Tag Archives: Zionist

You’ll have to forgive me Mr. President. I’m a Jew and I’ve been hurt before

nintchdbpict000302095318-e1487202625524

I know as a Jew and a Zionist I am supposed to feel all warm and fuzzy today.  After all the President of the United States did greet the Israeli Prime Minister with great respect and they expressed their long lasting friendship.  To make it even better, President Trump went as far as saying that he would move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem.  That’s never been said before. Oh wait. It has been said before. By just about everyone else to run or step into the office since at least the mid 90s.  So although I appreciate the nice words, right now they are nothing more than that, and as a Jew I am yet to be convinced.

For example, outgoing President Barack Obama, a disappointment to so much of the Jewish community started off by making the following comments.

“Let me be clear,“Israel’s security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable. … Any agreement with the Palestinian people must preserve Israel’s identity as a Jewish state with secure, recognized, defensible borders.”

“Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided.”

Go back to recently defeated candidate Hillary Clinton who wrote the following in a letter, dated July 2, 1999 to Dr. Mandell Ganchrow of the Orthodox Union in New York.

“If I am chosen by New Yorkers to be their senator, or in whatever position I find myself in the years to come, you can be sure that I will be an active, committed advocate for a strong and secure Israel, able to live in peace with its neighbors, with the United States Embassy located in its capital, Jerusalem.”

Her husband, former President Bill Clinton declared in February 1992, at the height of the Democratic primaries, that he supported recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, a step that would alter U.S. policy, but never signed the 1995 congressional mandate to move the embassy.

Senator John McCain pledged to move the U.S. embassy in Israel “right away” from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem as did Senator Robert Dole and George W. Bush who actually did become president.  Candidate Bush made the pledge to move the embassy on his first day in office. Once in office he said he went from doing it on the first day to saying he would begin the process on his first day.  Instead he signed a waiver every 6 months delaying the same 1995 congressional mandate and in the end never did it.

Enter President Donald J. Trump.  Yes he has said some very nice things. He too promised to move the embassy to Jerusalem.  But now he is looking into it. He promised to rip of the Iran deal on his first day.  We must have missed it. And he publicly stated the following at a press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

“I would like you to hold back on settlements for a little bit.”

Donald Trump may end up being the best friend Israel ever had in the Oval Office.  I certainly hope so.  But forgive me if I’m not ready to throw a party yet. I’ve heard this song before.

 

LIKE THIS POST? SHARE IT ON FACEBOOK OR TWITTER

HOW TO BUY THE BOOK

READ MORE OF WHAT I HAVE TO SAY IN THE COMMON SENSE LIBERAL

JOIN “THE GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL” ON FACEBOOK

GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL IS NOW ON TWITTER @gcimovement

IN CONJUNCTION WITH GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL

 

 

Advertisements

When Muslims save Jews

israelfootballassociati-1

An interesting thing happened today.  A predominantly Muslim country potentially saved the lives of many Jews.  Israelis no less.  Yes, you read that correctly.  Kosovo police thwarted an attack on Israel’s international soccer team reportedly planned by members of ISIS from Syria. This turn of events, one that causes a collective sigh of relief and for those who believe in a higher power a show of thanks to God up above, also has very relevant and majorly important significance in a country not directly involved.  That country being our very own United States of America.

Over the years I’ve been anything but moderate in my approach towards Islamic extremism.  I have no problem recognizing the danger of the aggressive and violent approach taken by too many elements in the Muslim world.  I have zero tolerance for those who are murderers in the name of a so-called cause and I recognize the vicious hatred and venom towards Israel from much of the leadership in the Muslim world. That being said, I also not only recognize, but believe wholeheartedly that the greatest majority of Muslims, regardless of how they actually feel toward Israel and the west, do not want any part in violence towards anyone and just want to live a peaceful and productive life.  In fact, I would go as far as saying that what took place in Kosovo is evidence to that fact.

