Rush Limbaugh Program - December 30, 2016, Friday, Hour #2

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 30, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program

36:13

December 30, 2016, Friday, Hour #2

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Bucks Exon here, Inforush on the EIB.
	Thank you very much for tuning in.
	Thanks for joining.
	It's open line Friday, so eight hundred two eight two two eight eighty two is the number.
	As I mentioned last hour, Russia, big action taken there by the well, no, scratch that.
	Some action taken there by the Obama administration in response to uh hacking.
	Uh but that's just one of two major issues that have come up in the last few days in the waning days of Obama's uh lame duck presidency and or lame duck time in office.
	Uh and what we have here is now Israel and the uh U.S. decision not to veto a resolution 2334 which condemns settlement activity and and then some.
	We'll get into it now with our guest.
	Uh we're joined by David Effoon.
	He is the editor-in-chief of Algaminer.
	You can read more of his work and all of his editors at Algaminer.com.
	Uh David, great to have you.
	Pleasure, Buck.
	Always.
	All right, so so what's happened here?
	Well, what's Obama, what's Kerry trying to accomplish?
	I mean, Kerry gave this sort of bloviating hour plus long speech about how this is complicated and there's lots of stuff that makes it, you know, complicated, but they're gonna solve it, but Israel uh what's going on here?
	Well, I think the first important thing is this that the speech uh itself is not relevant without the context of the vote at the UN last Friday.
	The speech was attempted uh essentially a glorified attempt to justify the vote at the UN last Friday, which the U.S. uh in an unprecedented move abstained from angering the Israelis, betraying the Israelis,
	and I can tell you from where I stand, the mainstream Jewish community in this country is seething, outraged, furious across the board with this stab in the back, and as some has even have even defined it, a stab in the front.
	What was the purpose?
	Why would the Obama administration, as you pointed out, so actually, before I even get into the purpose, put it put a pin in that for a second.
	What did this do?
	What resolution 2334 said what?
	Why would the UN Security Council uh we've got a half a million dead in Syria and counting?
	I know there's sort of a temporary ceasefire, we'll see how long that lasts.
	Uh, but we we've got geopolitical problems all over the world.
	You've got uh horrific violence in different parts of the Middle East.
	Israel is a peaceful, stable democracy, close ally of the United States, and resolution two three three four in the United Nations says what, accomplishes what.
	Well, set set aside the question of why they're focusing on Israel right now, and and to be honest, this obsession with Israel is certainly suspect, especially in light of, as you mentioned, major issues that are happening around the world.
	Massacres in in in Syria, obviously the Iranian nuclear threat, all kinds of uh unbalances that warrant U.S. attention more than this.
	But set aside that question for a moment.
	Let's talk about what exactly took place, what happened here, what was different, what was unprecedented.
	For so long in this conflict, you have two sides who are claiming one piece of land, the Arab side and you have the Israeli side.
	The way that it has been understood until now, in terms of American policy, is that negotiations will decide in exchange for peace uh which territory will go to Palestinians, Arabs, or which ones will go to Israelis.
	That's how it's been until now.
	So the currency, the one currency that the Israelis have is the land that the Arabs are claiming.
	And the currency that the Palestinians have is the the offer of peace, the carrot of peace, if you will.
	What this resolution has effectively done, it has taken out of Israel's hands the only card it has, which is the land.
	It said before these negotiations even start, we are declaring that that land belongs to the Arabs.
	They're taking the Arab position before the negotiations have even started.
	So it's tremendously hindered Israel's position to the point where they no longer have anything to give, and what the the Palestinians or the Arabs are able to achieve is what they wanted, the land concessions, without having to give peace in return.
	And giving peace means an end to all claims.
	It means they're not going to continue the conflict and try and take even more land, which is the number one concern of all Israelis today.
	Now the green line, by the way, I mean the mention of the Green Line in this uh and and I know that one of the criticisms that was leveled against specifically the the wording of the revolution was that it may it it makes no distinctions about the status of Jerusalem versus outposts versus actually Israeli government backed settlement activity it it's uh sweeping in the language that it uses yes that's absolutely the case it's sweeping and uh it's it's really unprecedented and the damage that it causes it's it's permanent and
	it's extremely widespread I have to tell you you know and and you know maybe this this is this is uh you know not something that that people have thought of but I don't know if any of your listeners have have had a moment to have a look at the United States State Department definition of of anti Semitism and if anyone's in front of a computer I I recommend that they pull it up.
