Senator Clinton Speaks Up for Israel at U.N. Rally

[sabra]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/17/world/17cnd-hillary.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Senator Clinton Speaks Up for Israel at U.N. Rally

Speaking at a boisterous rally for Israel near the United Nations headquarters this afternoon, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton said she supported taking “whatever steps are necessary” to defend Israel against Hamas, Hezbollah, Iraq and Syria in the military conflict in the Middle East.

Senator Clinton, addressing a crowd of several thousand people, said the United States must show “solidarity and support” for Israel in the face of the “unwarranted, unprovoked” seizure of three Israeli soldiers by members of Hamas and Hezbollah, which she referred to as among “the new totalitarians of the 21st century.”

“We will stand with Israel because Israel is standing for American values as well as Israeli ones,” said Mrs. Clinton, who was joined by two dozen political and religious leaders on a stage along 42nd Street.

Mrs. Clinton, who is seeking re-election to the Senate and is considered a possible candidate for president in 2008, also compared Israel’s fierce response, which has included heavy bombardment of Lebanon, to a theoretical response by the United States if it faced attacks from neighboring countries.

[xultar]

1. Feingold did it too. So I don't wanna here any fuckin bitchin about this.

[truebrit71]

2. Why defend Israels actions? Completely disproportionate response...

..this is the beginning of a back-door war against Syria and Iran, and ANYONE that stands up and defends this bullshit had better be prepared to get called to account when it all goes pear-shaped...

[aquart]

8. What's a "proportionate" response?

I need to hear the polite way to react in the Middle East. TELL ME WHAT THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE INSTEAD?

btw, you do know there is an internal power struggle among the Palestinians? The one who gets the most points against Israel wins? Because that's so much more macho than actually doing anything for their own people.

BUT TELL ME YOUR PLAN.

[Sam Odom]

13. How about this response ?

Washington Post Foreign Service

PARIS, Jan. 19 -- President Jacques Chirac said Thursday that France was prepared to launch a nuclear strike against any country that sponsors a terrorist attack against French interests. He said his country's nuclear arsenal had been reconfigured to include the ability to make a tactical strike in retaliation for terrorism...

The French president said his country had reduced the number of nuclear warheads on some missiles deployed on France's four nuclear submarines in order to target specific points rather than risk wide-scale destruction.

[wordpix2]

127. y'know, this whole nuclear arms race reminds me of the WWI arms race

only this time it will be total annihilation of the human race

[truebrit71]

19. Let's see, they grabbed a couple of Israeli soldiers, so grab a couple ...

...of theirs...

What you DON'T do is bomb a fucking airport, or civilian areas like Israel has done...

OR IS THAT TOO FUCKING SIMPLE FOR YOU....??

[question everything]

83. Kidnapping was only the most recent act.

they have been shelling northern Israel for months

And you bomb airport and bridges to prevent the transferring of the soldiers to Syria.

Also, they have been hiding their missiles launchers among homes of supporters so eliminating them does require bombing residential areas.

Last, this is a terrorist organization not bound by any agreement between countries. They should not have these long-range missiles that we now know they possess. How would you like a terrorist organization from Mexico shelling St. Louis?

[truebrit71]

97. I don't believe Mexico had formerly owned St Louis, but if they shelled...

...parts of So Cal, Arizona, Texas etc etc they would have a valid reason no? Your example falls flat. And since when has the kidnap and murder of Palestinians by the Israelis not been considered acts of terror? Oh, that's right, Israel gets to do what it wants (including ignoring 66 UN resolutions) and nobody says boo.... :eyes:

[question everything]

108. Neither did the Palestinians owned Haifa and Nahariya.

There was a UN partition in 1947, the Arabs did not accept this, started a war and they lost, including some areas that were going to be theirs. End of story. All the world borders are a result of wars, of territories being moved and changed. Some areas in Europe you were part of one country if you were born before WWI, part of another between the two wars, and part of yet a third after WWII. But I don't hear any bleeding hearts screaming about that.

As for SoCal, Arizona and Texas - are you willing to cede these states to Mexico? Would you like to pass this first by the residents of these states?

And then, of course, we have native Americans, right?

Israel is defending itself. Has been doing so for almost 60 years now. It has not place to withdraw. It tried the peace process with the Palestinians where the withdrawal from Gaza was the first step and where withdrawal from the West Bank was going to be the next.

Unfortunately, this experiment went up in flames. Israel will negotiate with Palestinians and other Arab countries for peace, as it has done with Egypt and with Jordan. It will not negotiate, and will fight factions and countries that are bent on destroying itself.

That you cannot grasp this, how nice to live in a country where your home will never be shelled, whee you will not have to run to a bomb shelter when you hear a siren where you don't even have to wear the uniform of your country to defend its borders.

