Liberal writer Peter Beinart’s latest op-ed published in the New York Times Wednesday has sparked outrage among U.S. Jewish leaders for calling for the end of Israel.
Even before George Soros invested millions of dollars into the New York Times, the "gray lady" had long been a favorite Liberal hangout for people looking to bash the Jewish state of Israel. I bet you didn't know that someone could be both Jewish and anti-Semitic, did you? A lot of people are shocked to learn that George Soros, despite siding with the Nazis as a teenager in WWII, helping them to steal from local Jews and put them in concentration camps, is himself a Jew. Yep, Schwartz György is indeed a Jew.
"Let them all be confounded and turned back that hate Zion." Psalm 129:5 (KJB)
What is a Zionist? Well, if you say that you're born again and trust Jesus Christ as your Saviour, then you are a Zionist. Why? Because a Zionist is someone who believes that all of the land of Israel that God gave Abraham back in Genesis belongs to the Jews. The original land grant God gave Abraham is many times larger than present-day Israel. Take a look at the graphic below and see for yourself. When Jesus returns as King of Kings in Revelation 19, the bible says He will rule the world in perfect righteousness from Jerusalem in Israel for a thousand years. If you believe that, congratulations, you're a Zionist.
WHO’S OCCUPYING WHO? LET’S LOOK AT GOD’S ORIGINAL LAND GRANT OF THE NATION OF ISRAEL TO ABRAHAM
Peter Beinart might be a little surprised that the bible actually agrees with his article in a manner of speaking. That is to say that Israel will indeed be taken over during the "times of the gentiles", and will come under the sway of Antichrist. In fact, the armies of Antichrist will actually control Israel for 7 shorts years. Right up to the moment that Jesus comes and slaughters everyone who came against the Jews and Israel. If you don't get saved, Peter Beinart, you will be slaughtered with them. Write about that in your next New York Times op-ed.
The Anti-Semitic New York Times Publishes Peter Beinart Op-ed Calling for End of Israel With No Jewish State
FROM BREITBART NEWS: The opinion article, entitled “I No Longer Believe in a Jewish State,” calls for Israel to be replaced with a binational, unitary state called “Israel-Palestine.”
“Israel-Palestine can be a Jewish home that is also, equally, a Palestinian home,” writes Beinart in the July 8 piece.
The head of the American Jewish Committee compared Beinart’s remarks to those of late Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, who called for a similar “solution” to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a 2001 oped published by the Times.
“NYTimes’ op-eds calling for the end of Israel, the tiny sliver of land where Jews exercise sovereignty in their ancestral home: -Muammar Qaddafi, 1/21/09 –Peter Beinart, 7/8/20 Can anyone recall the NYTimes publishing opeds urging the end of any other nation (& UN member)? Hmm,” Harris wrote.
Former U.S. ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro derided Beinart’s plan as “utopian nonsense.”
“Calling for one state for Israelis and Palestinians is neither original, nor a remotely viable solution to this long-running conflict. It’s a disaster in the making for Israelis, the Jewish people, Palestinians, and US interests,” Shapiro wrote on Twitter.
His proposal means the elimination of the very purpose of Zionism: the sovereignty in their homeland that the Jewish people deserve and history proved and history proved repeatedly they suffered grievously without. It would be an immense historical tragedy….While one democratic state sounds superficially appealing to some American ears, the reality would be a highly impractical perpetuation of the conflict within one state, a society deeply riven, and nearly inevitably, far worse violence. The US would lose a key partner.
Author Daniel Gordis, who once hosted a podcast with Beinart, denounced Beinart’s ideas — both in the Times op-ed and the original essay published in the left-wing Jewish Currents — as “an astonishing array of sleights of hand and misrepresentations.”
He notes that fulfilling Beinart’s vision would render Jews a minority their homeland but “surrounded by hostile masses.” Columnist Ira Stoll points out Beinart’s assertion that Zionism is primarily a reaction to the Holocaust is false.
“Herzl’s Der Judenstaat was published in 1896, almost a half-century before the Holocaust. For thousands of years before that, Jews prayed for a restoration of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel,” Stoll writes in the Algemeiner.
Political analyst Tom Rogan similarly dismisses Beinart’s historical claims as erroneous.
Beinart writes: “When Catholics became equal political partners, the violence largely stopped. It’s the lesson of South Africa, where Nelson Mandela endorsed armed struggle until Blacks won the right to vote. History shows that when people gain their freedom, violence declines.”
Rogan counters:
This is not so.
History shows that violence declines when warring peoples embrace a mutually respected political enterprise. There are no indications that anything remotely like this could be possible in any sort of unitary Israeli-Palestinian state. Israelis support a democratic state bound to the secular rule of law. Many and perhaps most Palestinians (and certainly all of the ones in power) seek a state that subordinates democracy to an enshrined Sunni Islamist theological identity.
He adds a unitary state would be a “terribly painful mistake.”
Beinart on Thursday addressed some of the objections that have been raised since the article’s publication, beginning with concerns of another round of Palestinian violence. Beinart expressed his hope that the next movement to emerge would be nonviolent because a violent one “would make it easier for Israel to respond in brutal ways.”
No comments:
Post a Comment