	Have a look Google State Department definition of anti-Semitism.
	Now in that definition uh posted on the State Department website there is a whole section relating to Israel and it includes as anti-Semitic the demonization of Israel holding a double standard towards Israel and the delegitimization of Israel.
	And I can say wholeheartedly that while I'm not going to say that Obama is necessarily an anti-Semite, according to this definition, Obama has given an incredible boost to the march of anti-Semitism taking on the form of anti-Israelism as defined by the U.S. State Department definition of anti-Semitism.
	The demonization of Israel, the double standard for Israel, the delegitimization of Israel have been pushed forward tremendously quickly.
	by this move of the Obama administration.
	I know on on your website uh David Efoon joining me now he is the uh editor of Algeminer uh Algaminer dot com so you can read uh their latest work you've got to piece up Barack Obama's anti-Semitic UN Act uh you just described why those terms would be uh applicable in this circumstance let me ask you David why do you think the administration does this at this time in this way despite years.
	I mean Obama would oh he would take offense oh I've got Israel's back I think he even said or someone said you know that no one doubts that this administration has Israel's back which if you have to say it by the way I mean some people doubt it.
	But for years they were telling us there's no daylight between the previous administration and this administration on Israel.
	Obama acted as though Israel could have no better friend.
	And in the waning weeks of his presidency, he does this.
	Why?
	Listen, to answer this question and to compute the motive of a president, you've got to get inside his head.
	And especially as a journalist, you know, it's something that, that uh you've got to be able to prove which is which is going to be tough in in this case but I have to tell you that it's hugely suspect.
	It's hugely hugely suspect.
	And people have explored all kinds of of options whether it's his history, his uh education, being in the church of Jeremiah Wright, growing up in Indonesia, whatever it is, something inside of him that takes this position uh against the Israeli position, the the position of the Israeli government, and turns it into something of an obsession.
	I mean there's no other way to describe it to turn this into a central central parting shot of everything that the guy's going to do as he's leaving office to focus so much uh attention on this of wh when the world is burning in so many places it's it's a really suspect obsession and uh I'm not sure how to explain it.
	Let's transition to perhaps a happier place for a moment here, David, and that is the incoming administration.
	Donald Trump, president-elect, has already gotten plenty of praise from Prime Minister Netanyahu, seems to have voiced his full-throated support both of the Israeli state's concerns vis-a-vis this resolution and his condemnation of what the Obama administration has done.
	He even went as far as to try to get the Egyptians, as I understand it, or rather the Israeli government reached out to to President Obama.
	elect Trump to see if they could influence this from not happening and the Egypt backed off for a day and then it went forward or then rather the resolution Went forward.
	Um, but Trump as president can repair this damage.
	What what steps can be taken here?
	Well, uh, I don't think that the damage can can be repaired.
	You know, as one of our uh uh experts we interviewed yesterday said the bell can't be unrung, and and he's right, the can't the cat cannot go back in the bag.
	The d the damage is done here and the extent of the damage will only be seen over a period of time.
	There are certain steps that could be taken to try and limit the damage, but how successful those steps are going to be remains to be seen.
	Maybe it's the threat of defunding the UN or certain parts of the UN, maybe it's a threat of of uh moving the UN to to a different place, which is something that people have discussed, even though it's uh it's a a major project and unlikely.
	Uh certainly threatening states in terms of where they're voting.
	I mean, you see the countries that have that have backed this resolution uh to say to them, listen, this is not acceptable behavior, and it's going to come at a price in terms of your relations with the United States.
	So those I think are some of the steps that could be taken.
	In terms of what the Trump administration policy is likely to look like, it's still in the early days and it's still being formulated, and we're still waiting to see who the major players are.
	Having said that, all indications are that there's going to be a a uh complete uh 360 uh uh turnaround, and uh we're gonna see a completely new approach to Israel and a completely new approach to the UN, a completely new approach to Iran.
	So we're I would say many in the Jewish community are cautiously optimistic.
	Many in the pro-Israel community are cautiously optimistic.
	We're seeing a whole host of opportunities that the incoming administration present to reset to reset the policy, uh the very damaging policy that the Bob administration has put in place on a whole host of issues relating to the Middle East security and ultimately American security, because that's what it boils down to.
	David Ephune is the editor in chief of Algaminer, A L G E M E I N E R. You go to Algaminer.com, it's the fastest growing Jewish newspaper in America.
