Caroline Glick Briefs Capitol Hill on the Gaza War


Below is the video of Caroline Glick’s July 25th briefing on Capitol Hill on Israel’s Operation Protective Edge. The presentation is followed by a Q&A session:

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • wildjew

    Caroline rightly told the assemblage (though Obama clearly has taken the side of Hamas against Israel), American policy for at least a couple of decades has supported terrorist groups in Israel.

    Why hasn’t Caroline Glick been invited to speak to the United States House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (Rep. Mike Rogers – Chairman), or the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs? Or has she?

    The GOP (my party) codified the establishment of a Muslim-terror state in Israel’s heartland at the direction of George W. Bush and Karl Rove, August 2004.

    My fellow Republicans protest, “Wasn’t Mitt Romney a staunch supporter of Israel?” Romney fought conservative Christian delegates — on our national party platform committee in Tampa, August 2012 — for the Palestinian genocidal cause. Do Republicans really have a sound case against this destructive president’s Mideast policies?

    (What Congressman did Frank Gaffney announce had attend to other duties during Caroline’s speech? Rep. Lambert? Congressman Trent Franks R-Arizona stayed though the speech. http://freebeacon.com/national-security/trent-franks-accuses-obama-of-unprecedented-cowardice-and-betrayal-of-israel/ )

    My party, the party of Lincoln, used to be a moral party based on Godly principles. But let’s be honest, Republican leaders today (like the Democrats) support the Palestinian cause. Courageous Republicans like Michele Bachmann, Louie Gohmert, Speaker Gingrich, Franks and a few others are sidelined. Bachmann calls for an investigation into Muslim Brotherhod infiltration in the Obama regime. Speaker John Boehner calls it “dangerous.” Monday, Speaker Boehner alluding to the president said: “(Support for Israel) doesn’t mean issuing vague, on-the-one-hand, on-the-other-hand statements. No, it means backing up our words, and showing solidarity with our friend.”

    Where is the solidarity with our friend when Republican leaders support a Muslim terror state in Israel?

    • Americana

      As far as the world is concerned, the geopolitical reality is still that Israel is supposed to tolerate the creation of a Palestinian state. That was the deal the Zionists made w/the United Nations in order to secure the creation of their modern Jewish state. That is the deal that remains on the table w/the Palestinians no matter how much Israel dissimulates about that fact and emphasizes the potential for Palestinian terror attacks that would threaten Israel’s existence if such a Palestinian state were to exist. The fact Israel’s intransigence over many decades has led to the current worldwide resurgence in Muslim jihad is evidence of this fact. There are many chicken and egg questions about the TIMING and the WHY behind the current jihad movement, but the fact remains, the Palestinian jihad lit a beacon for international jihad over 70 years ago and it will continue to be that beacon if the Israeli One-State Solution abrogates Palestinian rights.

      As for Caroline Glick’s strategic perspective on what’s what in the Middle East, if she were truly strategizing for the sake of strategizing rather than merely laying claim to the falsehood that her ONE-STATE solution will solve the Palestinian problem (the violence against Israel and the international jihad) once and for all w/no further endless reprisals and international repercussions, she’d mention the downsides of imposing that UNILATERAL ISRAELI SOLUTION on the Palestinians. Since it’s been abundantly clear the Arab world has been aware of Zionist designs on the Middle East since the Jewish aliyah began in the late 1890s and that’s where their mutual enmity interlocks, committing this final divestment of Palestinian land would simply be oil on the sociological fires that have already been burning far too long. Look at the most recent Zionist geopolitical concept floated on FPM, that the Israelis have some rights to the Saudi Arabian oil fields because of an ancient Jewish presence in Saudi Arabia.

      Glick claims that if the U.S. allowed the ISRAELI ONE-STATE solution to be imposed, the U.S. wouldn’t face any more Palestinian jihad. She claims that if we allowed this one-state solution, we wouldn’t have Arab jihadists coming across our southern border or otherwise waging jihad against American interests around the world. Is she kidding? We suffered the 9/11 attacks because Osama bin Laden was acting on behalf of the Palestinians. He stated it very clearly in his 9/11 manifesto as did all the 9/11 participants in their videos. We would be opening up the U.S. to a whole different level of Palestinian jihad if we endorsed this Israel One-State Solution.

      • reader

        “That was the deal the Zionists made w/the United Nations in order to secure the creation of their modern Jewish state. That is the deal that remains on the table”

        It’s like saying that Chamberlain’s deal with Hitler is still on the table. Judenreina just can’t take a hint. Too much substance between her ears. And I’m talking about sand and bull cr*p.

        • Americana

          Different scale of warfare, different grounds for animosity between the British and the Germans. The Palestinians were told they were going to receive statehood and their borders were agreed-upon at the same time as were Israel’s borders. Other Arab nations, acting on behalf of Palestinians, have undertaken wars and interfered w/the process of the Palestinians achieving their state, but should the behavior of other Arabs ultimately determine what treatment the Palestinians receive? I don’t believe so. The Palestinians are freedom fighters just as the Israeli Irgun and Haganah were freedom fighters.

          • reader

            What does the scale of warfare and grounds of animosity have to do with the international law? It’s a rhetorical question. Like why do you hate the Jews so much? You don’t have to answer.

          • Americana

            Since that’s a more than rhetorical question (‘Why do I hate the Jews so much?) and the answer is going to be more than loaded as far as you’re concerned, there is no point in answering such a disingenuous question. Get back to me when you’re ready to discuss the strategic reality beyond the anti-Semitic canards being tossed out.

          • reader

            Err… I’m not in your waiting room, Judenreina, and it’s bad taste for a mindless troll to order people around.

          • Americana

            I’m not ordering you around. As far as I’m concerned, you (general ‘YOU’) either engage in the discussion fully or you fire pot shots and then disengage whenever you find the room temperature is a little too hot. Throwing out the old anti-Semitic canards and then exiting Stage Right doesn’t cut it as far as I’m concerned.

          • reader

            Nobody here with a discernible IQ has any doubts about you being a Jew hater. Nobody with a discernible IQ doubts that you couldn’t care less about the Arabs too.

          • Americana

            How perceptive, and as Borat would follow up w/a time lag of several seconds, NOT. You’ve seen the movie ‘Borat,’ right? Sacha Baron Cohen is a gorgeous British Jewish comedian. I guess I must find Jewish men appealing even if they’re terrible dressers as long as they’ve got a good brain. Baron Cohen’s ‘Dictator’ was a tour de farce of what’s going on in the Middle East right now. As for the Arab jihadists, especially the most vainglorious jihadis whose egos are operating on overdrive like Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, I’m not sure what will bring them back into the human fold. If there were more discernible IQs in evidence, there wouldn’t be such incredible arrogance regarding notable Jewish military and intelligence community figures who believe in the two-state solution.

            http://youtu.be/CgbhyjuhbX8

          • reader

            What? Could YOU be any more incoherent, please – since you’re salivating over Sasha Cohen, all of a sudden?

          • Americana

            You find that incoherent? You need a précis so it’s easier to comprehend for you?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Token.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            I believe I can fly. I believe that we can build habitable “green” outposts on Mars before the end of the year. All we need is willpower and love.

          • Americana

            Let me check in w/these Israelis and I’ll let you know whether Israel would find it easier to set up shop on Mars…

            http://www.israelnsp.org

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Few Jew haters *feel* like a Jew hater. They justify it in their minds. Just like her.

          • Americana

            Lordy, but this comment just about takes the cake. I don’t bother justifying my neutrality in my mind. I’m comfortable w/my childhood friendships w/Jews and what those friendships have made me feel toward the preservation of Israel. My big issue is I don’t believe Israel should persist in stupid management of the Palestinians. It hasn’t paid off. It’s created worldwide jihad that is only growing in intensity.

          • Drakken

            You are far from neutral, you make no distinction between Israel and the ragheads. Israel hasn’t created jihad you bloody dolt, islam has done that all by itself, your just to thick to get it. In war between civilization and the savages, always go with the civilized over the savage, Israel is western civilization, those bloody ragheads you have empathy for hate you with a passion, your just too stupid to get it, it is a lesson that you are going to learn the hard way.

          • Americana

            Of course I make distinctions between the ragheads and the Israelis. Of course, the ragheads invented jihad millennia ago and are using it now against the civilized man. However, the political word for that without overt religious connotations is “TERRORISM.” Which is something the Israelis practiced w/enough ferocity, they drove the British out of the Palestine Mandate because they wanted their state after WW II, pronto. They didn’t want to wait and let the quibbling continue over which nation would get what, they simply seized their chance.

            I more than understand what the differences are between the civilized man and the savage. (Since you’ve obviously forgotten, I insisted my oldest sister stop teaching at a university in Sri Lanka when the Tamil Tigers bombed the capital Colombo less than three blocks from her house.) I also understand the differences between propaganda portrayal of events and the reality. I have a bone to pick when Caroline Glick claims Christians are being crucified by ISIS — as if they’re being hung up there on crosses as Jesus was, alive and dying over many hours — and pointing out the reality doesn’t make me not neutral. The ISIS guys are mounting DEAD BODIES THAT ARE CRUCIFIED to be put on display. Implying that FGM is practiced by ALL the world’s Muslims is far different than saying that FGM is practiced only by SOME of the world’s Muslim societies. Stating that doesn’t make me NOT NEUTRAL. That’s true for all sorts of issues within Glick’s narrative. Israel is at risk because she’s refused to honor the Palestinian statehood requirement in her own elevation to statehood.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Americana Drakken • an hour ago: “Of course I make distinctions between the ragheads and the Israelis.”

            Yes you do. One is “oppressor” and the other is “victim group.”

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Americana Drakken • an hour ago: “However, the political word for that without overt religious connotations is “TERRORISM.” Which is something the Israelis practiced w/enough ferocity, they drove the British out of the Palestine Mandate because they wanted their state after WW II, pronto. They didn’t want to wait and let the quibbling continue over which nation would get what, they simply seized their chance.”

            So you find it convenient to your arguments to strip out context.

            Huh. I hadn’t noticed.

          • Americana

            I don’t strip out context. There was Jewish terrorism that was used to achieve the Jewish state by driving out the British so the Israelis could declare their independence.

            That’s about all the context one needs in the two parts of that sentence. That’s cause and result.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Americana objectivefactsmatter • an hour ago: “I don’t strip out context.”
            Americana Drakken • an hour ago: “However, the political word for that without overt religious connotations is “TERRORISM.””
            So ignoring religions “connotations” is not stripping out context?
            It’s fascinating to hear you justify yourself.

            “There was Jewish terrorism that was used to achieve the Jewish state by driving out the British so the Israelis could declare their independence.”

            So maybe the fact that there is terror going on is not really the most salient point. Maybe it’s the fact that they enter in to treaties and continually break them in bad faith as if their terror is simply part of a larger objective that they want to be ultra-discreet about.
            And see, that is the key point that you avoid.

          • Americana

            That’s not a key point that I avoid. The Palestiinians break their ceasefire agreements eventually because they’re keeping up the pressure on Israel to endorse a Palestinian state. The Israelis know that without a declaration of a Palestinian state, there won’t be peace.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “That’s not a key point that I avoid. The Palestiinians break their ceasefire agreements eventually because they’re keeping up the pressure on Israel to endorse a Palestinian state.”

            This makes sense to you?

            And the same excuses apply all during the Oslo Accord disasters I suppose.

            Great strategy. Force us to kill all of you. It’s called going for broke. Do you know what that means?

            Recognize it for what it is because Israel did not start it, does not promote it and does not want it. The only two ways to avoid it would be to win the war decisively or trust people who have proved to be not worth trusting.

            Which do you advocate again?

          • Drakken

            Sparky, the palis have made it completely impossible for a state now and your hero Obummer and his clueless minions make it even worse. So as I have said to various Israel officials, go big or go home, for if you don’t go big now, expect to do this in less than a year, 6 months as ISIS infiltrates into the West Bank, Gaza and southern Lebanon. So good luck with your pali state.

          • IslamDownpressesHumanity

            The British were collaborating w/the islamic-nazis. Islamic-nazis that had persecuted the Jewish people in Israel for centuries and were planning on exterminating them in ’48′.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Right.

            Another way of looking at it would be that the Israelis were on the short end of the stick when the British dealt in bad faith with them. The jihadis were proximately allied with the British in attacking the Jews.

            The jihadis are still the ones acting in bad faith. That’s the most relevant analysis anyone can make if we must keep it very simple.

          • IslamDownpressesHumanity

            In the ’48′ War of Independence the Brits were constantly hamstringing the Israeli military while giving the muslimes free reign to work their barbarity. A bus load of Israeli hospital staff was gunned down a hundred yards from a British military position in ’48′ near Mt. Scopus (I believe) and they did nothing to save the unarmed medical personnel. The Brits threatened direct military intervention on behalf of the islamic-fascists several times in ’48′.

          • Americana

            The citation for this??? Links provided, always, for contentious facts that are atrocities and that are being used to blame one side or the other. Was the attack over and done with before the British could do anything as was the case w/many of these fly-by attacks?

            If the British “threatened direct military intervention” it would have been from a position of neutrality. Why? Because tactically, the British couldn’t assert one nation over the other because of their proximate power balance. I’d hardly call that “hamstringing the Israeli militias” any more than I’d call it actual military action. The British were bystanders, by and large. Some individual British service members did leave the British forces to join one side or the other as they were demobilized, but the role of the British government was not to assist one side over the other. As for the lawlessness and guerrilla warfare, that’s not possible to easily control for any military forces.

          • IslamDownpressesHumanity

            The Mt. Scopus debacle is referred to in The Arab-Israeli Wars by Chaim Herzog, he might have actually been there at the time.
            The Brits had military pacts w/Jordan and Egypt.

          • Americana

            The British absolutely did not ally themselves w/the Palestinians. The British left because they couldn’t tolerate losing any more British servicemen and diplomats to an impossible civil unrest situation.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Americana Drakken • an hour ago: “I have a bone to pick when Caroline Glick claims Christians are being crucified by ISIS — as if they’re being hung up there on crosses as Jesus was, alive and dying over many hours — and pointing out the reality doesn’t make me not neutral.”

            https://assets-news.vice.com/images/2014/04/30/isis-crucified-people-in-syria-yesterday-article-body-image-1398880272.jpg

            http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OL1g1d5vwv4/U5MVEifTsoI/AAAAAAAAuos/uuQacOcdE5w/s1600/unnamed-3.jpg

          • Americana

            That’s a dead body that was strung up, you do realize that, right? It’s one of a series of photographs where you see several bodies of people who’d already been executed and they were laid out next to the crosses, then their bodies are thrown on the crosses, tied down and then the crosses were erected.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Americana objectivefactsmatter • an hour ago: “That’s a dead body that was strung up, you do realize that, right?”

            Ahhhh…It makes you feel better that most are killed first and only a relatively few people are actually left alive to die nailed to a cross. Got it.

            It’s easy for them to please you. Why is that?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Israel is at risk because she’s refused to honor the Palestinian statehood requirement in her own elevation to statehood.”

            Liar. The ones that refused are the ones you make excuses for.

          • Drakken

            Distinctions without a difference, it is because of religion that the arabs are going jihad on the Israeli’s and just because Israel defeated their arab Islamic armies that they are still upset about it, and no amount of semantics is going to change that. ISIS is crucifying people (ALIVE) you dumbazz for I have seen this with my own two eyes and there are mass graves all over the place so you are sadly misinformed because you just don’t want to believe it. Israel is at risk because of islam, not that the other arab tribes give a rats azz about the palis, they want Israel gone, period end of story, and the other arabs don’t care how many palis it takes to accomplish that goal, and here you truly believe that if Israel just gives the arabs what they want and appease them so more, peace will be at hand, well I’ve got a cool grand right here that I’ll bet you right now that it will never happen. So sunshine, put your money where your mouth is if you truly believe without any doubt the nonsense you spew. I’ll be waiting for that bet.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “My big issue is I don’t believe Israel should persist in stupid management of the Palestinians.”

            There’s the rub because you keep advocating more stupidity rather than less.

            “It hasn’t paid off. It’s created worldwide jihad that is only growing in intensity.”

            That’s also correct. Appeasement just lets your enemies grow stronger materially and build their hatred and disrespect towards you.

            Did you know that Marx was full of bullshit? Did you know that conflict and hatred can arise from other factors than material want and striving to “throw off the oppression of capitalism?”