[cracksquirrel]

126. No no no no...

See, you're relying on facts here. Facts are all brains, no heart. And besides, facts have been shown to have a well-established Zionist bias.
/Also, Hamas needs to end its unhealthy alliance with Bears
/Bears are godless killing machines.

[treestar]

132. You know that half sounds logical

Or they could appeal to the UN, etc. But they've shown such contempt for it for so long that nobody cares.

Force only never works. All such empires eventually fall. Let them conquer the whole damn ME, eventually they won't be able to sustain their rule by force like every other empire has found out.

[progressivebydesign]

20. How about going after the people that kidnapped, NOT killing innocents.

Sorry.. but I've always felt that Israel takes a iron fist approach to everything.. very brutal with innocents. Their reaction to the kidnapping of 2 soldiers is to destroy a neighboring country that DID NOT kidnap the soldiers? So.. if one of our terrorist groups in the US kidnap soldiers from another country, then you'd suppor (and HIllary would as well) the bombing of our suburbs and killing of children here? Is that how it is? THAT'S disproportionate.

[ileus]

100. Rolled over and died....gosh what else?

[MsMagnificent]

101. "Proportionate"

to you is slaughtering hundreds of civilians because a couple IDF soldiers were captured?

Kidnapping as a tactic that Mossad has carried out for as many decades as they've existed?!

Please -- EXPLAIN all this to me, on how "Proportionate" this Israeli response is, because I sure as hell can't see it!

[eagler]

103. I hate to admit it , but there is simply no other way for Israel to act

They are certainly not perfect but they gave up Gaza ,withdrew from Lebanon, and observed a very one sided ceasefire. Islamic radicals have vowed to exterminate them. Jews have been the sworn enemies of Muslims since the 7th century when Mohammed himself gave the Jews a chance to convert. They did not and so they were wiped out.

[MGD]

105. I agree. nt

[PaulaFarrell]

125. that's crap

jews lived in palestine and other arab places without problem before Isreal was created. It was a European country which tried to wipe out the Jews,not an Arab one.
Israel has lots of choices. They choose to take the most aggressive option time and time again.

And OK they 'withdrew' from Lebanon after they basically destroyed it but still couldn't control it. It was fo rtheir own benefit, no one else's.

[Biernuts]

57. Ok, if the separatists in quebec start lobbing rockets into the

US, we should be measured and show restraint?

Pure bullshit, mon amis.

[SOS]

73. In your Quebec scenario

should the US blockade Canada and bomb Ottawa?

[Biernuts]

96. If they do't stop the attacks from their territory, nuke em till they

glow! Then pave over their country for overflow parking. Maybe that's where we could deport the illegals to the new "Canadian Territoy Penal Colony" (No, it's not an all-male nudist camp)

[MsMagnificent]

102. Yep, that's a reasonable & proportionate response

if you were a LGF'er!

[The Stranger]

74. Of fucking course, we would. We wouldn't bomb Quebec City.

Come on, people. Why is this so hard?

[Amonester]

77. Don't ever worry, no independentists in Quebec have any intention

to start lobbing rockets anywhere. Not even at "George Walker" Happer's dumb face. The only time a handful of extremists made some dumb s**t of their own, they simply landed nowhere else than in jail (or they got a 'deal' to fly away in exile).

Since then, Quebec will only become an independent country (like any other independent country) when the citizens of the actual province will vote for that in a 50% + 1 (hand-counted paper ballots and verified in the presence of international observers) majority.

Even PM Charest of the (still) Federalist Parti Liberal Du Quebec even declared two weeks ago during an official visit to Paris, that 'Le Quebec' is wealthy enough to become a country anytime!

Of course, once he got back home, he said "he didn't really mean it" ... (no surprise there).

If Canadians don't manage to get rid of that BFEE's newest sycophant (FuhrHarper) ASAP, I am afraid a referendum in Quebec will (... get rid of that lap dog for Quebecers). Note that the actual leader of the PQ is a gay man, and it doesn't matter (like it shouldn't matter anywhere).

Quebecois en paix (in peace).

[Hardrada]

82. My friend in Nova Scotia hasn't emailed me since "Harper"

was sort of elected. Is this some sort of shell-shock that affects people in your land?

[Amonester]

86. Sorry for that, but I can't answer for your friend. Maybe... shocked?

Or else? (Sorry again).

But about LeHarperer (apologies for this as it's off-topic), one example is he promised to reduce the Federal G.S.T. (value-added sales tax) by 1%. The Cons were saying all consumers will end up with more money in their pockets. The idiots beleived them and elected them (minority gov.). Then he did lower the G.S.T. as he promised to do, but (and this is where voters got fooled) most Corporations then decided to increase the retail price of their products, and the customers (& voters) end up paying exactly the same price they paid before (if not more)!