	Uh great to have you, David, as always, my friend.
	We'll talk soon.
	Always a pleasure, Buck.
	Openline Friday continues.
	800 282 2882.
	Bucks exit in for rush.
	We'll be right back.
	Buck Sexton here in for Rush Limbaugh on the EIB.
	Appreciate you uh joining.
	800 282-2882.
	Uh let's take Attila in Wisconsin.
	Attila, cool name.
	Thank you for calling.
	Hello.
	Hello, Buck.
	How are you doing?
	How are you doing?
	Good, good.
	Thank you.
	Uh, yes.
	Um what I was gonna say is I think people forgot when in regards to Israel, oh Obama's been he meddled in their election uh trying to unseat or prevent uh Net Nanyu from winning the election over there, and he's he's had a great uh thing against Israel, but he's sucked up to all the the enemies like uh Iran and Cuba.
	I mean, he he doesn't like democracies.
	So he he's doing everything he can before he gets out.
	Let me just remind everyone, Attila, of what of what you you mentioned in the start here.
	This is from the Washington Times, uh WashingTimes.com back in uh July of twenty sixteen.
	Uh the State Department paid hundreds, there's a quote, State Department paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayer grants to an Israeli group that used the money to build a campaign to oust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and last year's Israeli parliamentary elections, a congressional investigation concluded Tuesday.
	Some uh three hundred and fifty thousand dollars sent to this one voice group.
	So that's meddling when the State Department's giving money to uh to an organization in a foreign country that's opposing one political candidate, I'd say that's meddling.
	Very much so.
	Where did Attila go?
	Uh I'm sorry, and you hear me?
	Yes, sir, we can.
	Everybody can.
	Okay, yes.
	Uh I think Trump should should uh remind everybody about this.
	Uh it's not petulant, but it it should be everyone should be reminded about that.
	The the Russians had nothing to do with this election.
	The crooked Democrats had something to do with the election.
	And have people forgotten about Bernie Sanders, how how Hillary put the screws to him.
	Yeah, look, the uh we we could also first of all you could say that Hillary, you could argue, and this is just sort of a fun thing to drive Democrats crazy, which just means it's a fun thing.
	Uh you could argue that Hillary winning the primary was in fact illegitimate because now we know the DNC was totally the tank for her, and the Clinton machine and the Democratic Party's machine, the Democrat Party's machine were one and the same.
	So you can argue that, you know, she was an illegitimate primary victor, never mind the general election.
	I mean, this stuff, you could we can all do this till we're blue in the face.
	I'm not sure it's uh particularly useful, but like I said, it'll drive them a little crazy.
	So that's always fun.
	Attila in Wisconsin, great to talk to you.
	Thanks for calling in on the EIB.
	Let's talk to Brad in South Dakota.
	Brad, you're speaking to Buck in for Rush.
	What's up?
	Hey, Buck.
	Hey, Buck, how are you?
	I just had a question for you.
	I want to know who John Kerry thinks he is, telling the Israelis that they can be Jewish or democratic, but not both.
	How does that work?
	Well, this is an old this is an old line that you'll hear.
	By the way, you'll hear this a lot on college campuses and as somebody who spent a fair amount of his time on campus back in the day in college studying the Middle East.
	I was uh one of the very few, although I never got I never got good at it, so I'd never pretend to, but who was studying Arabic before 9-11.
	Uh it was the as you can imagine that was not a a popular uh language course of study in in in the U.S. But I spent time around these sort of mid-east studies professors.
	And it's always that uh unless the Israelis um change the numbers and and do things to affect the demographics, uh unless they create two states, they'll be overwhelmed by the Palestinian population within their own state, and that's and then you get into this this uh discussion of uh Israeli apartheid and and and all that.
	So this is not any this is not sort of a new idea that he puts forward, but uh for uh reasons that I'm not gonna be able to uh address in uh in totality in about the next twenty seconds, uh, but for reasons including the fact that uh there's all of these negotiations ongoing, continuing, and the Palestinians, for example, haven't walked away from the right of return in the past and the final status talks of Jerusalem, and these are the issues that are at hand.
	Uh the the Israelis are not saying that they're gonna they've offered a state a few times, right?
	They've offered a two-state solution several times.
	And so to be lectured about how one state means uh apartheid or one state means it's non-democratic is is sort of missing the point entirely, but it's one of the ways that the anti-Israeli left constantly undermines the the Jewish state.
