Anyway, there are some great links out there discussing how FABULOUSLY Benjamin Netanyahu rejected Obama's stupid and dangerous plan! ~ Christine
A ‘No’ From Netanyahu: Israeli PM Rejects 1967 Border Talk in Front of Press
www.theblaze.com WASHINGTON (AP) — Showing no concrete progress, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sat alongside President Barack Obama on Friday and declared that Israel would not withdraw to 1967 borders to help make way for an adjacent Palestinian state. Obama had called on Israel to be willing to do just...
*******
*******
Even Gene Simmons (who I dislike because of his terrible lifestyle) thinks that Obama is crazy for demanding such a ridiculous concession from Israel!! ~ Christine
And, even though this last link is not directly related to the above topic, I just had to post the link from a "proud, un-hyphenated American!" Love it!!! ~ Christine
*******
Tell Obama: Don't Betray Israel
www.michelebachmann.com Take a stand today and sign the petition to tell Barack Obama: Don't betray Israel.
*******
After Obama speech, Netanyahu rejects withdrawal to 'indefensible' 1967 borders
www.haaretz.com PM responds to Obama's proposal for two state solution based on 1967 borders, says such a solution would leave many Israelis in the West bank outside Israel's borders...
*******
What's more, the liberal leftist lunatics cannot resist making a ruckus anywhere -- even at an event where a Christian pastor is expressing his biblical views about Israel! ~ Christine
facebook.cufi.org
Last Sunday a well-organized protest sought to disrupt Pastor Hagee’s CUFI Sunday sermon. One after the other, eleven protesters interrupted Pastor Hagee. They accused Israel of being an apartheid state and of committing genocide against the Palestinians. As they were escorted from the Church, th...
*******
Even Gene Simmons (who I dislike because of his terrible lifestyle) thinks that Obama is crazy for demanding such a ridiculous concession from Israel!! ~ Christine
posted by Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit - 2 hours ago
In an interview with CNBC’s Jane Wells, rock n’ roll singer Gene Simmons slammed President Barack Obama on his proposal to weaken Israel in support of the Hamas-Fatah alliance. “How about you live there an...
*******And, even though this last link is not directly related to the above topic, I just had to post the link from a "proud, un-hyphenated American!" Love it!!! ~ Christine
posted by null at American Thinker - 10 hours ago
Folks, it is a bit too early to go all in on any presidential candidate, but here's my favorite, for now.
*******
*******
Know what? I was proud of my decision to vote for Tom McClintock for governor of California instead of RINO Arnold. Schwartenegger's celebrity didn't mask his bad liberal politics and policies. I'm even MORE glad that I never cast a vote for him after finding out about his infidelity to his wife and the heartbreak the scandal must be causing for his entire family. What a dirt bag!!
Tom McClintock certainly was an underdog in that political race. But upholding my morals and values and ethics when I voted for him in the Republican primary back then was more important to me than for the candidate to win. Many people may not agree with me on this, but it was important to me as a Christian first, wife and mother second, and conservative third in my life.
If Sarah Palin decides to run, she will have my vote throughout the political election process. I pray that she (or another Christian conservative like Herman Cain or Michele Bachmann) wins. We need to have a leader who will take us in the right direction here in America - a direction that God would approve of - not the socialist, Islamo-fascist, "throw America and Israel under the bus" kind of disastrous, traitorous, and treasonous direction that the resident puppet in the White House and all of his Soros-led puppeteers are taking our beloved nation!
Hat tips to all links.
Posts
22 comments:
Hi Christine,
Thank you for highlighted what is happening in the world of politics regarding ISRAEL.
I will be leaving for Israel in three weeks and look forward to seeing the Land I left after living there for five years (2002-2007). Thank you for standing with ISRAEL. Shabbat Shalom. (ss)
This rhetoric didn't work for Carter. It didn't work for Clinton. It won't work for Obama. I'm thinking Obama's even more anti-Semitic than Carter, and that's sayin' something.