So what that electoral promise did, ended up being another subsidy to the Corporations, and less tax income for the gov. to pay-back in services to the public... And Definitely no mo' money in the voters' (consumers') pockets! :grr:

Not to mention the 15 billions more in war-mongering military equip. FuhrHarper just went giving to little king george's war-profiteers last week... :mad:

[Hardrada]

90. I believe it is absurdities like that which are leaving my

friend speechless. My other friend in Vancouver hardly ever emails and then never ventures an opinion on anything . (These are both former US citizens who went up north during the Nixon Zeit).

[Wise Doubter]

62. Don`t you mean mushroom shaped ?

:nuke:
:nuke:
:nuke:
:nuke:
:nuke:
:nuke:

[LiberalVoice]

3. I dont care...

I'm sick to death of the undying support our government has given the Israeli goverment. A terrorist organization with the same resume as Hezbollah and Hamas. Only a higher body count.

On edit: No matter what the situation our government has supported Israel. NO MATTER WHAT. That they are supporting them now is nothing out of the ordinary.

[uppityperson]

5. Bah to any of them that say this.

disproportionate response.

[High Plains]

7. I don't care if St. Kucinich said it.

Blind support for Israel is just wrong.

[Copperred]

16. Israel is a religious based state and supporting it is completely

against the long term interests of the United States in the same way that we prop up Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, also both highly religiously based states.

At the end of the day the United States should not be involved in the Middle East period.... American defenders of strategies supporting Israel, Palestine, or any such group over there are 100% traitors to the average American on the street who knows not why they are there......special interests have destroyed this country.......making simple issues appear complex.....and until they are fully dislodged from Capital Hill for what they are.....

It's funny, people think Judaism and Christianity are actually indigenous components of Western culture...what a joke... Judaism and Christianity, like Islam, have NOTHING to do with the survival of Western culture....never did. As we all know...the three loonie step-children were born in the Middle-East.....

Teddy said it best, "There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American."

[MGD]

104. I strongly disagree with this:

"At the end of the day the United States should not be involved in the Middle East period"

At the end of the day, an advanced nation survives by having access to large deposits of oil. As such, advocating disengagement from the middle-east is tantamount to advocating the fall of the United States and the unimpeded domination of China over the entire world becasue while you're busy disengaging from the vital fossil fuel producing countries, China will be busy engaging those countries.

[Copperred]

115. a huh.....

China, because of our idiocy and desire to be an empire, will befriend the masses of these countires AND its elite that we created without having to be directly involved in the oppression of the former.

If we had not supported royals and dictators directly post WW-II in the ways that we have and fostered unknown animosity towards the US because of our un even hand via Israel we would not be in the predicament we are today...hated by their masses, and hated even by their royals for the neutered elites they know they are.

I love how you are saying basically we should continue our policy of oppressing the people of these nations.

That's smart American foreign policy there....

If you ever figure out how to make friends....let the world know..

Our policies sinces the end of WW-II have been based on teh idea of oppression rather than the policy of friendship. Had we taken our post WW-II spoils and leveraged them for the long term by building friendships...as China is doing over the long term...we would be in a whole different world than we are in today.

Keep it up...

[MGD]

134. Ignoring for a moment the large number of red herrings you posted

"China, because of our idiocy and desire to be an empire, will befriend the masses of these countires"

There are no friends in international politics, only partners and agreements and understandings. This notion of "befriending the masses" is naive and simplistic. What's more, China is not befriending the masses; China is illegaly bribing elected and non-elected government officials for contracts which will allow them to exploit the masses. China condemns the freedoms you hold dear and is one of the most repressive countries on the planet. Your support for them should be an embarassment to any Democrat.

"I love how you are saying basically we should continue our policy of oppressing the people of these nations."

And I just love how you take "we shouldn't disengage from the middle-east" to mean, "we should continue our policy of oppressing the people of these nations."


"Our policies sinces the end of WW-II have been based on teh(sic) idea of oppression rather than the policy of friendship. Had we taken our post WW-II spoils and leveraged them for the long term by building friendships...as China is doing over the long term...we would be in a whole different world than we are in today."

We did build "friendships" after WW2. It was called NATO, and once the USSR crumbled, our "friends" quickly lost interest in the friendship. And, again, china is not making friends, China is buying governments and the resources of the countries that those governments represent.

[Copperred]

137. ....really solving the underlying issues i see.....

MGD wrote: "There are no friends in international politics, only partners and agreements and understandings"

To repeat a supposedly unquestionable mantra over and over does not make it true - it is an assumption and one that is not true in a political vacuum. Do you think the British and American people are not friends? They are friends - now, as they were even when they were our masters..aka at some level, ourselves. The American revolution was most certainly a family affair.... they are still family..and the British are most certainly still our "friends".