            Seriously. The world would not fall quiescent simply by destroying personal property rights and delivering “social justice” as defined by the left. That’s where your arguments lead whether you know it or not.

          • Americana

            Oh, so the Israelis have been APPEASING the Palestinians all this time and that’s why the worldwide jihad has grown to the scale that it has? No, the Israelis are reaping the whirlwind of close to 3/4 of a century of dispossession and Caroline Glick is trying to claim that the whirlwind is still within our power to tame if we only oppress the Palestinians even more by allowing the Israelis to take over the remaining Palestinians land of Judea and Samaria.

            As to “where my arguments lead,” that’s not the case that I’ve ever advocated destroying personal property rights and delivering social justice in the ways you deride. But you’re certainly welcome to try to keep throwing the Communist and Socialists labels at me until they stick. (Switch to more intelligent 3M superglue to tackle that.) Instead of veering off into this wacko speculative territory, stick to the thrust of the discussion.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Americana objectivefactsmatter • an hour ago

            “Oh, so the Israelis have been APPEASING the Palestinians all this time and that’s why the worldwide jihad has grown to the scale that it has?”

            You’re explaining Israel’s role in jihad. I corrected you.

            “No, the Israelis are reaping the whirlwind of close to 3/4 of a century of dispossession and Caroline Glick is trying to claim that the whirlwind is still within our power to tame if we only oppress the Palestinians even more by allowing the Israelis to take over the remaining Palestinians land of Judea and Samaria.”

            Oh, the whirlwind of dispossession, eh? That’ sounds dramatic. Let me rethink everything I know about the history of the region…

            That didn’t help.

            “As to “where my arguments lead,” that’s not the case that I’ve ever advocated destroying personal property rights and delivering social justice in the ways you deride.”

            Tools don’t need to be aware of overall strategy. They just have to be useful.

            “But you’re certainly welcome to try to keep throwing the Communist and Socialists labels at me until they stick. (Switch to more intelligent 3M superglue to tackle that.) Instead of veering off into this wacko speculative territory, stick to the thrust of the discussion.”

            Explaining your myopia is absolutely relevant to the discussion, especially since you keep going in circles about it. If you think my suggestion is absurd then you clearly don’t understand it. That’s why they refer to people like you as useful idiots. Or just “tool.”

            And furthermore, the dominant factions in the “Palestinian” movements were communist / socialist and jihadi. So it’s not a big shocker when a dupe starts with the neo-Marxist analysis and won’t give up on it. All we need to hear from you is that people who disagree are oppressors or suffering from false consciousness and then you’ll be at or near 100% in trying all of the Marxist approaches.

          • Americana

            You and your Marxist nonsense. It’s as if the realities of the Israeli situation have to be deflected to the economic and political party aspects of those who are critical commentators for the fallacies of the present Israeli course to evade being the focus of your posts.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “You and your Marxist nonsense.”

            So you admit that you’re confused? Or do you claim that I’m confused?

            “It’s as if the realities of the Israeli situation have to be deflected to the economic and political party aspects of those who are critical commentators for the fallacies of the present Israeli course to evade being the focus of your posts.”

            But that is what you do! Hello? Dispossession? Where does that come from if Israel is the bad guy here?

          • IslamDownpressesHumanity

            Duh, the paleswine aren’t freedom fighters, they’re fighting for the annihilation of Israel and the Jewish people — as evidenced by the charter of Hamas. I’m sorry burka bimbo but genocidal causes don’t fit the definition of freedom fighter and neither does the judenrein status of Gaza.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Read my lips:

            The Palestinians blew their own chances. Nobody gets absolute promises with no requirements on the part of the recipient.

            Because if there is no consideration from the other party, there is no bilateral agreement There is only an unenforceable promise.

            But it was a series of bilateral (and multilateral) agreements that Palestinians f-ed up.

            Deal with that first before you reboot your tired and myopic rants.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “The Palestinians are freedom fighters just as the Israeli Irgun and Haganah were freedom fighters.”

            That’s so idiotic.

      • wildjew

        I am in a bit of a hurry. I will address your other points later.

        (Prime Minister David) “Ben-Gurion had said as early as 1948 that the Arab attack on Israel had abrogated the outlines of (1947 United Nations) partition; even Abba Eban, a known dove, insisted that the pre– Six-Day War borders were indefensible, that they simply set up another massacre of Jews and that Israel would never return to them.”

        Menachem Begin: The Battle for Israel’s Soul by Daniel Gordis (p. 163).

        • Americana

          There are CURRENTLY top-tier Major Generals in all the Israeli Armed Forces along w/current and former directors of the Shin Bet and Mossad who say a two-state solution is achievable and defensible. I’ll take their beliefs over those of others any time, especially those from the early days of the Israeli state when Israel wasn’t as fully weaponized as she is now. As she is also now a full member of NATO, Israel has a totally different military status nowadays.

          • reader

            ” I’ll take their beliefs over those of others any time”

            Others – like Ben-Gurion and Menachem Begin? Ask who gives a cr*p and wait.

            chirp…chirp

          • Americana

            They’re long since dead and their military perspective has long since been outstripped by the evolution in contemporary Israeli military circumstances.

          • reader

            You have no intellectual capacity or knowledge base to evaluate contemporary military circumstances. Like the “evolution” from Reagan to Obama, for example, has nothing to do with that in the military circumstances.

          • Americana

            I’m not basing my opinion on my own “intellectual capacity or knowledge base” as to what is feasible defensive posture for Israel’s military. My opinion is based on plans these extremely erudite, sophisticated, high-ranking members of the various Israeli military services have written about and what they believe is feasible for Israel’s defenses. I’m not relying on my own interpretation of what the military situation is, but I can certainly evaluate information that others who **are** military men and intelligence services men present.

            As for the other aspect of this issue, yes, I can certainly gauge what is likely to happen if the U.S. further inflames the situation by making the wrong diplomatic choice since those are precisely the grounds on which the CURRENT Palestinian jihad is being waged against the U.S. You’ll note that Caroline Glick doesn’t mention HOW or WHY she’s confident there will be a sudden cessation of jihad activity against the U.S. if the U.S. backs the one-state solution in Israel’s favor. All those supposed by-product benefits that will redound to American security if the U.S. endorses this one-state all-Israel plan will come from where exactly? Certainly those benefits won’t be coming our way courtesy of the jihadis.

          • reader

            “You’ll note that Caroline Glick doesn’t mention HOW or WHY she’s confident there will be a sudden cessation of jihad activity against the U.S. if the U.S. backs the one-state solution in Israel’s favor”

            Oh, what a clever straw man. She never claimed that there will be a sudden cessation of jihad activity against the US. She said that if Israel is pushed to the brink of elimination – which is what Obama is trying to facilitate – the jihad activity against the US will only increase. And it’s been obvious all alone. You like to quote Osama Benladen, why forgetting his “strong horse” quote, all of a sudden?

          • reader

            all along

          • Americana

            Actually, I believe she did claim that in one form or another. Let me listen to her entire speech again and I’ll try to catch her phrasing because I found it so improbable.

          • reader

            Also, try to catch this: your a hater and a moron.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            The strategy is basically to try to win. It would be like Reagan predicting that standing up to the Soviets would lead to their collapse.

          • Drakken

            You continue to believe in the peace fairy and want to believe the peace movement has the answers because your a leftist useful idiot with no experience in the region and refuse to listen to your betters. So garbage in, garbage out.

          • Drakken

            You know next to nothing and you plainly express your utter stupidity to all that know better.

          • Americana

            You are a contractor who thinks his pay grade entitles him to sneer at the Major Generals far above him but who never ventures into explaining the long term strategic impact of your genocidal solution. I’ve got no problems w/backing israeli Major Generals and Shin Bet and Mossad directors against your vision of what’s feasible and what’s not. They’re top of the line strategists; you’re a well-paid contractor. There’s no comparison in terms of what your job responsibilities and vision and training are vs what their jobs require. What the two different groups assess and plan for. are entirely different things. If they say they can provide a secure, viable, safe two-state solution and you claim the only way out is genocide, there’s a major disconnect between you and them. You’re ONE lower ranking soldier against the opinions of many far higher ranking soldiers. It’s the higher ranking strategists who ultimately design the strategies that win the wars and keep the peace.

          • Drakken

            I sneer at stupid people who should know better but take their 30 pieces of silver to assuage their guilt. I run over 5,000 personnel and am on a governing board, so my opinion and vast experience matters, not yours and not the idiots who want to continue to try too appease savages that want us dead, you and other leftist of your ilk continue to try to put round pegs into square holes in the firm belief that you can make peace with a people who have no interest in it. Appeasement by folks like you only leads to lots of mass graves which I am seeing a lot of these days because of western feckless and weak policies. I have met some of those peacenik idiot Major Generals, idiot leftist savants and I have nothing but utter contempt for their cowardly behavior and they know exactly where stand, for I have made my position perfectly clear.

          • Americana

            http://www.israelnsp.org/what-they-say/a-viable-solution.html

            Here’s the Israeli Security Project web site. None of these people’s bios read as dupes or appeasers or, worse, naive idiots. Their fundamental belief is that separation is the only safe way to preserve the Israeli national identity and Israel’s democratic political system.

            I’d put any of these guys up against you and your Carthage plan and I’d be betting on them. it’s got nothing to do w/what is most effective in the moment, it’s what would tactically achieve the CORRECT OUTCOME of peace for the longest period of time.

          • Drakken

            You go ahead and bet on appeasement honey, I’ll bet you a cool grand that it doesn’t and will not work period! I’ll even go further, I’ll put up my yearly salary on that, so put up or shut the f**k up about things you have no effing clue about. The correct outcome is very simple, level Gaza and throw the ragheads out and there will be peace. Until then, you go ahead a side with less than useless idiots of the left. I advise Governments ands corporations, they hold up a peace signs and sing kumbaya, so yeah, keep betting on them sunshine, lets see how that works out for ya.

          • Americana

            But that’s just my point, Drakken. You level Gaza and the liberation fight simply switches to another venue and another compass point. You’re simply ignoring the full scope of the Paletinian disposition of forces and demographic remnants around the region. The Palestinians expect a STATE. They were promised a state at the same time Israel was promised a state.

            You may “advise governments and corporations,” but that’s kind of a baseline military intelligence service. That’s you saying you can provide a safe taxi ride from Baghdad Airport to Mosul. That’s NOT the equivalent of you being interchangeable or synonymous w/the Israeli generals who state they believe in a two-state solution who appear on http://israelnsp.org

          • Drakken

            When your opposition is dead there is no more jihad and I have explained this concept to more than a few folks that run the gamut from soldiers to political hacks advising Prime Ministers, Presidents and Kings. I am on a first name basis with various high level folks here in the ME and I am called day and night asking for advice, now as for what you are being told, it is unworkable and untenable for once a muslim goes for you, you have to kill him to convince him otherwise and it works. The Jordanians are finding that out as we speak.

          • IslamDownpressesHumanity

            An entire division. Are they all armed? Do they have any armor, AAA or airborne assets?