Hi Susan,
You are most welcome! Standing with Israel is a biblical mandate for Christian believers. Why? The Bible tells us so!
Have a great and safe trip back to Israel! How long will you be visiting there?
God bless you!
Christine
Euripides wrote:
" I'm thinking Obama's even more anti-Semitic than Carter, and that's sayin' something."
What a sad fact THAT is!! I just wonder why so many liberal Jews can't see the danger in such policies. I have read that many are now "waking up" and realizing that Obama isn't their "friend."
Look at this poll, everybody!
Fox News Opinion Poll
Thank you for voting!
Yes. The current situation can't continue, and something needs to give. 7.41% (20,508 votes)
Not sure. I'm wondering whether Obama gave Israel the heads-up on this. 2.09% (5,793 votes)
No. Israel is our one true ally in the region, and we need to stand with them. 89.27% (247,042 votes)
Other (post a comment) 1.22% (3,380 votes)
Note to all of the commenters (four) who posted pro-Palestinian, Israel bashing comments and links...your comments have been rejected.
Wow! When you have the boldness to reject and not publish Israel-bashing comments, I consider that a stand on the solid Rock for sure, Christine. You are beautiful, my friend.
My visit to Israel is a three-week study tour in conjunction with the faculty of Jerusalem University College (JUC). The tour is via my school Columbia International University (CIU) where I am studying clinical counseling.
Thanks for giving light to the world about the Messiah and about Israel. You are the salt of the earth! Love to you and all your worldwide readers!! (ss)
Of course Susan! This is my blog and I can reject negative comments if I want to! (heh heh - just a little play on words from the lyrics of the "it's my party and I'll cry if I want to" song.
How excited you must be for your three-week study tour at JUC! May God grand you traveling grace and mercy and may your trip be successful for your clinical counseling studies!
God bless you Susan!
Love,
Christine
P.S. Ever since the major google blog repair happened several days ago, I lost my Talk Wisdom blog followers list on the sidebar. I didn't know how to get the list to re-appear, but today I see that it is back now!
Perhaps you didn't read or listen to President Obama's speech. My suspicion is you just read articles/comments at Atlas Shrugged by "the shreiking Harpy" Pamela Geller or WorldNutDaily. Such credible sources you have!
According to George Mitchell, Former Senate Majority Leader who resigned this month as President Obama’s envoy to the Middle East after serving two years, President Obama’s comments on the 1967 borders were “a significant statement,” they do not signal a major shift in policy, especially when land swaps are taken into consideration.
“The president didn’t say that Israel has to go back to the ‘67 lines. He said with agreed swaps,” Mitchell told Amanpour. “Swaps means an exchange of land intended to accommodate major Israeli population centers to be incorporated into Israel and Israel’s security needs. Agreed means through negotiations. Both parties must agree.”
“That’s not going to be a border unless Israel agrees to it and we know they won’t agree unless their security needs are satisfied, as it should be,” Mitchell added of the 1967 borders.
Mitchell noted that Obama’s Thursday statement on borders were identical to a proposal made by former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert, who served until 2009.
Also, Netanyahu, who will address the pro-Israel lobby Monday and Congress on Tuesday, played down the rift.
“The disagreements have been blown way out of proportion,” he told The Associated Press on Saturday. “It’s true we have some differences of opinion, but these are among friends.”
More fear mongering from the lunatic fringe of the regressive party...Nice going. You bought right into it. Obama didn't "betray" anyone.
John -
You are entitled to your opinion but I think that there is a Higher Power who would disagree with you.
Also, I wouldn't hold up Ehud Olmert as a bastion of integrity. He was involved in several scandals and ultimately got booted out of office.