It is true that sometimes you make enemies of your family or you patch things up....but the idea their are no friends is a joke.. even outside of family relations. People are people, and nations are nothing more than people magnified...or funneled and divided, etc,etc...still people. Was America not the friend of the Shah of Iran? the friends of the ruling western oriented royals of Saudi Arabia?

The Far Eastern Orient cultures do actually have a sense of friendship in international relations that is completely lacking in the West - and most certainly America - by most standards. Granted, the American people on their own have lots of friends overseas, but they do not have a good grip on their government at the moment, now do they. A number of non-Western nations actually befriend each other out of no other reason than to have friends....maybe also cuz on a rainy day it makes for good policy. It is a good and healthy thing in their minds...they don't just show up when they need something.

Politics is naive and simplistic at the macro level....that's clear. China is not supplying Israel, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan with F-16s. China is buying their resources, asking them to invest in China, and to trade.... She is not getting herself involved per se in highly dubious international entanglements. China is not stereotyping the entire Islamic world as terrorists. That China is bribing people, what should we care? If we were true freedom oriented people, like we were once..we would legalize bribery so it is seen, taxed, and accounted for on the books as the expense that it is and it would result in making US corporations as competitive as their competition on the global stage.

I did not say, nor lend support to China as some of freedom or liberty. It is indeed a political nightmare for many of its own people and the non-ethnic Chinese it is oppressing. If you actually think I lent them support by showing how we are fucking up....get a grip on yourself.

At the end of WW-II America had numerous friends...it had nothing to do with the Soviet threat. NATO was a military alliance...it had nothing to do with friendship.....there was a threat...those who were against it joined. If you don't think China is developing friendly relations with numerous people the world over...your not paying attention nor diving in deeply as to how the Chinese people think or what their foreign policy history shows.



...keep your own house clean before you go barking up others.

Cheers....

BTW... I never said I was a Democrat.

[treestar]

129. If this were true, we should take the Arabs' side, shouldn't we?

Didn't Moses settle in the one place in the ME that doesn't have oil?

[MGD]

135. How did we come to be talking about Moses?

[treestar]

138. OK, forget Moses. If we are in the ME because we have to be for

the oil, why don't we take the Arabs' side? They have the oil.

Well, we are pretty good friends with Saudi Arabia, even though they produced most of the 911 terrorists.

But why do we ever take Israel's side? The Arabs who have the oil don't want Israel there. Israel doesn't have any.

[MGD]

139. That is a good question

and one which I have argued about more than once. The last time I seriously argued about this, I basically came to the conclusion that Israel makes a better friend than enemy. Also, at one time, serious cold-war politics were involved in the relationship and our current relationship is a legacy from that period. The cold-war political alliance still plays out too even though the the cold war is supposedly over (arguable). There's no doubt that the biblical world perspective plays into the relationship as well. Also, and this is where I get flamed probably, I think it's possible that our fiat monetary system is, to no small extent, "symbiant" with Jewish interests and I mean no disrespect to any Jews by invoking the old stereotype of the Jew.

[AnOhioan]

30. Kucinich has never advocated "blind support"

for either the Israeli go'vt or the Hamas/Hezbollah groups.

Of course, a reasoned and equitable approach to the conflict is one that very few even want to hear.

[ixion]

35. yep, you said it

:applause:

[saracat]

14. Both are wrong. JMHO.

[xultar]

32. Agreed. But some people tend to give their favorites a fuckin pass.

I just wanted it to be crystal clear.

[saracat]

33. I have no favorites where this kind of war is concerned.

[xultar]

38. No kidding. Who can have a favorite in this climate.

[jonnyblitz]

75. you must have missed the Feingold thread, xultar.

He was roundly criticized, believe it or not, and some of his more "intense" supporters were NOT pleased.

[Jax]

43. I don't give

a flying fuck who spews this crap. I will fuckin bitch about what I want to bitch about on these forums...

Israel's government is being run by terrorists just like the United States government. We do spread it.

[acmavm]

49. Who are you to tell anyone what to post? And it's 'hear' not 'here'

although 'read' would probably be more appropriate.

[lastknowngood]

50. I bitched about Feingold and I'll bitch about her. Holding Israel

blameless is as asinine as holding the repugs blameless for the war. I won't go to the poles for her.

[bigluckyfeet]

79. I will never vote for

Hillary,I had to hold my nose when voting for Kerry,it will not happen again.

[pokercat999]

65. No bitch'n just this from her address.

"also compared Israel’s fierce response, which has included heavy bombardment of Lebanon, to a theoretical response by the United States if it faced attacks from neighboring countries."

If true that means she would support bombing Canada, killing some it's civilians, blowing up power generating plants etc, if Timothy McVey had been Canadian. I can't believe the quote is true. If it is she's an ass.

