I knew it! I knew the media and commentary would find a way to dismiss the accomplishment or minimize it. La Times and NY Times didn't even show it or buried it. Media has become such a disservice to us. And I've always thought the Nobel Peace prize that was given to Obama should have been given to the American people who elected him. They created the peace to elect a black President.
As an American who visited who visited Israel earlier this year, I can attest that this peace deal is indeed very good news.
Our embassy in Jerusalem and these two or three treaty inititatives represent the best work of the Trump administration.
What's unfortunate about our President is that he refuses to address all Americans; instead, he directs all of his favor, work and constructive comment toward the loyalist base that propelled him, on an electoral college fluke, into the white house. This refusal to communicate constructively with all Americans will cost him his job, when our Constitutionally-mandated leadership-selection process renders a decision to Mr. Trump to whit: "You're Fired!"
Then the orthodox Jews who so ardently favor Trump, in whose apartment we stayed while in Israel earlier this year--they will once again be up the Jordan without a paddle, unless they are willing to renew relations with the party of Harry Truman, whose bold advocacy in the 1947-49 days was a major factor in the rebirth of the nation of Israel.
Long live Israel, and the United States of America! And thanks to the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain for working with us, and with our friends in Israel.
Thank you for the personal history lesson. I wish some of these millennials would at least read some material like this (from the other side). Or better yet actually go visit one of these countries. They would not only get a different point of view but see how good we have it in the United States. Of course some of us Hippies need to read some of their writings so we can understand why they feel like they do.
I think even You understate the accomplishment. You said Trump deserves “some credit” at least twice in the article. I believe his overall foreign policy that caused this to happen deserves ALOT of credit!
Another great article Erick. Trump's pushing the “Fake News Diatribe” is not 100% accurate due to his undeniable sense of exaggeration. But Trump’s style seems to be deliberate exaggerations that focus a spotlight on a political discussion he wants to have: i.e., in the case pf “Fake News”. that many media organization are more like partisan megaphones that deliberately minimize or distort news stories than they are like unbiased news sources that providing honest news reporting to their audiences. Whether the media does this because of a profit motivation or because of a political bias, an honest person would have a hard time denying that there seems to be a deliberate pattern of distorted news. I don’t think this is a new effect for our country. From what I can tell from history, nearly every major city had competing newspapers that spun news in a fashion that pleased their segment of the political audience. What is somewhat new is that the phenomena of competing local papers has recently become nationalized with modern technology, with the WP, NYT, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS on one side and Talk Radio and conservative websites on the other.
In a way, Trump’s exaggerations are analogous to the other side of the coin, as represented by article the Atlantic’s story on Trump’s alleged derogatory comments about soldiers. There have been so many people who were present at the event in question that have gone on record to deny the Atlantic’s story that the credibility of the four anonymous sources has been pretty been completely eroded. In truth, anonymous sources should never be given much credibility as they are not part of the Biblical standard of justice, as all Biblical witnesses faced severe punishment if they were found to give false testimony (Deuteronomy 19:18-19): “The judges must make a thorough investigation, and if the witness proves to be a liar, giving false testimony against a fellow Israelite, then do to the false witness as that witness intended to do to the other party.” But it seems to me that the Atlantic seems not to care because their story achieved two of its main goals: 1. It reached people who hate Trump and have no desire to research distorted and/or negative comments made about him. 2. It’s secondary intention was to amplify a true story: i.e., that there are military personnel (like Generals Kelly and Mattis) who disagree with Trump (and other generals) about his military strategies.
Amazing news!
I knew it! I knew the media and commentary would find a way to dismiss the accomplishment or minimize it. La Times and NY Times didn't even show it or buried it. Media has become such a disservice to us. And I've always thought the Nobel Peace prize that was given to Obama should have been given to the American people who elected him. They created the peace to elect a black President.
As an American who visited who visited Israel earlier this year, I can attest that this peace deal is indeed very good news.
Our embassy in Jerusalem and these two or three treaty inititatives represent the best work of the Trump administration.
What's unfortunate about our President is that he refuses to address all Americans; instead, he directs all of his favor, work and constructive comment toward the loyalist base that propelled him, on an electoral college fluke, into the white house. This refusal to communicate constructively with all Americans will cost him his job, when our Constitutionally-mandated leadership-selection process renders a decision to Mr. Trump to whit: "You're Fired!"
Then the orthodox Jews who so ardently favor Trump, in whose apartment we stayed while in Israel earlier this year--they will once again be up the Jordan without a paddle, unless they are willing to renew relations with the party of Harry Truman, whose bold advocacy in the 1947-49 days was a major factor in the rebirth of the nation of Israel.
Long live Israel, and the United States of America! And thanks to the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain for working with us, and with our friends in Israel.
Thank you for shining light on the truth of this situation.
Thank you for the personal history lesson. I wish some of these millennials would at least read some material like this (from the other side). Or better yet actually go visit one of these countries. They would not only get a different point of view but see how good we have it in the United States. Of course some of us Hippies need to read some of their writings so we can understand why they feel like they do.
Their ignorance, their loss.
I think even You understate the accomplishment. You said Trump deserves “some credit” at least twice in the article. I believe his overall foreign policy that caused this to happen deserves ALOT of credit!
Another great article Erick. Trump's pushing the “Fake News Diatribe” is not 100% accurate due to his undeniable sense of exaggeration. But Trump’s style seems to be deliberate exaggerations that focus a spotlight on a political discussion he wants to have: i.e., in the case pf “Fake News”. that many media organization are more like partisan megaphones that deliberately minimize or distort news stories than they are like unbiased news sources that providing honest news reporting to their audiences. Whether the media does this because of a profit motivation or because of a political bias, an honest person would have a hard time denying that there seems to be a deliberate pattern of distorted news. I don’t think this is a new effect for our country. From what I can tell from history, nearly every major city had competing newspapers that spun news in a fashion that pleased their segment of the political audience. What is somewhat new is that the phenomena of competing local papers has recently become nationalized with modern technology, with the WP, NYT, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS on one side and Talk Radio and conservative websites on the other.
In a way, Trump’s exaggerations are analogous to the other side of the coin, as represented by article the Atlantic’s story on Trump’s alleged derogatory comments about soldiers. There have been so many people who were present at the event in question that have gone on record to deny the Atlantic’s story that the credibility of the four anonymous sources has been pretty been completely eroded. In truth, anonymous sources should never be given much credibility as they are not part of the Biblical standard of justice, as all Biblical witnesses faced severe punishment if they were found to give false testimony (Deuteronomy 19:18-19): “The judges must make a thorough investigation, and if the witness proves to be a liar, giving false testimony against a fellow Israelite, then do to the false witness as that witness intended to do to the other party.” But it seems to me that the Atlantic seems not to care because their story achieved two of its main goals: 1. It reached people who hate Trump and have no desire to research distorted and/or negative comments made about him. 2. It’s secondary intention was to amplify a true story: i.e., that there are military personnel (like Generals Kelly and Mattis) who disagree with Trump (and other generals) about his military strategies.