Since the election of Donald Trump as President-elect of the United States, the status of Muslims in America has been very much in the forefront.  I get it. I honestly do.  I have often said that although most Muslims are not terrorists, the majority of terrorist attacks are conducted by Muslims.  The safety of innocent people is a major responsibility of any government and actions need to be taken to see to it that all that needs to get done does get done.  However, an attack on an entire people or religion is not only immoral and reminiscent of tyranny from the past, it’s a bad strategy.  The events in Kosovo bare this out.  In the name of fairness and objectivity, when you listen carefully to Donald Trump’s words and proposals, he never goes after all Muslims.  What he does however is target the problem as being a Muslim problem, which if done correctly and with a degree of tact would possibly have tremendously positive effects, but when done with mere soundbites causes a large percentage of people to see the entire Muslim world as a threat.

I don’t make a habit of defending Muslims.  As a Jew and a Zionist I’ve had plenty of justified anger towards many Muslims over my lifetime.  However, I also don’t believe in going after one group of people merely because of what they are, and if only from a pragmatic sense, it’s stupid.  Setting aside the fact that I personally base who I like and who I call a friend on how they are personally, if the entire Muslim world gets alienated, even if it’s a result of interpretation of Trump’s words as opposed to their actual meaning, the rest of us are indeed not better off or safer as a result.  My fellow Jews who think otherwise need look no further than Kosovo, where a police force of a population mostly consistent of Muslims did the right thing and stopped a potential massacre of Israeli soccer players.

There is a middle of the road, and throughout history that middle has always achieved the best results, not an extreme ideology in any one direction.  There is indeed safety in numbers, and if there are large numbers of Muslims who want to live in peace, a fact that any reasonable individual knows to be the case, then working with them will get us a lot further than alienating them.  The argument that “Trump didn’t say that”, isn’t enough anymore. As President-Elect he has a responsibility to how his followers interpret his words, and if he does not recognize that, even if his intentions are good, the damage caused will result in him failing tragically, for everyone, including those that support him.

LIKE THIS POST? SHARE IT ON FACEBOOK OR TWITTER

HOW TO BUY THE BOOK

READ MORE OF WHAT I HAVE TO SAY IN THE DAILY COLUMN

JOIN “THE GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL” ON FACEBOOK

GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL IS NOW ON TWITTER @gcimovement

IN CONJUNCTION WITH GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL

 


Open Letter to President of Virginia State Bar regarding cancellation of trip to Israel

 

Virginia-State-Bar-Mid-Year-Legal-Seminar-Website-original-w-border-e1427570476766-620x432

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Mr. Martingayle,

Let me start by putting you on notice.  My actions regarding this perversion of ethics will not be limited to this letter.  I intend to take every action necessary to lobby as many people as possible behind the process challenging the Virginia State Bar’s cancellation of its trip to Israel.

I wish to start however by challenging the very ambiguous wording in your statement regarding this matter. You made the following statement. CLICK HERE TO READ HIS STATEMENT

It was stated that there are some unacceptable discriminatory policies and practices pertaining to border security that affect travelers to the nation.

What practices are you referring to exactly?  Are any of these “practices” as you call them recently implemented?  I suppose they must be seeing that I  am certain you would not have made a decision to travel to Israel originally if they were in place at the time. When you say discriminatory do you mean these policies are targeting specific people merely because of what they are or, seeing that you do use the term border security, would these policies indeed be responsible as opposed to discriminatory?  You also say these policies affect travelers to the nation.  Could you please clarify what impact any of these policies would have on any member of the Virginia Bar Association?  Muslims belong to the Israeli Knesset, so I am certain the Muslim members of the Virginia State Bar would not have to be concerned with having their movements restricted.

You went on to say the following:

Upon review of U.S. State Department advisories and other research, and after consultation with our leaders, it has been determined that there is enough legitimate concern to warrant cancellation of the Israeli trip and exploration of alternative locations.

The strain in the relationship between the United States and Israel is well documented, but that didn’t stop me from checking further into your claim.  I know I’m not as smart as you are, after all you are the President of the Virginia State Bar and I’m just some dumb Zionist with a big mouth, but I usually am pretty good at finding information on websites.  I looked on the State Department website and could not find anything resembling these advisories you are referring to in your statement.  Maybe you found them in the same location you found your “other research.”  I’m also curious as to which leaders you are referring to in the statement.  Leaders within the State Bar?  Community leaders? Political leaders? I am not a resident of Virginia but I do believe if you are going to make a statement such as that one, people have a right to know.

The final quote I wish to address is this one:

Undoubtedly, this news will disappoint some VSB members.  But we are a state agency that strives for maximum inclusion and equality, and that explains this action.