Back to God and His Word. I am pressed for time at the moment, but I will copy and past a portion of Joel Rosenberg's recent email to me:
He wrote:
"3.Do not divide the Land of Israel -- In my message about the final chapter of the Book of Joel, I explained the warning to the nations that the Lord gives. I focused in particular on Joel 3:2 (which is 4:2 in the Hebrew Bible) in which the Lord says, "I will gather all the nations and bring them down to the valley of Jehoshaphat. Then I will enter into judgment with them there on behalf of My people and My inheritance, Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations; and they have divided up My land." The Bible is very clear: the Lord is going to judge all the nations for dividing up the Land of Israel. Let the United Nations and the United States and the European Union and the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli government itself be warned. What appears like wisdom to the world - carving up the State of Israel like a Thanksgiving turkey - is direct disobediance to the Word of God and will trigger the most severe divine judgment. This is a hard truth for many to hear and to hold, particularly for Palestinian Arabs and others in the epicenter. But we do Israel's Arab friends and enemies no favors by denying, obfuscating or trying to explain away the clear teaching of the Lord found in the Scriptures. We must teach the truth. We must do so gently and lovingly, but we must also be clear and firm."
THAT is why you will never convince any Bible-based Christian believer that dividing up Israel is a good thing.
Read this!
FAIL. Americans Disagree With Obama – Support Israel Over Hamas-Fatah Alliance
A majority - 63% - disagree with Obama's support for Hamas-Fatah alliance.
John,
I did listen to Obama's speech, and he called for negotiations using the 1967 borders as a starting point. Since Netanyahu has rejected that idea for as long as he has been in office, then the idea of thinking that there can be negotiations on that basis is rather inane I would think. Since both parties are not going to agree with anything along that line, then basically it was a stupid thing to say. The only possible use for it could have been to give a soundbite for Arab extremists.
As for Netanyahu playing down the difference, what is he going to say? I'm sure he realizes that long term the US is still the best chance for a steady ally that Israel has, despite the current administration. While it must be unpleasant for him, his best political strategy is to take as much crap from Obama as he can without alienating the US as a whole in the hope that someone sane will be voted into office in 2012.
Israel has agreed to numerous concessions over the decades. They have always been met with betrayal and murder. I's sure that their government is smart enough to recognize Obama's rhetoric as simply the latest flavor to come their way.
Well I guess that you can't hold up Bibi Netanyahu as a bastion of integrity either...this was a joint statement from him and Sec Clinton on November 11, 2011:
"The Prime Minister and the Secretary agreed on the importance of continuing direct negotiations to achieve our goals. The Secretary reiterated that "the United States believes that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state, based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements."
And this from ThinkProgress:
Yet what Orrin Hatch, Netanyahu, and their allies in the U.S. Congress are not saying is that most Israelis and Palestinians actually support a settlement based around 1967 borders with mutually agreed land swaps that result in a safe, secure, free, and prosperous independent Palestinian and Israeli states. Here is a roundup of some of the recent polling on the issue:
- PALESTINIANS SUPPORT PEACE: It a common refrain among those who would deny rights to the Palestinians that they are militantly opposed to Israel’s very existence and would never support a peaceful resolution. Yet the facts do not support this assertion. Polling conducted in 2009 indicated that 74 percent of Palestinians support a two-state solution based around the contours of the international consensus. Polling conducted in 2010 found that 71 percent support peace negotiations with Israel and that a majority of Palestinians oppose rocket attacks on the country. Last month, the top Palestinian diplomat at the UN asked that the international community support a solution based on the pre-1967 borders and mutually agreed land swaps.