          • Drakken

            Protection of govts, corporations, individuals and training are being contracted out and frankly we can do a lot more with a h*ll of a lot less and more bang for the buck. As for what you ask? I’ll just say we are well prepared and leave it at that.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Well, you are a lot smarter than they are and they’re dead.

            OK, we’ll do what you say.

          • Drakken

            Yeah and the peace fairy will come and wave her magic wand and peace will magically break out all over the land and people will sing kumbaya and the rainbows and unicorns will rain from the sky. Please step away from the bong pipe.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Bring them here so we can ask some questions of them. Otherwise you’re relying way too much on this fallacious appeal to authority.

          • Americana

            I’ve already posted several links to video interviews of some of these folks where they state such opinions. You’re capable of doing research to locate such interviews if you’re interested in their perspectives.
            _____________________________________________________

            Here’s the Israeli National Security Project web site:

            http://www.israelnsp.org/what-they-say/a-viable-solution.html

            The two-state solution is the only viable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

            Carmi Gillon, Fmr. Shin Bet Director: The “occupation is bad for the future of Israeli society from all aspects – humanistic, economic, moral, etc. I can assure you that [former Shin Bet Directors Ami Ayalon, Avraham Shalom, Avi Dichter, Yaakov Peri, and Yuval Diskin] and some 95% of my colleagues and workers from the Shin Bet from over three decades all agree” that only a two-state solution will end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. (Source: John Horn, “Dror Moreh’s ‘The Gatekeepers’ Sheds Light On Israel’s Shin Bet,” Los Angeles Times, February 11, 2013. Click here to read the piece.)

            Yuval Diskin, Fmr. Mossad Director: “I believe that the solution to which the State of Israel must strive is an agreement with the Palestinians, which will create two states for two peoples.”(Source: Dror Moreh, “Yediot Ahronoth: ‘Diskin: Netanyahu is Afraid, Zigzags, Doesn’t Take Responsibility’,” peacenow.org, January 9, 2013. Click here to read the piece.)

            Yaakov Peri, Fmr. Shin Bet Director: “Israel must do everything to come back to the negotiating table and find a compromise…The only solution is a return to the negotiating table.”(Source: Reuters, “Former Shin Bet chief: Palestinian ‘despair’ threatens third intifada,” Haaretz, January 9, 2013. Click here to read the piece.)

            Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Gabi Ashkenazi, Fmr. IDF Chief of Staff: Israel will ultimately be “forced to separate from the Palestinians, in one way or another.” For this reason, Israel must “outline the parameters for peace, including permanent borders.” (Source: “Ashkenazi: Israel must outline its parameters for peace,” Jerusalem Post, December 9, 2012. Click here to read the piece.)

            Efraim Halevy, Fmr. Mossad Director and Fmr. Director of the Israeli National Security Council: It is “imperative” for Israel to reach an understanding with the Palestinians to withdraw from certain areas and hand them over to the Palestinians. (Source: “Interview between Efraim Halevy and Aaron David Miller,” Wilson Center Middle East Program, October 24, 2012. Click here to read the piece.)

      • IslamDownpressesHumanity

        Gee why don’t you tell your jihad is due to zionists theory to the 2.5 million Armenian and Assyrian Christians slaughtered by Turkish muslimes in the early 20th century? Or maybe you could relate your “theory” to the Jews slaughtered in the Farhud pogrom in Baghdad in the 1940s. All of which happened before the establishment of the state of Israel.

        • Americana

          Both those horrific occurrences you cite were the result of ideological warfare, which in both cases was driven by anti-Semitism arising from Germany and being directed by Germany in WW I and WW II, respectively. Certainly, those slaughters tapped into the anti-Semitism of the Turks and the Iraqis (Farhud, Baghdad) but that doesn’t mean that all pogroms arise from identical bases nor that they’re politically engineered for identical reasons.

          But, there is some credence to them relating to Zionism despite them happening before the declaration of the state of Israel because the Arabs were well aware of the Zionist intentions toward establishing a Jewish state in the region and securing a large amount of land to host that homeland. Since all the discussion about the specific land involved British Palestine, it was a foregone conclusion the Palestinian Arabs would be up in arms about it throughout the gradual buildup of aliyah immigration.

          • reader

            This is the kind of circular logic that belongs to the proverbial Animal Farm, not here. What can I say. You’re as restless as you’re contemptible.

          • Americana

            Circular logic? It’s interesting that rather than provide your own reasoning about the relevance of those two events to the feasibility or advisability of Glick’s one-state solution, you simply opt for bowing out and claiming it’s circular thinking.

          • reader

            Here’s my reasoning – yet again: the Palestinians are an invented people. They don’t have any legitimate claim to Israel. Hamas is a spin-off terrorist wing of Muslim Brotherhood with the global jihad strategy. Hamas and ISIS are among the worst human rights violators in human history. You’re a Jew hater who does not give a cr*p about the Arabs, wherever they are. Pretty much sums it up.

          • Americana

            Since HUNDREDS of people of all nationalities recognize the Palestinian Arabs are an indigenous people from the specific geographic region which the Israelis are claiming is (formerly) theirs, I’d hardly say the Palestinians have got no legitimate claims to the land. Archaeologists would throw your claims out based not only on historical writings but on actual archaeological evidence. Certainly, if the Palestinian claims weren’t legitimate, Israelis, or Israeli proxies, wouldn’t be making these absolutely ludicrous assertions of Israeli provenance from thousands of years prior that the Israelis STILL own that land today. Look at the most recent assertion on FPM that the Jews also have rights to Saudi Arabian oil fields and that’s why there is Saudi Arabian participation in funding terrorism. It’s to prevent the Jews from claiming the Saudi oil fields… Conspiracy theory #12,658.