I read your subsequent statement clarifying that this is not an anti-Semitic action, and assuming you believe what you are saying I will make the following observation.  Although I have no way of backing up this statement with facts, and unlike some who are far more intelligent than myself I always feel the need to do so, I would guess that the majority of those disappointed by this news are indeed Jewish.  Clearly their needs and desires don’t carry the same weight of the other members the Bar Association is bending over backwards to appease. I speak of the nameless 37 that many claim coerced the State Bar into this decision. If you truly are, as you claim to be a state agency that strives for maximum inclusion and equality, I have two questions for you.  Would this inclusion include giving in to the political demands of a group of people whether their demands were justified or not?  And how does turning your back on the only democracy in the Middle East help to increase this maximum equality you claim is so important?

I am sure when you made this statement you expected controversy, but I am not sure you expected to be challenged on the specifics. For all I know the position of President of the Virginia State Bar is a more ceremonious position and you don’t so much make policy as much as you represent the policy once it is implemented. Maybe you are just following orders.  Of course we all know what happens when people take that approach, and it is nothing resembling “maximum inclusion and equality”.

This action on the part of the Virginia State Bar is without any merit whatsoever and establishes a precedent damaging to the country’s entire legal system.  To take this extreme action against an important ally, and to insult an important segment of the legal community without clear explanation damages the credibility of an organization that is nothing if it is not credible.  I hope you see that, and then I hope you respond, but frankly every element and carefully worded nuance of your statement tells me that you won’t. But with the help of many more who feel as I do, this will not go away.  I care too much about America’s legal system to allow that to happen.

Sincerely,

David Groen

Global Coalition for Israel

 

LIKE THIS POST? SHARE IT ON FACEBOOK OR TWITTER

HOW TO BUY THE BOOK

CLICK TO JOIN “THE GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL” ON FACEBOOK

GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL IS NOW ON TWITTER @gcimovement

IN CONJUNCTION WITH GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL

 

 


Open Letter to the Editorial Board of the NY Times regarding article about Israeli Elections

israel-election_1-e1426664737956

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Editorial Board,

The first 3 words of this letter already tells so much of the story.  To be forced to start a letter “Dear Editorial Board” makes you wonder why no individual had the intestinal fortitude to use his or her name when going on the attack as they did against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu one day after his election victory.  For those of you reading on this self-perceived holier than thou and smarter than the rest of us board, here is how criticism is given when you are not afraid to stand by your convictions.

My name is David Groen.  I am a proud American, a proud Jew, and proud Zionist. I am also an ardent supporter of Benjamin Netanyahu who found your editorial titled “An Israeli Election turns ugly” to be not only offensive, but skewed to suit your political agenda and a contradiction to the factors that make democracy great.

CLICK HERE TO READ NY TIMES ARTICLE

Israel is not only a great democracy, it is the only real democracy in the Middle East.  You speak of Benjamin Netanyahu as though he is some fascist dictator on the rise.  This is a man who leads a nation constantly under attack from terrorist organizations and threats from rogue nations such as Iran calling for its annihilation.  Yet somehow you have a problem with Netanyahu trying to defeat the Arab vote knowing full well that their agenda would be to go against his political strategy of how to keep Israel safe and secure.  I’m not debating whether or not his strategy is right or wrong because this letter is not so much to debate his tactics, it is to debate yours.

There is no evidence that voters were harassed, be they left-wing Jews or Arabs, and no reason to believe this was an election ripe with any significant corruption. What it was instead was an example of an ambitious politician using democracy to his advantage.  It is almost comical to me that the NY Times, that great defender of freedom and civil rights would have a problem with democracy functioning on a prime level.  No one forced anyone to vote for Prime Minister Netanyahu.  The Arab population had a big vote in the election.  Their representative party has seats in the Knesset.  They have a say and a role in the Israeli political system.  How many Arab nations have Jewish representation?  None.  Because in most Arab nations the Jews were run out of town.  If “you” don’t like Benjamin Netanyahu that’s fine.  Just don’t attack him for utilizing his country’s democratic structure.