- ISRAELIS SUPPORT PEACE: While the pre-1967 borders were portrayed as primarily a Palestinian demand by the mainstream media and conservatives, the truth is that most Israelis are actually in favor of withdrawing settlements and establishing roughly these borders in exchange for peace. In a 2010 Brookings Institution poll, a plurality of Israelis supported this border arrangement along with mutually agreed land swaps. More recent polling from the Joint Israeli Palestinian Poll conducted by the Truman Institute for the Advancement of Peace at Hebrew University and the Palestine Center for Policy and Survey Research found that 52 percent of Israelis support a peace agreement based roughly around the elements of the Saudi peace plan and Clinton Parameters, which would incorporate the pre-1967 borders, and that most Israelis support negotiating with Hamas. A 2011 poll conducted by a major Israeli newspaper shows that 53 percent of Israelis want Netanyahu to seriously engage in peace talks that includes significant concessions.
The Prime Minister and the Secretary agreed on the importance of continuing direct negotiations to achieve our goals. The Secretary reiterated that "the United States believes that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state, based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements."While it is true that mort Palestinians support this agreement than Israelis — the status quo is much worse for them — it is also true that narrow majorities of Israelis support the general contours of a peace proposal that Obama and the wider international community are endorsing. Netanyahu, Hatch, and their allies in the U.S. Congress and Israeli Knesset are staking out positions that are out of step with public opinion and reality. The question is whether Obama will use the levers at his disposal to force them to the negotiating table."
John,
I see in your first post that there is a lot of Secretary Clinton making claims as to what the Prime Minister agreed to.
"It a common refrain among those who would deny rights to the Palestinians that they are militantly opposed to Israel’s very existence and would never support a peaceful resolution. Yet the facts do not support this assertion."
That's a pretty bold statement considering that the Palestinian's voted in a Hamas government, Hamas being a terrorist organization who's charter calls for Israel's destruction. Awfully easy to say that you favor peace as you are lobbing rockets across the border.
Which brings us to the next worthless platitude: That they support land swaps that provide for a mutually secure Israel and Palestine. Sounds nice, but as long the Palestinians continue to both demand more land and continue to fire across the border, it's a practical impossibility. Rather like benevolent socialism in that regard. I can understand why President Obama and his crowd are so willing to swallow it. They have shown the entire nation what they think of border security using our Southern border as an example.
" Netanyahu, Hatch, and their allies in the U.S. Congress and Israeli Knesset are staking out positions that are out of step with public opinion and reality."
I quite agree...if the reality that you are pursuing is the destruction of Israel. This is the same type of "land for peace" arrangement that led Europe to hand Hitler Poland, Czechoslovakia, Framce, and almost the rest of the hemisphere. It never ceases to amaze me how "progressives" as they call themselves keep pushing the same policies that failed repeatedly in the past.
"Since Netanyahu has rejected that idea for as long as he has been in office, then the idea of thinking that there can be negotiations on that basis is rather inane I would think."
Sorry Gary. That's just not true...this was a joint statement from him and Sec Clinton on November 11, 2011:
"The Prime Minister and the Secretary agreed on the importance of continuing direct negotiations to achieve our goals. The Secretary reiterated that "the United States believes that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state, based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements."
Please note the phrase..."the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state, based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps..."
Hi Christine,
Do you think that it is possible that some day the libs might actually realize that polls are useless when predicting likely outcomes for despotic regimes? Pluralities and majorities just don't mean very much when there is an extremely radical minority that no one will seriously oppose. I thoroughly believe that most Muslims are peace-loving, law-abiding people, but that still doesn't change the fact that there are over forty zones in Paris right now that the authorities recommend that non-Muslims not enter under fear of injury. Unless the majority are willing to stop it, the minority will have their way. It's that way throughout the mid-East. It's getting to be that way throughout Europe and Canada. The jury is still out on Asia.
Hi Gary,
You asked:
"Do you think that it is possible that some day the libs might actually realize that polls are useless when predicting likely outcomes for despotic regimes?"
Short answer? NO!
I wonder...do many of them actually think that Hamas was genuinely Democratically elected to lead the Palestinians?
Do they really think that I'm -in-a-jihad in Iran was voted back into office? Are they actually so blind to the fact that Ahmidinijad is just a puppet in the hands of the puppetmaster mullahs in that brutal regime?