On edit: A blowhard ass just try to use repug scare tactics to make herself look good in the eyes of the neo-con.

[mom cat]

68. Don't worry. I am bitching about him too.

[napi21]

4. A State Senator IS supposed to support what their constituents want.

I may be wrong, but I THINK there are many Jews in NY, and it seems to me that is exactly what Hillary is doing.

[sabra]

6. there are more Jews in NY than in Israel.

[cali]

26. There are not

5 million Jews in NY.

[DemFromMem]

9. Double standard

When someone supports Israel, it's because they are either Jewish or kowtowing to the Jews. But when someone opposes Israel, it would have nothing to do with being anti-Semitic.

I wish the moderators at DU would make it clear that there is no place for these types of comments here.

Many of those of us who are Jewish on DU, especially those of us who are dovish when it comes to the Palestinians, have been deeply hurt and offended by much of what we've seen posted when it comes to Israel.

I'd like to think I'm in a bit of a unique position to offer an opinion on the subject. I'm Jewish and much of my is Israeli. But I'm also an immigration lawyer and a substantial portion of my clientele is Arab and Muslim. I've represented 100s of Palestinians over the years and have had long discussions with them on this topic. Ask them about the subject and they don't just go into the knee jerk anti-Israeli tirade you see here. The ones I know are generally interested in peace and a happy future for their people. They can be very self-critical and call a spade a spade when someone does something undefendable. That's more than a lot of people in this community.

Many of the Israel critics who post on DU are more anti-Israel then the Palestinians they purport to defend. Some of the rhetoric is so harsh, that even if it purports to only criticize Israel, those of us on the receiving end can only come to the conclusion that it is anti-Semitic. I sympathize with the Muslims out there who get the same treatment from the right wingers.

Hate speech is not only about the actual words used, but about the reaction of the group targeted by the speech. In other words, if it feels like hate speech, it probably is. And if you showed much of the anti-Israel rhetoric on this site to your typical liberal Jew, he or she would probably say it is anti-Semitic. By the way, I hear the same discussions when it comes to the anti-immigrant chatter coming from the right. They claim not to be anti-Hispanic and are merely discussing immigration policy. But a lot of them cross the line and then blame Latinos for being overly sensitive. The same story for blacks. We expect this kind of thing from the right. I thought the left was above that.

[sabra]

12. thank you for this post.

[napi21]

15. I'm very sorry if what I posted was interpreted as hate speech.

I didn't mean it that way at all. I'm not Jewish, but most of the people I hear calling WJ in the AM and claim to be Jewish are very supportive of the Israeli actions, and all I meant by my post was that Hillary appears to be supporting what her constituents want her to.

If I offended anyone, I appologize.

[bling bling]

21. I highly doubt the poster was referring to you.

It is much more likely the poster was referring to perhaps one of the posts above yours that literally called Israel a terrorist organization, as though it's a pea in the same pod as hamas or hazbullah (sp?).

I have said it before, but I'll say it again, posts filled with blind and willful ignorance and hatred like that are an embarrassment to the poster, to the community, and to the Democratic party. There is no equivocating Israel to the terrorists organizations. It's sick to even suggest it -- unless you're an idiot who thinks a Democracy where women have rights = a tyrannical extremist group of people who think most of the rest of the world is infidels and women are one step above dirt. The only equivicating you can do between Israel and terrorist orgs. is that they're all human beings. Beyond that, their perceptions of the world are miles apart. Go ahead and rip on the democracy and side with terrorists -- I just wish these people wouldn't do it on the DU, because that's not a democratic party position.

[bunyip]

85. Israel

is not a terrorist organisation.

It is a state, the government of which daily commits terrorist acts.

It also violates scores of UN resolutions, international law and the Geneva Conventions.

The difference between Israel and its enemies are that Israel has an airforce, and lavishly-funded lobbyists in Washington.

a Democracy where women have rights = a tyrannical extremist group of people who think most of the rest of the world is infidels and women are one step above dirt.

Are you talking about the Gush Emunim? Or the other Israeli pressure groups who "think the rest of the world are infidels and women are one step above dirt?"

Or are you talking about the Palestinians?

That would then be hate speech, and grossly ignorant to boot.

[DemFromMem]

24. I was speaking generally

I appreciate what you have said and I know most of the people at DU are not hateful. I think that's why we're Democrats. I posted what I did as a reaction to what I've seen day after day on the Israel/Palestine forum and on a number of other sites. It really is scary to many of us.

[OKNancy]

23. Have you alerted on any of these?

"I wish the moderators at DU would make it clear that there is no place for these types of comments here."

There are hundreds of posts here every day, moderators need the help of DU readers if we are to catch problem posts.

