Posted on 12/10/2011 11:44:01 AM PST by Amerisrael
Newt Gingrich supports the creation of yet another Arab Muslim state in the ME.
And in the very heart of Israel's own land.
No thanks Newt.
Newt Gingrich, like all the other candidates, has been fearcely engaging in the "Israel talk", in an effort to woo voters, among whom support for Israel is of paramount importance.
During an interview Gingrich had it 100% correct when he described the so-called Palestinians as an "... invented people", who are in fact Arabs.
But then afterwards his campaign stated that Gingrich still supports the establishment of a "Palestinian" state:
["Newt Gingrich declared in an interview that Palestinians are an "invented" people, though his campaign afterward claimed the candidate still supports the establishment of a Palestinian state. "
--read the rest here.
You lose Newt. And so do any of the other GOP candidates who share that view.
In the general election this blogger will not be voting based on "better than Obama", but rather on whether the GOP nominee adequately reflects this blogger's views on the important issues. And foreign policy is one of those very important issues because it is key to dealing with the threats and dangers to the U.S.
None of the GOP candidates to date have indicated that they understand that the Islamist demand for a "Palestinian" state in the heart of Judea and Samaria is part and parcel of imperialistic Islam's agenda to Islamacize and subject the non-Muslim [house of war] world to the Islamic [house of Islam] world:
["The Koran sees the world as divided into two - one part which has come under Islamic rule and one part which is supposed to come under Islamic rule in the future. There is a division of the world which is very clear. Every single person who starts studying Islam knows it. The world is described as Dar al-Islam (the house of Islam) - that's the place where Islam rules - and the other part which is called Dar al-Harb - the house of war. Not the "house of non-Muslims," but the "house of war." It is this house of war which as to be, at the end of time, conquered. The world will continue to be in the house of war until it comes under Islamic rule. This is the norm. Why? Because Allah says it's so in the Koran. God has sent Mohammed with the true religion in order that the truth will overcome all other religions."]
This is a "global conflict" with a dangerous imperialist Islamic ideology. Not an isolated "regional conflict".
It is not an "Arab/Israeli" conflict. It ia an Islamic/free world conflict.
This same fight is taking place in different geographical theators around the world:
The Islamic attempt to take over the southern Philippines and impose a "Bangsamoro" [Muslim state] .
The carving up of Sebia to impose additional Islamic states [such as the wrenching away of Kosovo].
Kashmir.
The taking advantage of irresponsible immigration policies to further advance Islamization in Europe.
Not to mention how the Islamists are using democracy as a "means" to political power in Africa and the ME.
Towards the furthering of their quest to re-establish the caliphate.
At the Republican Jewish coalition's presidential debate Michelle Bachmann's response to the question of a "Palestinian" state was the best.
A message to all presidential candidates, if you--
support the establishment of a Palestinian state, -"forget about it"
“I will wait and see who comes out on top on this. Then I will get behind the nominee and back him/her as much as I can.”
Even though the one who comes out on top may not be a true conservative or adequately represent your views on the issues?
That’s exactly what the GOP establishment wants you to do. Support their rinos.
Sounds to me you don’t vote according to strong conviction on the issues, but rather who is “just better”.
Newt is better than Obama on some things, but since his campaign responded that he still supports the creation of an Islamist state in the heart of Israel, on that matter he is no different than Obama!
Shows that you are a marxist. Have fun voting for Obama.
People like you havent a friggan clue at all. You’d simply be happy, like Glen Beck, to go down in flames without a fighting chance. Then, you all have the gall to claim you all supported Reagan, which you never did, except by claiming. Reagan would STRONGLY support the candidate, as he did with GHW Bush whom he had severe differences with even while he was in the White House. Yet Reagan would get behind the candidate that was in his party even if he did NOT like it.
Time you back biters got the hell out and started your own little ditty. Then you can whine, bitch and moan when the Leninist gets re-elected and starts to really rip the freedoms from your little fingers.
Newt is “it” until he is not.
“Time you back biters got the hell out and started your own little ditty.”
Time you rinos got the hell out.
I used to think Obama would be a one-term guy, but I'm starting to change my mind. I just know too many democrats, and I've gotten into arguments with them. It's impossible to talk to them. My brother-in-law thinks obamacare is a RIGHT.
There is nothing “right” about Obama OR his policies. He is the worst thing that has EVER happened to America.
And the really scary part is....
it ain’t over yet.
There is nothing “right” about Obama OR his policies. He is the worst thing that has EVER happened to America.
And the really scary part is....
it ain’t over yet.
If we are blessed to win in November, I think he will try to do a lot of damage between that time and inauguration.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.