Which bring me back again to that question.  Who is the “you” in all this? Who am I actually writing to? The entire Editorial Board is in agreement on this issue?  How about signing all of your names to it so we know how many of you there are and know you are all in agreement.  Not because I believe there should be anything heinous done to you, but because if you are to criticize someone who speaks to the people just because you are upset he got what he wanted, don’t you think you should at least let everyone know who you are when you criticize him?  To hide behind the title “Editorial Board” is a level of hypocrisy that totally destroys any credibility you have left.  Whoever “you” actually are.

What Benjamin Netanyahu did this election was nothing different from what any other politician would do in any democracy.  He did what he felt he had to do to win.  Creating this perception that his words were racist attacks on the Arab population of Israel is either irresponsible on “your” part, or even worse, an attempt at manipulating the minds of your audience.  But here is the difference between “you” and me.  I accept your right to do this in a democratic society with free speech, and when I don’t like “your” methods, I sign my name to my criticism.

Sincerely,

David Groen

 

LIKE THIS POST? SHARE IT ON FACEBOOK OR TWITTER

HOW TO BUY THE BOOK

CLICK TO JOIN “THE GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL” ON FACEBOOK

 


Open Letter to Mehdi Hassan in response to his letter to “Free Speech Fundamentalists” in the Huffington Post

mehdi

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Mehdi,

I am not Islamophobic.  I am also not a liberal pundit.  I am however a Jewish American Zionist who is opposed to any extremism that leads to violence against innocents.  Although I know you are not Jewish and would guess there is a better than fair chance that you are not a Zionist,  if I am to take you on your word in this letter, you are opposed to extremist violence against innocents. However, unfortunately like too many other decent Muslims, I believe you are missing a crucial point in your argument.  The concerns you have revolve around circumstances created by fellow Muslims, not the liberal hypocrites you feel the need to attack in your letter.

CLICK HERE TO READ MEHDI HASSAN’S LETTER

I think there are those who are standing up and screaming for free speech that are indeed hypocrites.  I do not however feel that they are the problem, nor do I believe that you are utilizing your time in the best manner possible by using this moment to expose their flaws.  This letter you wrote is the first thing I have ever seen written by you.  I do not know how much time you have spent on the more critical aspects of the global crisis we find ourselves in today.  I accept and appreciate how devastated you were personally by the awful acts of terrorism in Paris.  It is for this reason that I write to you with a degree of respect.  However, I believe it is critical for you to understand Mehdi, that the entire narrative is generated by the vicious behavior of more than a few Muslims.  And what I hope you realize, is that my making that statement does not make me Islamophobic.  I would be happy to meet you, shake your hand, have a drink or lunch and have a nice conversation.  I would look at it no differently than getting together with anyone else for the first time.  You being a Muslim does not make me see you automatically as a threat  or a problem.  That would make me Islamophobic.  Being honest about the reality of our world today, albeit harsh, does not.

How does this connect to your issues with what you call the Free Speech fundamentalists?  Unfortunately it is very simple and very basic.  They are not murdering anyone.  They are not trying to stop people’s activities at all costs regardless of the carnage or loss of human life. I’ve seen very little of the product to come out of Charlie Hebdo. Why? Because it is irrelevant in what should be the discussion today?  If I were to play devil’s advocate and say the creators of the product produced by Charlie Hebdo were and are offensive and disgusting, that would be a very minor infraction compared to murder.  Making offensive cartoons is not a crime punishable by death.  As you know and have stated.

You are fed up?  So am I. I am fed up by those who believe that a proponent of free speech who verbally attacks those whose viewpoints they despise are considered to be against free speech themselves.  That is hogwash.  I write Open Letters, many a lot harsher than this one, all the time.  Sometimes I am insulting, demeaning, and even downright nasty.  But I have never threatened one person with physical harm nor do I ever encourage or belong to any organization that does encourage physical harm, even to those I know hate me just for being Jewish.  Instead I exercise my free speech to expose them for what they are, and do my best to help encourage a verbal process that makes them shut up.  But let’s be honest Mehdi, there is a lot more chance of this letter generating a threat against my safety than there is of your letter generating one against yours.

All actions have consequences and words have responses.  If I attempt to drown your words either through my words or a process, I am not opposing free speech.  Instead I am using my free speech to battle you in the appropriate and civilized manner.  As I know you to believe as well, violence is neither an appropriate nor civilized manner in which to silence someone and someone who holds that same opinion is not a hypocrite just because in their expression of their free speech they say something we find ignorant or abhorrent. It just gives us the opportunity to oppose them in the same manner. Unless what they say promotes violence, in which case I think we would both agree they are not on our level.

