US political turnabout on J & S

By Yisroel Medad

I was all for “retention” as the political buzzword.

It is my presumption that politicians are afraid of movement, initiative, change. Presented with plans for immediate application of sovereignty over Judea and Samaria or suggestions of additional annexation moves, the reaction would be one of nervousness. I suggested a new campaign:

Retain The Territories

Retention, which I employed in this 2005 op-ed, avoids the issue of “sovereignty” which, I am forced to acknowledge, scares people because they think – wrongly – that Israel doesn’t have the better claim but it does.

The US Joint Chiefs of Staff reported on June 29, 1967, submitting an opinion about Israel’s needs for retaining territory which detailed in this Memorandum for the Secretary of Defense from the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCSM-373-67) possible lines in Judea and Samaria as so:

    a. The Jordanian West Bank. Control of the high ground running north-south through the middle of West Jordan generally east of the main north-south highway along the axis Jenin-Nablus-Bira-Jerusalem and then southeast to a junction with the Dead Sea at the Wadi el Daraja would provide Israel with a militarily defensible border…
    Israel should not have pay a price of “territorial compromise”.

I’ve been now outflanked:

ZOA’s Mort Klein had asked Newt Gingrich:

    What is your position about the right of Jews to live in Judea and Samaria [the West Bank] and the right of Jews to live in communities there at this present time?

and Gingrich replied:

    Well, it depends on where exactly you define the boundaries. I do not oppose any development in the [Israeli occupied] areas, because I think that’s part of the negotiating process. To the degree that the Palestinians want to stop the developments they need to reach a deal in which they recognize the right of Israel to exist… As long as they are waging war on Israel, they are in no position to complain about developments. I think the whole peace process has been absurd and has created a psychologically almost impossible position for the average person because once you say there’s a peace process you wonder why the Israelis aren’t being more forthcoming. But if you say, look, we’re still in the middle of a war. They’re still trying to destroy the country — they’re still firing rockets, they still have terrorists coming in — then you all of a sudden understand what the real situation on the ground is, and in that setting, why would the Israelis slow down in maximizing their net bargaining advantage?

This thinking quickly followed his words to another Jewish questioner in an earlier interview when Gingrich said:-

    “Remember, there was no Palestine as a state. It was part of the Ottoman Empire. And I think that we’ve had an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs, who are historically part of the Arab community.”

Many of our establishment Jews, even some who share blog space here were upset, almost declaring Gingrich to be irrelevantly silly. But a statement like this one gets a free pass:

    Prime Minister Salam Fayyad said Gingrich needs to reexamine the history books…”The Palestinian people inhabited the land since the dawn of history, and intend to remain in it until the end times…People like Gingrich must consult history…”

Following Rick Perry (“I consider the Israeli settlements to be legal, from my perspective, and I support them…where the Israelis are clearly on Israel’s land that they have hard fought to win and to keep, absolutely.”) and Rick Santorum (“The bottom line is that that [Judea & Samaria] is legitimately Israeli country. And they have a right to do within their country just like we have a right to do within our country […] all the people who live in the West Bank are Israelis, they’re not Palestinians. There is no Palestinian, this is Israeli land.”), the visit of five Congressmen to Judea and Samaria, the South Carolina State Assembly decision, US politics seems to be reorienting to the original intent of Congress.

Almost 90 years ago, the United States accepted the terms of the Mandate and its territorial applicability which included Judea and Samaria – and Gaza – both in a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress on June 30, 1922 which was then signed on September 21, 1922, by then President Warren G. Harding, as well as appending its signature to the Anglo-American Convention of 1924.

Gingrich, Perry, Santorum and others are not making any new statements but repeating traditional American diplomatic policy: Jews have a legal right to reside in Judea and Samaria and build their homes there.

December 17, 2011 | 31 Comments »

Leave a Reply

31 Comments / 31 Comments

  1. Sternlight says:
    December 20, 2011 at 1:46 am

    It is a bad idea to falsify history to try to win an argument. US policy toward Israel, and the associated tone, have been quite different as between different Presidents. There is no reason to think a Republican victory would not greatly improve US/Israeli relations. Instead of alienating friends of Israel, one should embrace them.

    I do not falsify history. It seems to me you are more a part of the problem than an advocate for solving it.

    Is the US an ally of Israel?
    A chronological look at the evidence

    The trouble with ideologues is that they see everything in black and white, when the world is multi-hued. Such ideologues also believe they are “right” and others “wrong”; they are “good” and others “evil”; they are “altruistic” and others “self-serving’. They also tend to pseudo-speciate those with an honest disagreement as “the enemy”; hence the vitriol.

    Here you go again practicing pseudo psychoanalysis with out a license. Our disagreement is not honest and your comment seems to fit your own definition of yourself. I asked you before and do so again, if you believe your way is foundationally correct. then show some evidence. I believe I can make a case for mine, as well as attributing to some I disagree with as conforming to “ontogeny recapitulating phylogeny”.

  2. Sternlight says:
    December 20, 2011 at 1:26 am

    Yamit “looks to (other) alternatives” than the ballot box. And if another with whom Yamit disagrees also “looks to other alternatives” what then, the Law of the Jungle?

    It’s all a matter of Power and who controls the ballot box and the system. In Israel the majority has been denied their rightful reins of power, and we will never gain that power through the ballot. Your assuming what I think you assumed, is presumptuous. Ask what i meant before you jump to any conclusions.

    And here I thought that Israel was a response to just such a use of the law of the jungle against Jews. I must be naive.

    Where did you ever get such a stupid and wrong conclusion?

    He reminds me of the old joke about Betar: “Both sides of the Jordan; by force if possible.”

    It wasn’t for the most part the BenGurions who drove the British out of Palestine. He and the British hand picked Jewish Agency did everything not to rile their British Masters. If they had joined the Revisionists from the late 30’s, it might have saved a million or so Jews. The extent of his disregard to Jewish deaths was seen in the Holocaust: Zionist leadership refused to push the Western governments for visas for Jewish refugees, bombing the death camps, or absolution of European dictators who contacted the Allies asking for personal guarantees in return for sabotaging the deportation of Jews. Most infamously, Ben Gurion and his ultra-rich Jewish friends virtually ignored the German offer to spare the entire Hungarian Jewry for a very reasonable, militarily inessential number of trucks, cocoa beans, and other dual-use goods. And yet, Ben Gurion had the audacity to persistently deride Zeev Jabotinsky as “Vladimir Hitler” even though Jabotinsky was rushing about the burning pre-war Europe trying to convince Jews to flee. The very Ben Gurion, the conspirator of silence who bears full responsibility for the Holocaust and should have been hanged alongside Eichmann, was laughing at Jabotinsky’s efforts to save Jews before the war and Hillel Kook’s efforts during it.

    For those too young to remember, the actual motto was “.. by force if necessary.”.

    I still advocate the use of force to achieve the liberation of all of the Jewish homeland, and I don’t see a scenario where force will not be unnecessary, do you? First things first we must secure what we hold first.

    I don’t think you and your ideas will find much favor with most of the commenters either Jew or gentile.

  3. It is a bad idea to falsify history to try to win an argument. US policy toward Israel, and the associated tone, have been quite different as between different Presidents. There is no reason to think a Republican victory would not greatly improve US/Israeli relations. Instead of alienating friends of Israel, one should embrace them.

    The trouble with ideologues is that they see everything in black and white, when the world is multi-hued. Such ideologues also believe they are “right” and others “wrong”; they are “good” and others “evil”; they are “altruistic” and others “self-serving’. They also tend to pseudo-speciate those with an honest disagreement as “the enemy”; hence the vitriol.

  4. Sternlight says:
    December 20, 2011 at 12:53 am

    When we stoop to the languaging and vitriol of the anti-Semite in our posts, we are little better, and do not earn the attention of serious people. If one wants ego gratification, get a sycophant. If one wishes to achieve one’s objectives, speaking effectively is much more useful than ranting.

    Pls don’t play psychiatrist with me, you aren’t qualified based on your so often published résumé.

    If one wishes to achieve one’s objectives, speaking effectively is much more useful than ranting.

    Sounds nice but I challenge you to prove it.

    Sometimes a hammer is more effective than the word, not to mention something even more lethal. I am a strong advocate of the punch in the nose and a kick in the ass, always found that tactic works better than jawboning. Being nice to un-nice baboons is the pits and for wusses like…you. I am trying to be kind here in limiting my vocabulary; which in your case is extremely difficult for me.

  5. Yamit “looks to (other) alternatives” than the ballot box. And if another with whom Yamit disagrees also “looks to other alternatives” what then, the Law of the Jungle? And here I thought that Israel was a response to just such a use of the law of the jungle against Jews. I must be naive.

    He reminds me of the old joke about Betar: “Both sides of the Jordan; by force if possible.”

    For those too young to remember, the actual motto was “.. by force if necessary.”.

  6. Sternlight you have brken your own rule of using ad homenim attacks by calling me a boor.

    A “boor”:

    A person with rude, clumsy manners and little refinement.

    So What? Calling me a boor means that you fit the definition more than me. I didn’t call you any names as a matter of fact I ignore you as inconsequential.

    A peasant.

    I ain’t no peasant.

    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    SYNONYMS boor, barbarian, churl, lout, vulgarian, yahoo.

    These nouns denote an uncouth and uncultivated person

    Even were it true, since when is voicing an opinion worthy of your soooo uncouth condemnation of me? 8)

  7. When we stoop to the languaging and vitriol of the anti-Semite in our posts, we are little better, and do not earn the attention of serious people. If one wants ego gratification, get a sycophant. If one wishes to achieve one’s objectives, speaking effectively is much more useful than ranting.

  8. Seems even in blogs we are slaves to ratings.

    I do agree that American politics is largely an entertaining distraction from most of the real problems facing Israel. There seems to be a misguided belief that there will be a major shift to the good for Israel if one or another candidate is elected. History has not supported such a view.

    AVRAHAM (YAIR) STERN:

    National Revival Principles (HaTechiya)

  9. Netanyahu must live and operate in the real world not one of Yamit’s imaginary Eden. The present Israeli leadership has one over- riding goal. In the face of an obviously anti- semitic and anti-right Americanadministration in it’s last year, God willing, of it’s rule, Netanyahu must wait for Tge next election before it does anything. I’d Obama loses the dynamics will change. If he wins, well all he’ll will break out in the Middke East.

    Firstly I think you are over-analyzing what makes BB tick and as usual getting it wrong. Most leaders of so called democracies can’t do permanent harm to their countries usually because of term limits ( They usually don’t have enough time in office ) BB is one of the rare exceptions because of Israels existential threats, time does not necessarily work in our favor and who knows Obama might win a second term with no internal restraints. When I played football we had a coach who drummed it into our heads “HE WHO HESITATES IS LOST”.Much later as a serving member of USARMY and the IDF, they taught us essentially the same truism.

    Practical rationalism may have some merit for other countries and peoples but not us.

    Is there ANYONE in Israel of whom Yamit would approve outside of perhaps a re-incarnation of Kahane? Netanyahu must live and operate in the real world not one of Yamit’s imaginary Eden

    A re-incarnation of Kahane would be nice but even he wasn’t perfect and I had a lot of disagreements with him as well. Yet there are some few I know I would support but as things stand they have little or no chance of reaching real positions of political power, Israel is a closed political shop, here the inmates are in control and they will fight to the death to maintain it.

    I have given up the belief that real change and real leadership can be gotten through the ballot box. I look to the obvious alternatives.

  10. “The problem is that, by its deliberate inaction, the world is pushing Israel to take care of this.”

    Hi, Steven.

    I’ve been doing a lot of franctic posting lately about Iran, and the notion that Israel needs to take out those nuke eggs before they hatch. I am not trying to push Israel to do this on my behalf as an American. We will have our own “fallout” from this matter, along with the rest of the world; but Israel is immediately threatened, and I am urging them to act in their own interest.

    The US government almost certainly will NOT stand by Israel in a timely manner. Our current President, Barack Obama, is at best a complete incompetent in foreign policy; and his corps of advisors has been aptly called an “echo chamber” where dissenting views are not tolerated. It is an Imperial Presidency, if you will, and Obama is a real Caligula — in spirit at least.

    Israel may not be able to act independently of the US. If they attack Iran, Iran will almost certainly retalliate against American interests in the Persian Gulf, not against Israeli interests; so Israel may be inviting American reprisals against them — either directly or through our Turkish surrogates. That is not a pretty scenario; and I am not proposing that Israel take this action or that in order to bring about Israel’s ultimate harm.

    The cost of inaction, though, is likely to be far greater than the risks involved in action. If Iran is allowed BY ISRAEL (ultimately, it is their choice) to proceed to possession of nuclear weapons that can attack Israel, then Israel will be a dhimmi to Iranian nuclear blackmail. The US will undoubtedly try to add to this a blackmail of its own, soliciting Israeli servitude as “protection money” of an American nuclear “umbrella”. How nonsensical THAT would be for Israel! An AMERICAN nuclear umbrella? They already have their OWN nuclear umbrella, for what it’s worth; and it isn’t worth very much if Iran develops a nuke force. If Israel does not deal with the Iranians now, they might as well reconcile themselves with a future of paying lip service to the Americans while being, in fact, in the bondage of Iran and its interests; and because the US will have caved in to Iran in 2012 because of fear of a Hormuz closure, Iran knows that they can hold the US hostage as well: Iraninan and Islamic interests will control the world, and the rest of us — especially Israel — will wallow in the life of sniveling cowards — even though as a people (not an oil company or economy), we Americans are in little physical danger from Iranian nukes.

    So, am I trying to PUSH Israel into something against their interests? I think not. Whether Israel acts of doesn’t, the US will ultimately lose because of our own greed, selfishness and cowardice. The difference is that Israel acts in a timely manner, they can be free of dhimitude; and if the Americans and Turks want to attack them, as they surely will, probably one after the other, Israel can take them down: Israel will suffer, but we and our wicked leaders will be devastated.

    I am a pessimist, and think Israel will hide its head in the sand. All they will gain in this is perhaps a year’s time. The Islamo-American axis can take down a dhimmi Israel even easier than they can take down a proud Israel.

  11. Sternlight Said:

    Yamit has once more crossed the line. In speaking of “Joos” he has become a boor. How long will the moderator permit his proven inability to control himself, despite repeated warnings? His posts have become more and more indistinguishable from those of an anti-Semite, though he, himself may not be.

    Noticed you shaved your beard….Is that all?

    My Reply to Sternlight

    Be specific Sternlight. Pls. identify what you believe I said that you think “have become more and more indistinguishable from those of an anti-Semite” Then Pls explain where and why you disagree with me.

    I promised Ted I would leave you alone. Seems he is easily impressed by your Résumé. I think you can tell that I’m not as impressed. 😛

    Exodus 17:2 So they quarreled with Moses and said, “Give us water to drink.” Moses replied, “Why do you quarrel with me? Why do you put the LORD to the test?”

    Exodus 17:7 And he called the place Massah and Meribah because the Israelites quarreled and because they tested the LORD saying, “Is the LORD among us or not?”Deuteronomy 33:8

    Do not test the LORD your God as you did at Massah.

    Noticed you shaved your beard. ..Is that all?

  12. Sternlight,

    I can assure you that Yamit is not an Antisemite; and I’ll go further, to say that he loves his people Israel and their country. I have been called an Antisemite much more than he, an impression I give people by my own frequent attacks on Jews (or phoney “Joos”, as Yamit called them) for causing their own problems. Neither of us are Antisemites. I won’t bother justifying myself here, because you criticized Yamit, not me. As for the latter, he is correct in laying the ultimate blame for the “rock-throwing”, etc. by “settlers” on Israel’s leaders. I am not a Jew but an American, and it appalls me to see a people like the Jews, tearing apart their own country and so bent on their own destruction. The settlers in Yosh are trying to establish a Jewish homeland in the Jewish homeland: There is nothing wrong nor perverse in that. That their own government is opposing them, is perverse.

    We have a parallel in American history, when the British were favoring the interests of the Native Americans over those of the British settlers on the Appalacian frontier during the 1760s and early 1770s. The problem there was that the British authorities, while being of the same people as the settlers, were so distanced from the latter by geography and social standing, that they were behaving like enemies. The result was a separation of the two, the American Revolution, and the eventual settlement of the entirety of this country I live in. The knesset seems to have become as distant from the Jews of Yosh, as the British Parliament was from my colonial ancestors, in spite of the fact that they live right there in Israel. They are behaving as though they are agents of an overseas foreign power. That is wrong, and Yamit is right.

  13. As a former LIKUD CC member I know in person every one of those make believe Jewish leaders.
    Bombastic charlatans, perhaps, leaders? No way.
    As a former Senior-Fellow Engineer US DoD Military Avionics Programs and as an Invited Consultant to the IMoD I know military loyalty and trutworthiness. That is a little known setting amongst the present Israeli so called military.
    I would call some of those listed by Yamit unJews because they conclusively much rather assault Jews than defend the Jewish national Heritage or people. We saw what happened in our town during the Second Lebanon War and consistently to the Southern cities
    No true JEWISH leader would send people to settle and then plot to kill the people or destroy the settlements or abandon civilians to their fate for the sake of Nobels.
    That is tantamount of criminally using and abusing citizens.
    Further. As we are digresing about using Jews, using Jewish soldiers against civilians is a crime Mr. Sternlight, regardless if a Jewish soldier attacks a civilian Jew or non Jew.
    The abhorrent habit of so doing has been inserted into the twisted souls of the “elites” here.
    The remedy is to sever that element from commanding our kids and sending them under harsh warnings to face a true panels of Judges on charges of high crimes.
    The era of the soft or hard “victims of peace” is over Mr. Sternlight.
    NO MORE military cowards raising hands or buldozers against sleeping civilans.