            I guess it’s time to opt for Solomonic Solution #2,459.

            Time for each nation to appoint a champion and do an Achilles and Hector cage match. The champions can duke it out in the old-fashioned way. You know how these ancient champions would fight, mana a mano, to spare their entire citizenry from warfare and putting just themselves at risk of death and dishonor. Such a sensible solution to choose champions and fight a final battle of just one on one, instead of forcing thousands or hundreds of thousands or millions to face war. No wonder those were the GOOD OLD DAYS, the really GOOD OLD, OLD, OLD DAYS when Israel still existed in that region. Israel has a right to exist but the self-aggrandizement has to stop somewhere. It had better stop before Israel has got the entire world absorbed in jihad on behalf of the Palestinians.

          • reader

            “Since HUNDREDS of people of all nationalities recognize the Palestinian Arabs are an indigenous people from the specific geographic region which the Israelis are claiming is (formerly) theirs, I’d hardly say the Palestinians have got no legitimate claims to the land.”

            Since when this became a criteria. Hundreds of thousands of people recognized the thousand year Reich.

          • Drakken

            I would much prefer that Israel takes off the kiddie gloves and put on a mailed fist and end this bloody farce once and for all. Overkill is highly under rated.

          • American Patriot

            How many times do we have to tell you, Moronicana? There is no such thing as a “Palestinian” nationality. Palestine is only another name for the Holy Land region. The so-called “Palestinians” are an invented people. The Soviet KGB invented the “nationality” during the 1960s in order to try and discredit modern Israel’s right to exist. Learn facts, fool.

          • Americana

            If the Israelis who support this organization know the Palestinians are a nation ( http://www.israelnsp.org ), it’s pretty dumb there are ANY JEWS or ISRAELIS anywhere who are trying to dispossess the Palestinians on the basis of pretending they’re an “invented people.” Nobody but folks like yourself pretend the Palestinians are an “invented people.”

          • American Patriot

            Nobody was dispossessed in the Holy Land, Moronicana. Meanwhile, you ignore the over 800,000 Jews that were expelled from Islamic countries beginning in the late 1940s. You ignore the fact that in apartheid Mecca, non-Muslims are not allowed to enter that city. And the Soviet Union did create the so-called “Palestinian” nationality during the 1960s in order to try to discredit Israel’s right to exist. That is part of the historical record that you ignore.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Basically you’re saying that yes they’re intolerant but that if the narrative is complicated enough, we’re supposed to forget (the key points) that they can’t ever make peace with anyone.

          • Drakken

            What part of islam don’t you quite get? It wasn’t ideological that got the Armenians, Greeks and other infidels killed by the millions, it was pure unadultered islam at its finest, and again, you don’t know or understand history to save your life.

      • semus

        The only solution is a one state solution your veiled threat notwithstanding. It’s not the first time I’ve heard it. The Palestinian cause such as it is, is used as an excuse by evil cowards to get ignoramuses, fanatics and losers to commit murder. So you can stick your threats, historical lies and half truths. The Palestinians have no case. People are catching on. God Bless Caroline Glick.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      Carter was not so much pro-Isreal as pro-Carter. It’s complicated to say whether he did more harm than good vis-a-vis Isarel itself. Obviously he f-ed up the region.

      I don’t know what Reagan would have done had he not been so focused on the Soviets.

      Bush 41 seemed to be duped by the Saudis and other Cold War allies in the region and thought they could impose the “new world order” and to be fair he didn’t have that much time to get it done. Having said that, I don’t think he could have succeeded on the path he started, but I do think that Clinton f-ed it up big time.

      Clinton was a full on dupe of the jihadis.

      Bush 43 was probably better than his father but his hands were full and he needed those Cold War allies, or at least thought that he needed some of them.

      #44 doubled-down on every mistake we’ve ever made. And it shows.

      But Clinton did take Bush 41′s initiatives and transform them in to the Oslo Accords. So he deserves “credit” for that.

  • andrewjwilliam

    my Aunty
    Ellie recently got a fantastic red Subaru WRX by work part-time using a
    lap-top… Read Full Report J­a­m­2­0­.­C­O­M­

  • SoCalMike

    This is nothing less than geopolitical treason.
    Expected from Obama but there are no Republican opponents speaking out forcefully against this criminal activity.

  • SoCalMike

    I wonder if spineless weakling John Boehner attended.

  • cathy

    I just returned from my first trip to Israel on Monday evening. I felt safe even as I spent time in bomb shelters and heard the iron dome at work. I felt safe at the airport both ways. WHere I did not feel safe was in JFK international airport coming home when I and other persons on line noted an unattended package. After getting the attention of a security officer we were told it was OK the person was on line but could not carry it. It is not OK for the security to let this happen. Whoever’s package this was could have gotten a cart as many on line had.
    This security guard’s lack attention could have been a disaster.

  • Greg Brennan

    She Rocks!

  • kate5778b

    Quite right, the still and never to be unabrogated1922 Mandate (not post WWII) which gives Israel (Jewish Palestinians) sovereignty over Jerusalem and Yesha (Gaza, Judea and Samaria) plus the rest of Israel and still IS International law.

    As both Jews and Arabs were the inhabitants of Palestine, both were named Palestinians by the British. The Arab Palestinians were given sovereignty over Lebanon, Iraq (Babylon) and Syria all re-established plus the latterly formed Jordan taken from the original land meant for Israel, which was also an ancient country that was re-established. No Arab/Muslim state bothered about the newly Arab states being formed, only Arab/Muslim states didn’t like it when the Jewish inhabitants were entitled to its ancient homeland and of course tried to destroy it on the day of its birth, as predicted 2750 years ago.