Some of your points I believe to be valid and some points I disagree with vehemently, but I only truly take issue with what I consider is your moving the narrative in a wrong direction, and for that reason I hope you reconsider your approach.

Sincerely,

David Groen

 

LIKE THIS POST? SHARE IT ON FACEBOOK OR TWITTER

HOW TO BUY THE BOOK

CLICK TO JOIN “THE GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL” ON FACEBOOK


Open Letter to John Kerry regarding the State Department Approach towards Israel

John_Kerry_second_Secretary_of_State_PortraitDear Secretary Kerry,

Although I am a Jew and a Zionist, as an American I am fully aware that when we vote for our leaders we are electing individuals whose job is to do what they perceive as best for the United States of America.  I am fully aware that despite the importance Israel has to me and millions of other Americans, your job is to do what you deem as strategically beneficial for America first.  I respect that, and to be frank as an American voter, even expect that.  With that in mind, despite my admitted personal bias, I still have serious issues with the actions of this administration and as I write this letter, primarily with the State Department.

I will begin to make my point by asking an important question.  What is the difference between negotiating with terrorists and legitimizing them?  I understand the Israeli/Palestinian issue is a complicated and troubling one.  I personally no longer hold a moderate view towards how it should be handled, but I know many of my fellow Jews and Americans who are more moderate and even optimistic that a two state solution is possible.  I know of many people who believe in what is best for Israel while opposing the building of settlements in the West Bank and questioning Prime Minister Netanyahu’s policies.   I tell you this to emphasize that despite the fact that I strongly disagree with these people, I know many of them love Israel as much as I do. The issue however is the importance of making a clear distinction not only between innocent Palestinian civilians and Palestinian terrorists but in properly addressing who is responsible for the problems they, the innocent people face.

I think it is fair to say that when Jen Psaki speaks in the name of the State Department, she is doing so with your approval and under your authority.  To be frank, if this is not the case that would represent an entire different set of problems.  But assuming she is indeed doing so, it seems more and more clear that there is an unfair balance as to the amount of criticism and expectation put on Israel by the Department of State.

I’ve heard the argument that Israel, as the democracy that it is needs to be held to a higher standard.  I also know that despite some of the problems currently between Israel and this administration there still exists a positive working relationship.  What I believe to be at issue here, and can not be justified by the rationale of diplomacy, is the fact that Israel gets pressured and criticized by the State Department in ways that imply it is fighting against an enemy of equal legitimacy.  If you wish to concern yourself with the well-being of the Palestinian people equally to that of the Israelis, I will quietly understand and accept that as a fair premise.  However in doing so, besides how morally incorrect it is,  you are defeating your own purpose if you manifest this into equal treatment of Israel’s government and Hamas.

I am sure the response would be that the State Department has condemned Hamas on occasion and that should be enough, but it’s not enough if you don’t properly address the fact that it is indeed Hamas and those factions within the Palestinian community that discourage peace with Israel and encourage violence and terrorism from their able-bodied men that is mostly responsible for the problems the innocent Palestinians are facing.

One more important point I wish to make, going back to my original statement, is that this approach which not only legitimizes but emboldens terrorist organizations is an approach that has the potential to cause serious harm to the United States and its allies.  If nothing else motivates you to rethink your strategy, I certainly hope that this does.

It would be wonderful to receive a sincere thought out response to this letter, one which details how the current actions are beneficial to all legitimate parties, but to be quite frank I’m not expecting one.  Please however be aware that many people feel as I do and are disillusioned and losing faith in the current administration’s ability to handle the serious events taking place around the globe.  Seeing that there seems to be more of an emphasis on satisfying the concerns of outside parties than the concerns of the American people, the State Department may want to reconsider its approach.

Sincerely,

David Groen

 

LIKE THIS POST? SHARE IT ON FACEBOOK OR TWITTER

HOW TO BUY THE BOOK

CLICK TO JOIN “THE GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL” ON FACEBOOK

Follow Holland’s Heroes on Twitter @hollandsheroes


Open Letter to Hypocrites Everywhere

hypoDear Hypocrite,

You know who you are.  You’re the person who screams and shouts against injustice when it’s fashionable.  You take a stand against those you know won’t hurt you.  You somehow manage to miss the obvious, stay quiet through the worst atrocities, and pick on the people you don’t like, not the people who actually do something wrong.

