analysts, for any and all issues relating to Israel, and the world’s relationship to the Jewish State and people. She constantly hits the nail on the head, as when you are fighting evil, and it’s insidious useful idiot’s, be they Jews, arabs, or liberals, and or a combination of all 3.. makes no difference, as they all want the absolute destruction of Israel, and the Jewish people, as is why we must never capitulate to them even an inch.
Evil has no reason or logic.. and these people who purport it, have no the right to claim themselves over another, just because they hate.. Theirs is an essence of pure evil, plain and simple, period.

Secondly, there is no doubt that Newt, with his warts and all, is the Ronald Reagan we must have in the White House, as he is the only one who has a backbone, and the facts and knowledge of truth, to be the best constitutional conservative Republican U.S. President, since Ronald Reagan.. to restore the U.S. Economy back to prosperity, along with the repair and restoration of America’s Free World allied relationships, and most importantly, to restore America’s commitment to the State of Israel and the Jewish people.

Newt is a Historian and Academic Scholar, as well as a senior govt elected official, ie; former Speaker of the House, he is not in the least bit afraid of these liberals, Democrat or Republican, and as he knows exactly what he is talking about, as in the Truth.. And it’s the Liberals and their delusional denial of said facts and truths, that they do not like, because the Truth goes against their claims of hatred and intolerance, which is too bad.. as Newt never said he spoke for Israel, like Romney tried to falsely claim, but in speaking the factual truth, he speaks in support of Israel.

Righteousness goes with Truth, which is on the side of the Jewish State of Israel, the Jewish people, and Newt..

Caroline Glick is the best! Although her articles are a bit on the long side (which I can certainly relate to), she is a clarion voice for the truth.

Whatever she says – you can take it to the bank!

Frickin’ A.

If Gingrich managed to do that, keep from anointing 15 million illegals with citizenship, repeal Obamacare and put a conservative on the SCOTUS, I’ll forgive him any other deviations from the rest of my wish list.

Americans were once according to the British realm (and possibly still are) a ‘made up people’–as per Newt Gingrich’s statement about the Palestinians–made up of so many different cultures.

    Midwest Rhino (not RINO) in reply to tadcf. | December 13, 2011 at 10:35 am

    “Americans” didn’t claim the US based on ancestral rights, though we did lay claim to land that was already (sparsely) inhabited.

    The US American today is only bound together by citizenship and the US constitution. Perhaps the “invented people” in the U.S. now are all those trying to lay claim to various entitlements, or the latest “occupy wall street” crowd. Maybe their origin goes back to the New Deal, or Johnson’s “Great Society”.

    Some smart person could probably link Obama’s affection with Hamas and other “freedom fighters”, with his desire to “fundamentally transform” our country. He desires an internal force as powerful and well funded as our military.He weakens US militarily and economically. “His People” are the unions, entitlement seekers, and victim class. And he has stated that reparations would not go far enough.

    He also believes we need a “positive liberties” constitution. In other words, the successful taxpayers must be made servants to “His People”. Considering Obama’s affection for Chavez and Zelaya, and the radicals he has in his administration, it seems Barack is attempting to drive any semblance of capitalism into the sea.

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.

    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.”

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

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend