Evangelicals aren’t the only ones who are down with Israel at war

When you have $22 billion, giving ten million to a guy to publicly advocate for the cause of your lifetime is cheap, especially if he salutes and does it. Sheldon Adelson got his money’s worth with Newt.

In December, Gingrich proclaimed the Palestinians “an invented people.” Israel’s Haaretz daily reported later that month that Adelson approved of the remarks. And Gingrich has said that one of the first executive orders he would sign if elected president would move the American Embassy to Jerusalem.

That embassy pledge isn’t new in American politics. But Gingrich also said that Isreal’s official capital, Jerusalem, must be defended as such. I’m not certain what that means, but I’ll guess that it’s a call to reject sharing the city, a negotiating point in all peace talks. He simply dismisses the fact that Jerusalem is central and foundational and sacred to all three Abrahmic relligions. (Fine from a private citizen, but reckless from a public politician running for Presdient.)

Adelson is an ardent Zionist who advocates for the U.S. to adopt the most hard line policies on Israel, stuff even Netanyahu rejects – the kinds of positions opposed by large numbers of Israelis, perhaps even a majority. Positions that ignore danger, shut down negotiatios and invite war.

At least, he doesn’t pretend. He puts his money where his mouthpiece is. And there’s plenty more where that ten million came from.

13 responses to “Evangelicals aren’t the only ones who are down with Israel at war

  1. In the same way certain dog whistles are sprinkled in his speeches for the cross-burning portion of “the Base,” we should expect to hear the apocalyptic dog whistles aimed at the End-Times portion (that is, the other 50%) of “the Base.” If you know your fundagelicals, you recognize that crazy drug-fueled prophecy is the context of supposed support for Israel. That is to say, Israel must rise prior to the End-Times (but only long enough to get an old-fashioned smiting from Jeebus).

    I just thought of this, but isn’t “Al Qaeda” Arabic for “the base?”


    • When these Christianist end-timers talk about the Rapture or the Apocylyse, they exhibit the same joy and anticipation as Islamists thinking of the joy of martyrdom and those 72 virgins.


  2. And the money from the Christian Right Zionists flowing into the cause is quite high.


    • The most ironic part of the bizarre political partnership between Zionists and those end-timers is that the way the Christians see it, the Jews will have to convert or be cast into damnation.


  3. Well, the “Palestinians” are an invented people for the most part in that most of those who are called Palestinians are just Arabs, tribal groups unwanted in their home ranges, who were convinced by governments of Arab nations to attack Israel as it was founded or their descendents.

    In fact, those in Israel are far outnumbered by those who’ve been in hellish refugee camps in surrounding Muslim nations for the last 60+ years, yet we never hear about the Left complaining about their treatment at the paws of their fellow Muslims.

    But…I find myself in agreement that Jerusalem can’t be an Israeli city. Frankly, that city is one of the few uses I can find for the UN. I think Jerusalem should be declared a “World City” and put under the jurisdiction of the UN with security forces entrenched to ensure its safety and stability.


    • Of course jonolan, before there was an Israel it was called Palestine. Many countries in that region, (Iran noticably excepted) are tribal confederations living within borders drawn by other countries after WWI. One of the reasons it’s impossible to govern Afghanistan. Most Afghanis don’t feel they;re a part of a country. They’re Pashtuns or Tajiks or whatever.

      That said, I think you’re right about Jerusalem – some kind of mandate subject to the governance of neither side. Good solution. Keep it open for all three religions, but give none of them jurisdiction.


      • You’re missing my point, Moe. The group currently called “Palestinians” do not have their roots in the region of Palestine – beyond the fact that some of them and their ancestors moved through the region seasonally or as part of a multi-year migration cycle. They are an invented people.

        As for the rest of your statement – HUZZAH! Someone who hasn’t traveled or lived in the region actually gets it! My faith in humanity is greatly damaged but my hope slightly restored.


        • I love that word, that exclamation, HUZZAH! 🙂 I really love it.

          Re Palestinians, I think we’re splitting hairs. They mostly lived in “Transjordan’ which included todays Palestinian territory and claimed lots of Palestine. But after ’48, Jordan pulled itself back to the present borders and basically left the Palestinians out there to dry. They had a traditional land in which they still lived, but they didn’t have a country.


          • It’s not really splitting hairs, Moe, when we’re discussing what percentage of the “Palestinians” were previously actual residents of what is now once again Israel and who would therefor have some proper claim to the land versus the generalized “Transjordanian” Arab population who the surrounding Arab states threw – unwanted people make such good cannon-fodder – at Israel in 1948 and, to some lesser extent, in 1967.

            Insofar as Gingrich’s statement is concerned, that is the crux of the matter.


          • I am not advocating for Palestians to be allowed to reclaim Israel or opining on which individuals have a claim – many individuals do have credible claims to actual plots of land – Israel is a state and gets to make its own rules. (I advocate a two state solution as if anyone listens to me.)

            But I don’t think Gingrich was commenting about Israel itself it was about Jerusalem and I think Gingrich was being carelessly provacative. Sure he was playing to his audience – duh! – but other people hear what he says and in many parts of the world people think when someone that politically visible speaks, he speaks for the U.S. (Somehting all our pols ought to remember)

            I’m not acutally disuputing what you say about many Arabs seeing the Palestinians as a convenient buffer – probably why Jordan pulled in its borders – after they let all the rich Palestinians to the other side of course.


  4. “but they didn’t have a country”. It only took a couple a thousand years for the Jews to get Israel…what’s the rush.


  5. You’re certainly right about Adelson’s having “plenty more where that came from.” If I heard correctly, he has 21 BILLION.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s