To be honest, I don't really know how many Muslims are "peace-loving, law-abiding" people. I guess it depends on whether or not they want Sharia law instituted in whichever country they live. It is also hard to know because many are silent on the issue. Hmmm... such thoughts have reminded me of a video I once saw about an American man whose Muslim friend shocked him with his behavior after 9/11. I will try to find the link.
So...what do you think of the Muslim uprisings going on in several countries in the Middle East? Are the "Arab Spring" revolutions going to head towards democracy in the various countries? Or, is it more likely that the Muslim Brotherhood (and other taqiya-type terrorist organizations) are all working to set up the destruction of Israel? The Bible certainly gives us some hints and clues about this...and what it is actually all about!
Found it! Scroll down to the video in the post:
Muslims Smile in Our Faces While Cursing Us in Their Hearts.
John,
You keep repeating the same things that mean nothing. There is a universe of difference between "Can" and "would in your wildest dreams." Theoretically, Communism "can" provide a good and equitable life for people living under the system. In practice, it has either ended as people abandoned communues (small scale experiments) or turned into a dictatorship (country size experiments).
Israel has repeatedly come to the table with the idea of attempting good faith negotiations based on security and land swaps. They have been rewarded with murder and betrayal, the reason being that people who lob rockets across your border with the idea of killing your citizens do not bargain in good faith.
And in your references, I continue to see a lot of what Secretary Clinton saying and Netanyahu not bothering to negate. I can understand his position, not wanting to make her look like the foriegn policiy idiot that she is, because as I said before the US is still the best ally that Israel has. But to assume that Israel is going to do anything counter to its security interest, regardless of what Madame Clinton says, IS inane.
Lest we forget the Clinton method: They lie. They were a bit slicker about it than Obama, but it still comes down to the fact that they lie, the chief reason being to make themselves look better than reality. You can listen to what they say and quote all kinds of political sources, but the history is that Israel has not agreed to any treaty that closely resembles 1967 borders. They know that Hamas is no more trustworthy than the Clintons or the Obamas.
Hi Christine,
" Are the "Arab Spring" revolutions going to head towards democracy in the various countries?"
I would be pleased with that outcome, but my guess is no. Many people yearn to be free, but history shows that freedom comes to those who plan for it and have a history developing it. The Israeli government was formed largely by men and women who had been educated in Western democracies and had experienced the horror of dictatorships unleashed upon them. It was relatively easy for them to pattern a democracy. The other Middle Eastern nations have no such history, and still hold much more loyalty to tribal alliances rathern democratic law. While nothing is certain, I would wager that any country in that region that overthrows its current regime will rapidly turn into a radical Islamic state. Again, I don't necessarily believe that this is what the majority of the citizens want, but I do not believe they will sufficiently oppose the minority that do.
I very much agree with you . I am a born again Christian believer on the Lord Jesus Christ and Israel should never have to go back to the 1967 borders since they defeated those who attacked them in self - defence and it would split Jerululem apart and thank God for the Prime Minister of Israel who stood up for what was right . There will never be peace by giving up any of Israel's land. And thank God also that we have been greatly blessed by Israel and the Jewish people who under God have given us the Holy Bible and the true Messiah , the Lord Jesus Christ who came into the world to save sinners and died on the cross shedding his sinless blood as the full atonement before God of all our sins when we repent of them before God and trust him as our own personal Saviour and receive his free gift of eternal life in God's heaven by faith in what he has done for us. Sincerely ;
Shalom Christine,
Most of the comments on this post seem to be hitting the nail on the head for sure. Most of the words I am hearing are sweeter than honey.
As George confirmed each individual’s salvation comes by repentance and rest; in quietness and trust is our strength (Isaiah 30:15).
Hope you are resting on this beautiful day. We have sunshine here in South Carolina. Shabbat Shalom to you and all of your worldwide readers. (ss)
Post a Comment