  14. Yamit has once more crossed the line. In speaking of “Joos” he has become a boor. How long will the moderator permit his proven inability to control himself, despite repeated warnings? His posts have become more and more indistinguishable from those of an anti-Semite, though he, himself may not be.

  15. To reduce Iran influence and role would benefit the WHOLE world. Right, center and left.
    The problem is that, by its deliberate inaction, the world is pushing Israel to take care of this. This is a repeat of Iraq in a much worst conditions.

  16. This is a region where those standing in the middle of the road end up dead my friend. And we are sick and tired of being forced by anyone, local or foreign to stand that way. We represent Eretz Israel including Judea and Samaria. There is no “west bank” just as much as there are no “pilistineans”.
    We, the majority here, are not waiting until, if, maybe, somehow, the very suspect US voter decides to perhaps remove the White House occupant. We cannot afford to take such chance or allow a nuclear Iran, ever. We are not giving credence to ‘INVENTED NATIONALITIES” so the US debt riddled tumblers can have cheap oil and some cash other than that printed like mad.
    There are no more voluntary “victims of peace”. That era is gone even so for now there are a few remnants of the cadre that fabricated Oslo and derivatives still around financed from overseas foreign countries. Barak and his few MKs are not elegible to any level if elections would take place now. The “kadima” aggregate would be decimated in elections, even if the State Department, CIA, Ford Fundation, Soros and EU would keep pumping money to the “NGO’s”. Arguably one may say that Rav Kahane is our lead, but it is not so even if we agree and a growing number of others does as well that he was correct.
    I just left the LIKUD Central Committee and before being so affiliated I was an US Democratic Party Member. But I AM JEWISH, not an hybrid. And we are the vast majority so far kept back by some willy politicians out for their “Nobel”.
    Bottom line. Democracy means that also in Eretz Israel the majority rules, like it or not. We represent the views of what all experts say will add up to nearly 78 out of 120 MK’s in the next election.

  17. Stan, please! I’m not talking politics in my latest post. There are two wars about to break out, and I wish Israel’s leaders not to get swayed by Obama’s shenannigans. Obama is trying to make this a war over Syria, which will ultimately be to Israel’s detriment. Israel needs to attack Iran NOW, while it still has a chance to do something effective there. Obama is cozying up to the Iranians, trying to cut a deal in which he lets them have nukes in exchange for Syria. This is not an “elections” issue, as hopefully it will be decided long before either Israel or the US has an election. This is urgent, in my opinion. I am not that concerned about Gingrich and Paul — there will be a lot of time before I get to vote for one or the other, if indeed both survive to May when our polls open.

  18. I hate to see pro-Israel blogers on this site wrote with such divergent views, none of which do much to help the situation. BO comes to most problems with views skated to the left while Yamit yells from the far right. PersonallyI think that BOis over-analyzing GINGRICH’s words while Yamit is living in a world all his(her) own. Is there ANYONE in Israel of whom Yamit would approve outside of perhaps a re-incarnation of Kahane? Netanyahu must live and operate in the real world not one of Yamit’s imaginary Eden. The present Israeli leadership has one over- riding goal. In the face of an obviously anti- semitic and anti-right Americanadministration in it’s last year, God willing, of it’s rule, Netanyahu must wait for Tge next election before it does anything. I’d Obama loses the dynamics will change. If he wins, well all he’ll will break out in the Middke East.

  19. There is a growing but subtle number of things happening here pointing to even further changes both here and in some countries overseas. It would not be correct to go into details about the local scene but the sounds are quite loud about re aligning. The present US administration was and remains, in real terms, untrustworthy to say the least.
    The Republican candidates are, in turn, following a well troden political candidates trail.
    Will they be consistent after elections? Probably not, but nevertheless some of them will be far better than what we face now.
    I would agree on that Barak is a dangerous poison dwarf, but not much more than that.