  • sydchaden

    The question is often asked, “What would end the Islamic violence that plagues the world?”

    Amazingly, no one seems to attribute the Islamic violence to the Islamic doctrine that calls for the violence. Specifically, the Islamic doctrine of “death to infidels”. Some academics and theologians claim that there is no such doctrine. And, they say, even if there is, it exempts “People of the Book”, i.e. Christians and Jews. But, regardless of wishful opining, there is such a doctrine, and the events throughout the world attest to the fact that it is being followed. The Muslim World takes the doctrine very, very seriously.

    So seriously, that the two major branches of Islam, the Sunnis and the Shia, each of whom consider the other to be “infidels”, have been killing each other for centuries, for that reason. And, they still are, in Pakistan, Yemen, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Mali, Sudan, Nigeria, Lebanon, and Syria. And, Muslims have killed non-Muslims, pursuant to the doctrine, in Egypt, Iraq, Libya, Nigeria, Lebanon, Syria, Indonesia, Thailand, China, India, Russia, Europe, Argentina, Israel and the USA.

    Western leaders ignore the doctrine. After all, it would not be politically
    correct to discuss it. Obama, President of a nation of “infidels”, ignores the death sentence that Islam has imposed upon the people who Obama leads, and instead, fantasizes that “Islam is the religion of love”, and, “Islamic terrorism is the work of a tiny minority”. But, any fool can see that the Sunnis and the Shia are hardly “a tiny minority”, and, any fool can see that “death to
    infidels” is hardly a message of love.

  • reader

    “Well, for one thing, the Israelis are claiming that the level of friction is actual warfare which it clearly is not until actual war does break out.”

    This sentence alone tells the story of an incoherent mindless Jew hating troll scraping the bottom of a barrel. Endlessly.

  • Drakken

    Yeah that’ll get it done, throw some more lawyers into the mix. Why don’t you call up the peace fairy you love so much and have her wave the magic peace wand and make everything all better. Peace only comes through war and total victory, your just way to slow to get it.

    • Americana

      Peace only comes when people are invested and WILLING to remain at peace. You can suppress people and there may be a veneer of peace, but true peace? Nah, doesn’t work that way. Look at all the world’s insurgencies that have always ultimately prevailed.

      • Drakken

        The muslim is either at your feet licking your boots or they are at your throat, always keep them licking your boots. You have peace when the other side is completely utterly decimated. Until then rainbows and unicorns will fall from the sky in your little world.

  • PATRIOT.WW48

    Caroline, Thank you so very much for your work. All rag-heads need termination.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    “Well, for one thing, the Israelis are claiming that the level of friction is actual warfare which it clearly is not until actual war does break out.”

    What? So I can slap you around as much as I want but if you defend yourself then > you < started a war. Right?

  • objectivefactsmatter

    You’re point is that the world is so complicated that we should just learn to trust jihadis and give them whatever they ask for because they see themselves as victims.

    Do you understand the origins of your philosophical approach? The policy of appeasement of violent “victims groups” rather than holding them up to our own standards comes from where?

    • Americana

      The “policy of appeasement” — the creation of a Palestinian state — is something which the Israelis knew was always coming down the pike. They knew Palestine was an agreed-upon entity w/agreed-upon borders because it was covered in the 1947 U.N. partitioning.

  • PATRIOT.WW48

    “I will make you a light to the Nations” GOD, Isaiah:49 …..”The Hebrews have done more to civilize men than any other Nation” John Adams. The first President to fight the off-spring of Ishmael(rag-heads, sheet-heads, sand- n^**+*$)

  • IslamDownpressesHumanity

    This was the most depressing presentation I’ve seen in a long time. Of course there’s no way to put a positive spin on the facts Mrs. Glick was presenting. I’m almost surprised there weren’t islamic-fascist apologists or supporters disrupting the presentation.

  • IslamDownpressesHumanity

    She also was noticeably upset about the crucifixions of Christians. Isn’t islam wonderful? So many ways of exhibiting the barbarity of their faith.

    • Dan Knight

      Yes, and I agree with her. They’re barbarians. I’d say something else, but decent folk might be reading this …

  • American Patriot

    That so-called “constitution” contradicts itself. It claims that all “Palestinians” are equal under the law, regardless of religion, yet states that Islam is the official religion of “Palestine”. The truth is that a “State of Palestine” would not be a democratic, secular state, but in fact, would be just another Islamic theocratic dictatorship. The fact is that the Palestinian Authority doesn’t even follow its own constitution, or rather, it just follow the parts it likes to follow and ignore the rest.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    “…all pogroms arise from the same identical sociological basis.”

    ‘Othering. It’s not good. The end. Go in peace.’

    Thanks so much for that useful insight.

  • Bruce

    There is no 2 state solution. Pre 67 borders…. No way never. Let’s take that off table and pay them to move to Jordan or Egypt . West Bank Arabs go to their homeland Jordan, gaza Arabs go to Egypt. ONE WHOLE ISRAEL.
    Problem Solved

  • Lanna

    Both Caroline and Nonie Darwish have written some very informative articles to bring the public into understanding of the conflicts that Israel has been through and how they have dealt with it. You know just because Israel doesn’t constantly complain or show footage of destruction like Hamas does, does not mean they don’t have shrapnel falling from the skies almost every hour of the day, there has been signicant property damage to homes, medical clinics, and businesses.