[cantstandbush]

37. making "alerts" simply to stifle what some call "anti-Israel" which then

becomes "anti-semitic" is just a back-hand way of keeping honest dissent about Israel from being discussed. I object to this form of censure because it further gives acceptance to an already lop-sided discussion of all the issues that have a bearing on US foreign policy and its cause and effect.
Unless someone uses hate language and threatens another poster, open debate is what should be supported. I have been on the other end of attacks and hate mail and name-calling that no doubt would warrant hitting the alert button but i recognize incivility and just shrug it off.

[coalition_unwilling]

28. One can oppose the policies and actions of the state of Israel, but not

necessarily be anti-semitic, though, wouldn't you agree?

[DemFromMem]

39. Absolutely

I don't have a problem if I feel like people are just interested in trying to promote peace and a better life for the Palestinians. There's a signficant peace movement in Israel that does just that and they are not labeled self-hating Jews just because they support an independent Palestinian state. I'm one of those supporters - I love Israel deeply and have been highly critical of the Israeli government.

I have a problem, however, with people (on both sides) who automatically attribute sinister motives to the other. Most Israelis want peace. They're not interested in lording it over the Palestinians and the bottom line is that most don't want to occupy and most really do want good relations with neighboring countries. Most Palestinians are likewise interested in a better life for their families and would be willing to live in peace with Israel in exchange for their own homeland. Extremists in both countries tend to hijack the agenda and, unfortunately, those nutjobs find plenty of supporters on the left and right wings in this country.

[springhill]

55. Exactly.......

most Israelis, not the government. Just like our government is not interested in peace. What is so hard to understand about separating the hateful terrible things a government does from its people. I just don't get it. Please explain to me.

[cali]

29. Great piece.

Please consider posting as a separate thread.

[madaboutharry]

51. Thank you very posting one of the few

intelligent comments on this topic over the last several days.

[Orangeone]

52. But it's the politicians

That act like being anti Arab is going to win Jewish votes.

[MrPrax]

54. Didn't offend me...

and stop speaking on my behalf...

[DemFromMem]

80. If you are a Jew...

(and the Santa Claus kinda threw me), then you know that no one speaks for you. We don't exactly keep our opinions to ourselves. If I was offended by seeing a diversity of opinion, I'd post on Free Republic. I expressed a view that I believe is held by most Jews and I don't believe I said anywhere in my post that we view things as a monolithic bloc. I still stand by my opinion that most Jews would agree with me.

[MrPrax]

95. Pathetic...

[IndianaGreen]

70. The point is well made!

There is a lot of penned up anger out there, driven in part by the inability to have a debate about US Middle East policy.

It is as hard to have a rational discussion about the Middle East as it is to discuss our Cuba policy. The body politic is more interested in rigid ideological positions, and the failed policies they produce, than it is in discussing alternatives.

[question everything]

107. Except that Nassralla - the Hezbollah leader

is quoted to say that he would like to have the whole world Jewry assembled in Israel; this would save him the trouble of going after all the Jews worldwide.

If this is not anti-Semitism that I don't know what is.

And the ones who support him, by association support the above statement.

At least, I doubt that a single bleeding heart on DU who support Hezbolla would take the time to disassociate himself from this.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

10. Isn't this the same Senator...

who several years ago made headlines for referring to it as "Occupied Palestine?"

[bling bling]

18. I doubt it. Maybe you could find a link or something.

Doesn't sound like something she'd say. All I remember her getting flak for a few years back was when she supported that Jeruselem should be the capital of Israel, or something along those lines. She was accused of trying to pander to the Jewish voters.

[jean]

11. Any chance she's pre-empting statements from bushco? Rove

and the cabal might NOT want to appear to agree with Sen Clinton. They can't have her trump their strong daddy decider.


edit - Any chance she and/or Bill are negotiating with anyone over there? Bill could be using the phone in lieu of shuttle diplomacy whilst the decider mulls over whether to send Condi or not.

[daleo]

17. Does she support killing Canadian civilians?

I suppose if it is "necessary". Wait until some American civilians are killed, then maybe things will be different.

[Scurrilous]

22. "Wait until some American civilians are killed...

... then maybe things will be different."

You would hope so, but the Rachel Corrie incident has shown that Israel can kill American citizens and our elected officials (for the most part) will do and say nothing.

[daleo]

25. True, but a whole family including 4 pre-schoolers might be different

But you don't really know until it happens.

[TomClash]

27. "Whatever steps are necessary?"

Silly me. I forgot the prevalent ideology of our time is now: "nations which lay down their arms without compelling reasons prefer in the ensuing period to accept the greatest humiliations and extortions rather than attempt to change their fate by a renewed appeal to force."

A fine world we live in.

[Jacobin]

31. Follow the campaign contributions

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

34. Hillary's so full of it . . .

It's all about triangulation with Hillary--everything that comes out of her mouth. I can't believe people fall for the crap Hillary spews.