  20. Ted, please can the political stuff for a bit. Israel is in grave danger. Obama is conspiring with the Iranians, to prevent Israel from attacking Iran. The trade-off is a free hand in Syria, which Obama is consiring with the Turks to put into the “US” (actually Turkish) sphere. Israel has NO advantage in the moves against Assad, and everything to lose. Meanwhile, it has MUCH to lose by putting off an attack against Iran. Please read the latest DEBKA post about the latest Barack-Barak conspiriacy.

  21. Fair enough, Yamit; but I thought the halachic definition of a Chelmite was one with a Chelmite mother 🙂

    In Chelm they believed the man gave birth? 🙂

  22. Sorry, Yam, for all the nonesense.

    I’m glad to see Newt redefining the debate about “Palestine”. We will see whom God selects as our next President, whether it be a blind fool like Zedekiah or an advocate like Cyrus. I don’t see any Davids in the lineup — not here in the US, and not in Jerusalem.

  23. There might be more than one Chelm, but even if not there are many who could be considered Chelmites and they aren’t all Jews.

    Fair enough, Yamit; but I thought the halachic definition of a Chelmite was one with a Chelmite mother 🙂

  24. Then again, I’m not a Jew; I wasn’t born in Chelm.

    Not so sure about that. How many towns and communities in America have biblical names? How many believe America is the shinny country on that hill? How many believe America has a divine mission in the world? What other country would elect a Carter both Bush’s, Clinton and Obama to be Leader? What sane country facing national bankruptcy would encourage and implore it’s citizens to get even deeper in debt buy going on an orgy of spending for stuff they don’t need instead of saving for their own benefit and economic protection. A country who fought and is still fighting wars they can’t explain or justify?

    There might be more than one Chelm, but even if not there are many who could be considered Chelmites and they aren’t all Jews.

  25. Gingrich, Perry, Santorum and others are not making any new statements but repeating traditional American diplomatic policy: Jews have a legal right to reside in Judea and Samaria and build their homes there.

    Our problem has never been your Christian American Congressman, it’s always been your phony right wing Jooos like BB, Sharon, Olmert, Shamir and Begin, and the stupid Jews who voted for the Likud, Shas and NRP. I would add the Kapo leadership of Yosh and those poor excuses for Rabbis who are respected in their communities. There are only a few exceptions that I consider genuine Rabbis.

    Voltaire, a wise anti-Semite who remarked correctly that “should the Jews get their own state, they would sell it”. Those Israeli Jews who supported Glenn Beck, are in this category.

  26. Aa the POTHUS I would expect speeches from historian Newt to outclass any including Kennedy and Reagan.

    I have always liked Newt. Your coment does not mewsh with your overt support of Paul but inconsistency is your calling card except when it comes to Jews. 😛

  27. Did anyone notice the “You” – “I” dichotomy? Gingrich is BLAMING THE ISRAELI JEWS TO THEIR FACE for the fix they are in — which, to a sensible person, means he is their friend; but to a Jew, it means he is an “Antisemite”.

    Defining who is or isn’t antisemitic based solely on statements depends pretty much on who is the speaker and in what context statements were made. Not everything antisemites say is untrue, but that doesn’t make them less of a Jew Hater. You more than others should understand this nuance.

  28. Gingrich replied:

    Well, it depends on where exactly you define the boundaries. I do not oppose any development in the [Israeli occupied] areas, because I think that’s part of the negotiating process. To the degree that the Palestinians want to stop the developments they need to reach a deal in which they recognize the right of Israel to exist… As long as they are waging war on Israel, they are in no position to complain about developments. I think the whole peace process has been absurd and has created a psychologically almost impossible position for the average person because once you say there’s a peace process you wonder why the Israelis aren’t being more forthcoming. But if you say, look, we’re still in the middle of a war. They’re still trying to destroy the country — they’re still firing rockets, they still have terrorists coming in — then you all of a sudden understand what the real situation on the ground is, and in that setting, why would the Israelis slow down in maximizing their net bargaining advantage?

    Did anyone notice the “You” – “I” dichotomy? Gingrich is BLAMING THE ISRAELI JEWS TO THEIR FACE for the fix they are in — which, to a sensible person, means he is their friend; but to a Jew, it means he is an “Antisemite”.

    I don’t like Gingrich, and I don’t trust Gingrich (though I would probably vote for him in the general election); but if a literal jackass were saying the same things he is saying and I were a leader in Israel, I would pay attention. I haven’t seen anyone speaking so plainly for a long, long time.

    Then again, I’m not a Jew; I wasn’t born in Chelm.