I admit I will never be completely objective.  I am a Jew and a Zionist.  I am also an American born of Dutch parents.  This means that I will always hope to find the positive when assessing the behaviors of anyone Jewish, Israeli, American and Dutch.  I also have a particular fondness for Canadians and I feel a strong connection to the British.  I actually like a lot of people.  What I don’t like are manipulators, thieves, imperialists, and most of all murderers.   I admit there are many grey areas in the first 3 categories and therefore some of it could be left open for interpretation, but a murderer is a murderer and I therefore won’t ever defend one.  What is important here is that this is the category in which you specialize.  You don’t look at the facts and determine who really is a murderer, you use your personal biases to change the terminology and manipulate the narrative.

Case in point, “the militant” or “freedom fighter”.  You somehow establish a moral equivalency between the Israeli soldier and the Palestinian terrorist. You try to make the case that the fight is equally justified on both sides, when in reality Israel’s fight is not against an established army of a credible nation, it it is a war against terror.  You may or may not work for the United Nations.  If you do, and I’ll be fair and not make any assumptions, you may be in favor of investigating Israel for war crimes or you may not.   If you are, do you realize that your hypocrisy is contributing to the destruction of the planet?  Your agenda is one that attacks the one democracy in the Middle East and ignores the wrongdoings of those committing acts of murder.  You speak of human rights yet you give a pass to those most guilty of human rights violations.  It makes no sense to the unbiased person, but makes all the sense in the world to those with a certain very dangerous and cynical agenda.

Then there’s the hypocritical Liberal.  I personally hold some viewpoints that would only be described as liberal and subsequently  am not blanketing all Liberals in this letter by any means.  The one’s I am referring to are those who claim to fight for tolerance and understanding and then turn around and attack and defend the wrong people.  Case in point, the academic that puts all their focus on boycotting Israel because they claim Israel has apartheid views and is persecuting the Palestinians, but says nothing about those nations openly and aggressively persecuting certain groups within their citizenry.

It’s always easy to distinguish between the sincere defender of the innocent and those who are tainted by personal bias.  The most objective statement a genuine person would have said about the war in Gaza if all they cared about was human life and not the political aspects and causes would have been, “I wish they would stop fighting so innocent people no longer get killed.”  I’ve never criticized one person who said they wanted peace for both Jews and Palestinians.  There truly is nothing wrong or hypocritical in wanting that. What is wrong is to claim you want this and put the blame on Israel.  You make excuses for the bad behavior of terrorists causing the conflict and concern yourself more with their rights than you do for the rights of not only the Israelis fighting it, but the Palestinian people being used as pawns by their very people.  Your behavior is not unlike the activist that focuses more on the treatment of a criminal in jail than on the rights of the victims they hurt.  You may define it as Liberal, but to me it is at best the epitome of misplaced Liberalism, and at worse devious hypocrisy.

If you are someone who claims to be a fighter for women’s issues and gay rights why are you not fighting against those governments or terrorist organizations that abuse both women and gays?  Why are you more focused on Israel building houses in areas most of you can’t even find on the map? And if you care so much about dead babies, why do I never hear your loud voice when it comes to Jewish or Christian babies?

You may also be that wealthy celebrity that speaks out against capitalism and inequality in western society while living off of the success you achieved from the very structure you so vehemently criticize.  Personally I’d rather you just shut up and give a huge donation to people who need help.  Otherwise all you’re doing is attempting to make yourself look like someone who cares.

Hypocrisy isn’t a Conservative or Liberal thing, it’s not a Republican or Liberal thing, and it certainly isn’t only an American thing.  It’s a self-serving cowards thing, and it’s becoming rampant.

I could go on and on because we live in a world overflowing with hypocrisy, but you get my point and most importantly, you know who you are.  You may pretend to care about right and wrong but in the end you just want to make an impression or push an agenda, and you are causing irreparable damage.

Sincerely,

David Groen

 

LIKE THIS POST? SHARE IT ON FACEBOOK OR TWITTER

HOW TO BUY THE BOOK

CLICK TO JOIN “THE GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL” ON FACEBOOK

Follow Holland’s Heroes on Twitter @hollandsheroes