	So that's why when people heard John Kerry say that, look, it just expose what a lot of us have known and I would point out have said for a long time about this administration and its senior most officials, that they speak a certain way, and yeah, they sort of keep the keep the the policies relatively in keeping with previous policies.
	But when you're talking about diplomacy and sensitive negotiations that'll have long-term ramifications, tone matters, words matter, and the way that the administration speaks about these things uh matters very very deeply.
	And and there's always been to those with paying attention, this sense that the Obama administration, because Obama is a man of the left in this country, let's just put it out there, it's been the case all along, we've all known it, has a certain built-in uh hostility towards the Israeli state.
	You look at some of the people he studied under in school, you look at his his past statements on the issue, and that obviously filters down to the rest of the administration.
	So I mean I'm with you that John Kerry lecturing anybody on this.
	Uh John Kerry, as a Secretary of State, wasn't able to get to first base on negotiating an Arab Israeli or a Palestinian-Israeli settlement.
	Uh they didn't even get to the table.
	So for him to give this sort of bloviating hour plus long speech about Middle East peace and how to achieve it, it's not just laughable, it's kind of offensive too.
	Uh but John Kerry does he doesn't care.
	Um a deeply ineffectual, uh ineffective Secretary of State.
	I don't think there's any way around that.
	I mean, if if you're gonna hang your hat on the Iran deal, just wait until that thing blows up in our faces.
	And I know, pardon the pardon the verbiage there.
	Uh, but thank you for calling in, Brad from South Dakota, good to talk to you.
	Um got a lot more to discuss, by the way.
	Uh so on the issue of the Trump administration and what it's handling, uh, what it's got coming up here, but the Obama administration's not done.
	Um they're trying to do everything in their power to make things more difficult.
	And there are some narratives out there that I want to attack.
	I want to attack some narratives that are meant to hobble this administration before it takes office on regulations on Obamacare on immigration.
	We'll hit that and more coming up.
	Buck in for rush.
	Don't go anywhere.
	Buck Sexton here in for rush.
	More on me at the Blaze.com slash Buck Sexton.
	You can download my podcast there every day.
	Please check it out.
	Now let's talk a bit.
	Oh, wait, first let me just give you the number in case you don't already know.
	800 282-2882.
	It's open line Friday.
	Gonna get a lot of calls in here.
	Let's do it.
	Um, but I wanted to bring a couple things to your attention.
	There's sort of a two-pronged attack underway to well, it's really probably there's probably more prongs, actually.
	I'm leaving some prongs off.
	But there's at least two avenues of attack the media is taking to undermine uh the sort of policy agenda of uh Donald Trump, right?
	They're undermining him as a can or not as a candidate as a president by saying he's illegitimate because of what fake news, the FBI director, James Comey, and of course Russia hacking.
	So the not my president folks who are out there, the it doesn't matter that he won the election.
	I bumped into some of them, I mean, kind of literally, because I had to walk through one of their childish profanity laden protests in New York City, where I generally live, down here in Palm Beach right now.
	So far, no angry Occupy Wall Street style protesters on the beach.
	It's been nice.
	Uh but the not my president uh meme that gained some traction the day after the election, of course, people saying that he's not their president.
	That's out there.
	So you have the delegitimization of Donald Trump occurring, and the media is still going with that.
	And understand that the Russia hacking thing, like I said, yeah, there's something to discuss there.
	I've been discussing it for a while, but it gets Democrats really excited because it can kind of implicate or can kind of indicate to them, they can insinuate that he didn't really win the.
	I mean, he didn't really win the election, right?
	I mean, that's that's what we're trying to say here.
	I mean, yeah, let's talk about cybersecurity.
	I mean, get Podessa not to do stupid things and get the DNC to actually pay attention to their email accounts.
	But I mean, he didn't really win the election.
	That's what that's all about.
	But there's other stuff too.
	On the domestic policy front, the media is preparing the ground to make this as hard as possible, to make this a just a long, slow slog in the mud for the Trump administration from day one, right away.
	And the way they're doing that, of course, is on the one hand, saying that despite, and you have to love this.
	I mean, it's sort of cheeky.
	It's sort of uh there's some chutzpah at work here.
	Despite Trump's victory, and despite the Republicans having a majority in the House and in the Senate, and despite all the governorships and all the state houses across the country, the fact that the Republicans are in their most powerful position as a party since, I don't know, many decades.
	Somebody give me the number.
	Very, very long time.
	Certainly in my lifetime.
	Um I did just get one year older a couple of days ago, so that's exciting.
	Uh but despite all of that, we are told that Donald Trump is unpopular and his agenda is unpopular.
	In fact, there's a piece on Slate.
	What is this from uh yeah, from today or from yesterday?
	Well, one or the other, from yesterday.
	Slate.com.
	If you want to know what the left thinks, there are these sites that are wonderful sort of repositories of left-wing uh whining and crying and nonsense, slate and uh what's the nation and there's great Hoffington Post.
	I could I could do this all day.
	And you go and you read this and you're like, it's almost as though some of these authors live in a live in another, not just country, but an alternative universe from the one that those of us who are sort of reality-based are accustomed to.
	But so that's part one.
	And you have to ask the question if if Donald Trump, the the headline here, Donald Trump is unpopular, and so is the GOP's agenda, right?
	Because that's an essential.
	They've already gone all in on Trump destruction.
	They they threw everything they could at that, right?
	Uh, you know, he's grabbing women, uh Trump University, uh, he's a racist, he's a bigot, he's a sexist.
	I mean, they they threw all of that at him.
	Didn't work you on the election.
	And they're still bitter about that, by the way, because they really debased themselves.
	The media debased themselves in the process of trying to divert a Trump uh presidency or try to prevent a Trump presidency.
	Uh They went all in and they lost.
	Now they're still very powerful at shaping public perception, though.
	They know this, right?
	The mainstream out there still recognizes that they can influence people.
	The drive-by is they can influence people by just running news coverage of a certain kind.
	And you can see the steady drum beat already.
	On the one hand that Donald Trump is unpopular, and the GOP agenda that he can now implement if he chooses to, on a number of fronts, it shouldn't be hard at all.
	And I think he will.
	There's no reason to believe that Donald Trump would back out or back off on some of his campaign promises, some of his most important ones.
	No reason to believe it.
	If he backs off, I'm going to be one of the people that's yelling and screaming about how we were lied to and this is unacceptable and there needs to be accountability, but you know, you can expect that, and a lot of us will be doing that.
	And whether our yelling and screaming matters or not, you know, who knows.
	But in the meantime, you gotta ask the question, okay, if the GOP agenda is so unpopular, why is the GOP doing so well across the country and why is Donald Trump the next president of the United States?
	If it's so bad.
	And if the future of this country is so terrifying that you have people who are holding these crying sessions and they need this sort of group therapy at universities and they need to create the safe spaces.
	Oh, we're so scary with Donald Trump out there.
	What do they see that the rest of us don't?
	They really believe that Trump is going to engage in uh sort of fascistic rounding up of people.
	What are the concerns?
	And you know, you say I say these things, and I'm sure you've heard this too, and you might have even heard this recently at family dinner over the holidays.
	You say this stuff and you say it sarcastically, and there are people going, yes, yes, I I am worried about uh Trump the fascist.
	Really?
	I was trying to be hyperbolic.
	I was trying to exaggerate.
	I I thought we could at least agree that you know Trump is not going to become American Hitler, right?
	We all get that.
	You know, let's start with the Trump is not Hitler and we'll move from there.
	What's amazing is that some on the American left, some Democrats, I shouldn't just say some, it's not like a here and there.
	A lot.
	When you start with the can we just go with Trump is not Hitler, like, no, I've unproven.
	You you can't see the future, and he's very bad.
	He's very racist, he's very misogynistic.
	So, well, that's that's that's quite a that is quite a place to start uh your perception of your yes, whether you like him or not, your next president if you were an American.
	Uh but that's where they are.
	So part of this is to convince people or to try to convince people that the GOP is terrible.
	It's just sort of one because, you know, whatever.
	Racism, man, or or something like that.
	The GOP has done so well in so many places across the country because you know every every dog has his day.
	I don't know.
	You know, the everyone gets their day in the sun.
	They don't want to look at policies.
	They don't want to look at the legacy of the Obama administration.
	They don't want to look at what's promised, not just by President Elect Trump, but by the Republicans in Congress who will have no excuses now.
	We can hold them to account in a way that was not really possible before, because before they could always say, you know, the president's got the veto, it's tough.
	Even when you gave us a majority in the House and the Senate.
