Caroline Glick was white hot in her attack on Europe.

By Ted Belman

The first afternoon panel at the JPOST Conference consisted of ambassadors from Italy, Denmark and Germany together with the Israeli Ambassador to the EU and last but not least Caroline Glick. It dealt with European/Israel relationship.

It started slow but ended white hot. The Danish Ambassador put his foot in it when he said that Israel should welcome the application of a double standard toward Israel. Caroline Glick tore him apart accusing Europe of antisemitism “since the time of Jesus” and hypocrisy. Glick said Europe has “obsessive, compulsive need to pick at Jewish state.” She really let loose and electrified the panel and the audience. You must watch it. The German Ambassador was undiplomatic . He attacked Europe and supported Israel in so many ways. His remarks must also viewed.

Europe believes in the two state solution. If only they had left it at that. But they define it by saying it must be based on ’67 lines plus swaps. So I must ask, why must that be the agreed borders? Why didn’t they leave the borders to be negotiated. If they did then they wouldn’t have the need to attack the settlements, most of which will be on the Israel side of any border agreed. Why do they consider settlements to be “obstacles to peace” and keep stressing it but at the same time they never say that the Arab “resistance” or intransigence or unwillingness to sign an end of conflict agreement, or demanding the “right” of return, are obstacles to peace. Why?

Obama has done irreparable harm by supporting such borders rather than leaving them to be negotiated.

US Amb Dan Shaprio talked afterwards. He said emphatically that US would not allow Iran to become a nuclear state. but was silent on allowing Iran to become a threshold nuclear state. He stressed that Iran hasn’t been willing to compromise. He never says the same about the PA.

December 11, 2014 | 4 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

4 Comments / 4 Comments

  1. “More cool in her delivery”?? What the hell does that mean? Her passion while articulating her illuminant rebuttal is remarkable simply because of its absence in so many other politicians and journalists who should be making the same rebuttals in defence of Israel and the Jewish people. Are you implying she could have/should have done better?

  2. “US Amb Dan Shaprio talked afterwards. He said emphatically that US would not allow Iran to become a nuclear state.”
    It is HIS job to believe Obama.
    The US is not to be trusted. For two reasons:
    1) the judgement of the intelligence community cannot be trusted – The “GREAT FRIEND OF ISRAEL”, President LB Johnson, did NOT act upon the commitment made by Eisenhower to assure free passage in the Suez Canal and Tiran straights.
    Believing Obama is NOT Netanyahu’s job.
    Netanyahu’s job is to keep Israel safe.