InAbLuEsTaTe

[Baclava]

87. Right on

She knows who butters her bread....and it ain't the field workers of society.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

36. This is what you do for 22 millions in campaign contributions.

[lumpy]

40. Hilary is in over her head.

on this one.

[Malva Zebrina]

41. So, what is her reward? Jewish voters to vote for her in her bid for the

presidency? Or the reasonable assumption that she is allied with the neo-cons and fully believes the US is on the right course outlined by the PNAC? I believe she is fully on course with the notion that the United States of America is so powerful that invading and occupying and killing and slaughtering children and other innocents, is the way for the US to go. I fully believe she is on the side of the neo-cons and is so because her politics are indiciative of her beliefs that pre-emption, war and killing is a way to establish and empire. She has been playing this game, beginning with her war vote. She will NOT listen to her base, but instead hires Peter Daou to tell her how to seduce the base. She has turned her coat or at the least in this stage of the game, revealed the lining of her coat.

I will never ever vote for Hillary Clinton should she run. Hear that Peter? You will lose one vote and I am not alone.

[Copperred]

42. Hillary running for Pres...will make the Repubs break out singing Dixie...

[iverglas]

47. I'm with you

... I fully believe she is on the side of the neo-cons and is so because her politics are indiciative of her beliefs that pre-emption, war and killing is a way to establish and empire. ...

Her appalling behaviour over the false intelligence in 2003 linking "lax" security at the Canadian border to a totally non-existent "terror threat" to the US wasn't exactly my first clue, but it was a pretty big billboard.

http://www.oreilly-sucks.com/bogusterror.htm

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/PEstory/TGAM/%09%09%0920030104/UFIVEN/national/national/national_temp/4/4/20/

The case of the five vanishing suspects

By PETER CHENEY AND VICTOR MALAREK
Saturday, January 4, 2003 – Page A1

They were at Akswesasne, being smuggled into the United States by natives. They were at Toronto's Pearson Airport, where they slipped into Canada by claiming refugee status. One was seen on a bus entering the Lincoln Tunnel. Another was spotted on a West Coast ferry.

By the middle of this week, they had starred in hundreds of newspaper and television reports and had been on the lips of everyone from U.S. President George W. Bush to Senator Hilary Clinton, who announced at a press conference that they had entered the United States through Canada.

But yesterday, the FBI admitted that the most important ingredient in the story -- that is, the proof -- is nowhere to be found: "There is no border-crossing information that would say they're here," FBI spokesman Ed Cogswell said. "And to say they came in from Canada is pure speculation."

It wasn't speculation of any sort -- it was a great big fat juicy pork pie -- a LIE. And Clinton, not having a shred of evidence to support her allegations, and relying on the eminently trustworthy intelligence fed her by the Bush administration, carried the Bush administration's can and announced loudly that Canada was a problem and something just had to be done about that messy northern border of yours that we sit on the other side of.

Hmm. Maybe there really is something to be said for the theory that she's just playin' to the folks at home. Except that, well, locking down the Canadian border isn't exactly going to do wonders for the NY state economy.

That's a fun story as reported by the Globe; do read the rest of it. Clinton never did issue what ya might actually call a retraction.

http://www.migration.ucdavis.edu/rs/images/uploads/5.MacklinRefugees_
(pdf; article about Canada-US immigration issues)

Senator Hilary Clinton is so eager to blame Canada that even when stories of terrorists "infiltrating" the US from Canada turn out to be a hoax, she refuses to apologize, insisting that the deficiencies of the Canadian system are what made the story plausible.

I spit.

[BooScout]

44. Hillary....you just lost my vote.....

I have said all along I would support Hillary should she get the nomination. Now I am not so sure. Why couldn't she condemn the violence on all sides and support brokering a peace as Bill did in the past? Major mis-step on Hillary's part as far as I am concerned.

[theanarch]

53. uh, Boo...

...nothing personal, but: i gave up on Hillary when she defended her cheatin' Bubba's "Contract on America's" hit on "welfare as we know it". Let's see: wasn't co-sponsoring the Flag fetish amendment; wasn't her joining the Focus on the Family's crusade against music-video-games; wasn't voting for the Patriot Act or the war on Afghanistan or the war on Iraq, or for every Pentagon appropriation attached to...no, it took THIS before you had your first doubt? Did i miss something? Or just notice too much, too soon?

[amandabeech]

45. If Sen. Clinton becomes President Clinton, she will not be effective

as a broker in any Middle East peace talks as many Democratic Presidents have done, including her husband.

IMHO, her speech may be short-sighted, and could come back to haunt her if she were to sit in the Oval Office.

[marshall]

67. Would a woman be accepted at the table in the Middle East?

Israel had Golda Meir, but other than Pakistan's figure head of a president (who got their by her father's bootstraps) what country in the area would show any respect to a female head of state?