	Now, I know some of you are like, Buck, you can't you're giving them way too much leeway on that.
	I understand.
	But that excuse is gone.
	They don't have that excuse anymore.
	They're gonna have to get very creative.
	You know, I I don't know how, I don't know how Mitch McConnell, I don't know how leaders in the House and the Senate are going to be able to look the American people in the eye and say, yeah, we know that we promised to work with the Trump presidency on tax reform, but yeah, we just can't, you know, we just can't do that.
	No.
	There will be a political revolt within the Republican Party, and there will be a shockwave.
	And anyway, I'm getting ahead of myself, though.
	We're not even a day one of the presidency.
	Well, we already have to fight over the broad strokes of the agenda because they're trying to condition the minds of the American people to think that the Republican agenda is bad and that nobody wants it.
	Yeah, they've won all these elections and they're in power because they've won all these elections, but But nobody wants it.
	That's one step in this process.
	The other.
	So that's sort of part one of this.
	And I'll I'll say what part two is, and we'll have to return to it and we'll take some calls and it's gonna continue on for a little bit here.
	The other, though, is that it can't be done.
	And the oh, the GOP agenda can't be done chorus is especially loud on Obamacare and on immigration, right?
	That's where we're just told cannot be done, and they keep you know, the the the so-called smart set, the intelligentsia, the the the Twitterati, the the the blog inators, I don't know, I'm making this stuff up.
	Uh they they say it can't be done.
	Whatever happened to yes, we can.
	Yes, we can.
	I I don't want to hear can't.
	There's no I in team.
	Buck sexon here in for rush.
	We'll get into this more.
	800-282-2882.
	Be right back.
	Buck Sexton here in for the one and only Rush Limbaugh on the EIB.
	Open line Friday is underway, well underway.
	Going to the third hour here in just a few minutes.
	800 282882, if you want to call in, I'm taking some calls now.
	But first, for more on me, go to the blaze.com slash Buck Sexton, or you can go to Facebook.com slash Buck Sexton and tell me your thoughts on the show.
	Uh let's go to and Buck Sexton spelled just like it's just like it sounds.
	Uh we've got Darla in Indiana.
	What's up, Darla?
	You're speaking of Buck.
	Hi, thanks for taking my call.
	I appreciate it.
	Um, I am a pastor and a pastor's wife, and I would like to bring up an aspect of the consequences of the UN resolution that I haven't actually really heard mentioned uh hardly at all in the media, and that is that hi I'm a teacher of history and of world religions, and I've been to Israel multiple, multiple times.
	And it is a proven fact that when uh the Muslim countries go in and try to take over the land and re-establish, literally re-establish and rewrite history for an area that my major concern, or at least one of the most important,
	is that in the this last June resolution, it would actually be not only possible but probable that the Christian and Jewish religions are in a very serious threat of being completely annihilated when we're they are giving away the land to the Muslim uh hierarchy that be,
	and in every country where that has happened before, they try to destroy every vestige archaeologically of the historical origins of those religions, so that their narrative can be that Islam was always first, it was always there, and that Christianity and Judaism will literally within one or two generations possibly lose the ability to the claim of our faith in the land and tracing it back.
	So I've I've heard a lot of the political fallout, the the even religious fallout, but very little about what the proven agenda of the Muslim religion is, and I believe that it is seriously uh when Obama and Kerry were explaining that they believe that even the Western wall,
	the Temple Mount and Jerusalem itself is occupied territory, that is the beginning of destroying the Christian and Jewish origins, trying to literally wipe them out in that area.
	Well, Darla, I've got a a couple of uh of thoughts come to mind.
	Um, and and thank you very much for calling in.
	A couple of thoughts come to mind.
	First off, the eradication of some of the oldest Christian communities in the world uh that has occurred really over the last uh decade or so, um, specifically i in Iraq, but also the pressure that the Coptic Christian community in Egypt is under,
	very sort of scant media coverage of the most recent attack um on copts in Egypt uh and and the mur the murders and the bombings of churches and the horrible things that happened to them there, the media just not as interested in it as they are many other stories.
	Never mind the uh continued usage of suicide bombers, even child suicide bombers against Christian churches in Nigeria.
	I mean, this is completely underreported in the media, and the eradication of uh Chaldean and uh Assyrian Christians in places like Iraq and really the genocide that's occurred against Christians in Iraq is just uh not much interest in the media and not a lot of help from the U.S. or the West for these communities, by the way.
