Five Ft. Three

“A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both.” ― Milton Friedman

Standing with Israel

on August 17, 2011

I admit, I didn’t really get why Glenn Beck was doing his Restoring Courage event in Israel this summer, that is until I started seeing the criticism about it. I mean, what is wrong with someone standing up for Israel and saying it has a right to exist and the Jewish people there should be able to practice their religion and live in the land in which they belong?


16 responses to “Standing with Israel

  1. soapster says:

    Because that's not what Beck and the other neo-cons are talking about. What they are talking about is the U.S. giving them aid both militarily and monetarily.By "support" for Israel, they expect the U.S. to "take serious action" to prevent Iran from having a nuke.

  2. soapster says:

    This of course to suggest that Iran is even remotely capable of producing or acquirng the means necessary to have a nuke at all.

  3. BB-Idaho says:

    The practice of religion in Israelis less than perfect …There is opposition among someIsraelis to Christian mission andthe peculiar practice of permittingorthodox Jews release from serving in the military; a high percentage of the orthodox (the head bobbersat the wailing wall) are welfarerecipients as well. I'm not criticizing the country, just pointing out that they have problems like the rest of the world. Beck's choice for his courage thing was fine…they are a courageous people.

  4. Beth says:

    Seriously, Beck is just talking about their right to exist, you are making stuff up, Soapie.

  5. soapster says:

    Soapie doesn't make stuff up Beth.If I can track down the audio from Beck's radio show I'll post the link. But in short here's a synopsis:"On Friday, August 12, 2011 on his radio talk show, Beck berated Congressman Paul for daring to tell the truth about America’s foreign policy debacles. During the GOP presidential debate in Ames Iowa, Dr. Paul was asked what he would do if Iran developed nuclear weapons. He stuck to the libertarian principle of non-aggression and non-intervention and said he would pursue diplomatic discussions and free trade with Iran.When replaying Dr. Paul’s answer on his radio show, Beck lost it. He called Paul "dead wrong" to suggest that somehow the Congressman’s response would jeopardize American lives. Once again Beck proves he is an establishment, neo-conservative, war-mongering blowhard who believes every Muslim is out to kill Westerners and Americans in particular. Beck, who loves to encourage Americans to read and understand their history, appears to be ignorant of the history of American covert and overt military and political intervention in Iran."More of this article here:

  6. Beth says:

    That is one person's interpretation. I am surprised at you, Soapie, I actually listen to Glenn Beck's show, I don't rely on other people's assessments (you are very much like Shaw in that respect). I suggest you only criticize from your own impressions of being a regular listener.

  7. soapster says:

    I heard it straight from Glenn's mouth. He is of the class that thinks that America must use military to force to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon (even though our own CIA says they're nowhere close to obtaining one) and even though Israel has around 400 and countless other countries have them.Why don't you address that?

  8. Beth says:

    I have never heard him say that.

  9. soapster says:

    And here I thought you were an avid listener. Go back and listen to the pod cast. Glenn's words were not taken out of context in the article from Lew Rockwell that I posted.As much as Glenn and many others like to pay lip service to the founding fathers and the Constitution, they've got a thing or two to learn about non-intervention; friendships with all nations, entangling alliances with none.

  10. Z says:

    soapster, you might want to read some of Kenneth Tillerman, though it's eerie that Google doesn't show much. That actually scared me as he's been so prolific on the fact that Iran does have every chance of having deployable nukes very soon. As far as Beck and Israel is concerned; some things go beyond money. I imagine he'd be better off raising private money from Jews and Christians in America and Israel deserves every penny of it.That's our one ally in that area, no matter HOW much that takes by our paying them in respect or money (or we were, until Obama stepped in and that whole Israel thing detracts from his Muslim love).I believe America, too, would expect a world power to make sure a neighboring country didn't nuke us, an ally. (especially a country like Iran)..and it could come to that the way Obama's running our 'world power'ness into the ground/

  11. soapster says:

    After Rafid Ahmed al-Janabi's pack of lies you'd think people would be a little more wise to Timmerman's (and John Bolton's for the matter) propaganda.Let Israel and the neighboring countries deal with any potentiality regarding Iran and the acquisition of nukes.They're not a threat to the United States. Of course if you ask the most religious evangelicals within the political circles (Santorum, Huckabee) they'll tell you otherwise. I don't suppose they've their own religious motivations hmmm….?

  12. soapster says:

    I should have mentioned you said Tillerman. I'm not familiar with Kenneth Tillerman. I am however familiar with Kenneth Timmerman. He and Bolton are two peas in a pod.

  13. Beth says:

    Non-intervention is a pipe dream, how do we have a global economy but ignore other countries when there is conflict? You cannot have your cake and eat it, too. And leaving other countries alone doesn't make the troubles go away from the USA.

  14. Beth says:

    I should add to Soapie that none of the events in Israel going on this week with Glenn Beck's appearances there have said anything about military help from the US to Israel, so that is not what his Stand with Israel is all about.

  15. soapster says:

    Who's having their cake and eating it too?Seems to me we've a whole lot of folks such as yourself paying lip service to the Constitution and our founding fathers and getting spending under control while at the same time advocating for the continuation of our intervention abroad.I could get into a lengthy rebuttal discussing the history and perils of mercantilism as well as the history of free trade and the like but I've neither the time nor the inclination. The information is all there for anyone who wants to take the time to learn about it.As for Glenn's event, I know what it's all about. I've been following reports. I don't expect him to come flat out and state it as I presented it. However, I don't know how else you can really interpret his opinion that Ron Paul is "dead wrong" with respect to his non-aggression stance towards Iran.Interestingly enough, it was just the 58th anniversary of Operation Ajax and if one knows their history, as Glenn is apt to advise them, one would know full well the consequences of such intervention.

Thanks for joining in on the discussion!

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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