	So there's that.
	And also to your point about the sort of eradication of uh civilizations and religions that were there first.
	I mean, that's part of the Muslim conquest, I mean, how many Americans even know that all of this territory that is currently sort of disputed, you know, at what point belonged to the Eastern uh Roman, which is how they thought of themselves as Romans, uh, the Byzantine Empire, which uh the sort of the Ottoman conquest uh took this and uh the well, the initial waves of Islamic conquest and then eventually the Ottoman conquest, including the fall of Constantinople and what was it, 1453?
	I might be getting the date wrong.
	Um that all happened, and then we're told, well, history sort of starts then.
	I mean, you see this in the jihadist rhetoric, by the way.
	I mean, when you're talking about uh expansionist colonialist Islam, which does exist is a thing.
	I mean, jihadists are in fact uh colo uh a colonial and they're uh empire builders in their minds.
	They see uh Catalonia.
	I mean, they see I'm sorry, Andalusia, rather, not Catalonia.
	They see Andalusia as span uh as Muslim territory.
	This is of course the Iberian Peninsula and Spain.
	And so the historical memory that exists in the radicalized components of the Muslim world uh is always at work in these processes, and certainly for a group like Hamas and other extremists in the area, um, that is part of what motivates them, right?
	Creating, rewriting the history.
	And it's also why when ISIS comes in, whether it's Pal Ma uh Palmyra, uh which they've retaken, by the way, in Syria and destroyed uh ancient uh Roman ruins, very well preserved and not anymore Roman ruins, um, or the the Taliban in Afghanistan destroy destroying the Buddhas of Bamiyan back in, I think it was ninety eight.
	I mean, this is commonplace.
	They destroy churches, they destroy any religious symbolism, any religious edifices that existed before them, because uh certainly for the the radicalized portion, the jihadists they view it as a threat to Islamic supremacy, which is part of the ideology.
	So, uh part of their ideology, I should say, uh, those who have jihadized uh and those who are Islamists who believe in the uh inextricable nature of Islam and day-to-day politics and that Islam should rule all of your life.
	I went on a bit of a a bit of a tear there, so we'll take some more calls.
	I was gonna take more calls, um, but I think we're gonna go to a break right now.
	800 282882, Buck Sex in Inforush Limbaugh.
	Excited about hour three.
	I'll be right back.
	Buck Sexton here in for rush on the EIB.
	Let's take a call.
	Open line Friday, of course, keeping with the tradition.
	Sharon in uh what are you?
	Sharon in uh Sumral.
	I've I've never heard of it, but interesting.
	Thank you for calling in.
	Well, thank you, Buck, for taking my call.
	Um, I have a question and a comment.
	My question is what does this resolution mean for Israel?
	What is going to change?
	Are they going to do something to them?
	And I would like to remind everybody of in the 90s when um the Clinton sent James Carvel over to Israel to help Ahud Barak get elected.
	And he sat down with the Clintons and Arafat.
	He gave Arafat every single point and item that he wanted, including land.
	As I remember it was about ten different things.
	And when they all sat down at the table with the cameras on to sign those documents, Arafat got up and walked out.
	That's correct.
	The Israelis have already offered uh uh a two-state solution is is what people keep talking about.
	The Israelis have offered a state.
	That's happened.
	They've offered the Palestinians states uh before and they are a state before, and they've rejected it.
	In terms of uh Sharon, by the way, yes, Somerall, Mississippi, first time I've heard of the town.
	Thank you for educating me a bit.
	Um in terms of the ramifications, look, the the actual legal or immediate uh ramifications for it are limited in the sense that it's a not it's non-binding, there's no direct legal action from uh UN uh 2334.
	Uh, but it changes the sort of context of discussion.
	It's the first resolution to focus on settlement activity to get through the UN Security Council since 1980, I think.
	Um, and it also could be encouraging because it talks about the illegal status of Israeli settlements, international criminal court could get more involved now.
	It's it's about the signaling and the sort of symbolism here more than anything else.
	I mean, it's not legally binding in the sense that okay, A happens, now B must happen, but it it puts the Israelis in a difficult position vis-a-vis uh negotiations with the Palestinians, but more uh more to the point, I think, in this case, uh, it will isolate them and create difficulties for them with the international community, which is the big problem.
	Uh Sharon, thank you very much for calling in from Mississippi.
	Uh, appreciate it, and uh thank you.

▲