[amandabeech]

71. Good question.

I wonder if Margaret Thatcher had any business in that area.

On the other hand, Madeline Albright seemed to do okay as Secretary of State. There haven't been any negative repercussions related to Rice's gender, as far as I know, just to the * policies.

[marshall]

76. That's true

And minus the obvious political differences, I think Mrs. Clinton would be a lot like Mrs. Thatcher, strong and forceful.

[ProudDad]

141. And equally in bed

with her corporate masters...

[iverglas]

46. and a real honest genuine progressive politician speaks up against evil

Get yer real honest genuine progressive politicians here ... Canada, that is. (Only in Canada? Pity.)

What Clinton says is what vile right-wingers say in Canada. This is what we say to vile right-wingers, if we're feeling polite.

Libby Davis, MP, prominent member of the federal New Democratic Party of Canada, feminist, lesbian, poverty activist ... from my inbox:

Libby Davies - Statement on Middle East Crisis
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:03:31 -0700
From: "Libby Davies, MP" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>

I am deeply concerned with the recent escalation of violence by Israeli forces in Lebanon, and deeply disappointed with the Conservative government’s response to this crisis. Many constituents have contacted my office expressing their outrage and concerns about Canada’s response. By calling Israel’s military response to the kidnapping of three of its soldiers as “measured”, Prime Minister Harper has failed to show leadership on such a critical issue.

I have written to the Prime Minister to express my concern as the Member of Parliament for Vancouver East.

Israel’s disproportionately brutal response to the unlawful and provocative kidnappings by Hamas and Hezbollah militants is a violation of international law, and has put the whole region on the brink of war. The bombing of Beirut International Airport, and of bridges that lead in and out of the city, has endangered the lives of countless Lebanese civilians, and is a terrible display of collective punishment against the Lebanese people. Over 160 people have been killed since Israel began its bombardments last week. The situation in Gaza is also of concern, as Israel’s bombing of critical infrastructure, including a power station, has endangered the health and safety of hundreds of thousands of Gazans.

We learned of the deaths of seven Canadian tourists in Lebanon, including four young children, who were killed following an Israeli air strike. By not immediately setting up an evacuation plan for Canadians caught in the violence in Lebanon, the Canadian government has failed to ensure the safety of its citizens. It is becoming obvious that the Prime Minister is willing to put his friendship with George Bush ahead of his duty to protect Canadian citizens, and
Canadian interests and values abroad.

I urge the Canadian government to immediately call on Israel to halt its attacks in Lebanon. Too many innocent lives have already been lost, and the Prime Minister’s silence on this matter is disgraceful. Both sides in this conflict must end the violence and return to peace talks before the situation spirals out of control any further.

"American values"? How awful to have someone appropriate your values like that. My sincere sympathy.

Would I vote for Clinton if I had the misfortune of having to make that choice?

Not on a full stomach I wouldn't.

[RCinBrooklyn]

48. She's a hawk and is okay with ANY military action.

[muryan]

56. There is nothing wrong

with legitmate military action. None of us would be talking today if it weren't for legitimate military action.

[ShortnFiery]

58. But WHO defines what is "legitimate" ...

Oh that's right the bloodthirsty super power WINNERS! They're always right because they write the history books. What a wonderful world, aye? :puke:

[muryan]

60. To the victors

go the spoils of war. Get used to the world, its going to be this way as long as humans inhabit it.

[ShortnFiery]

61. I would prefer to try and walk with God ... and not hate my brother.

My (and other's) reward will come in the next life ... sow the seeds of tolerance and love is not ever wrong ... Jesus would approve. ;)

[The Gunslinger]

69. I'm George Bush and I support those words.

[treestar]

131. Not always. And the victors usually suffer other consequences

They don't stay on top forever.

Then there's that little thing called human advancement.

[IndianaGreen]

59. I see she is raising funds for her Presidential campaign

by sounding like a bottle-blonde version of Condi Rice.

“We will stand with Israel because Israel is standing for American values as well as Israeli ones,”

Hillary is right! Israel and America share common values when it comes to bombing cities, hospitals, TV stations, power stations, grain storage facilities, caravans of civilians fleeing the fighting, etc.

[JackNewtown]

63. Good for her but not surprising

I believe she is right but her comments are no big deal. Has any Senator taken a different position on this? Why criticize--or praise--her for doing what all or virtually all the Senate is doing?

[Hardrada]

84. She is only following orders.

[robcon]

64. Hillary C. is right.

We must show solidarity and support for Israel, whose soldiers were kidnapped by the scum Hizbollah.

[IndianaGreen]

66. Are you advocating we endorse Israeli terrorism?

Published on Monday, July 17, 2006 by CommonDreams.org

The Distance from Guernica to Lebanon

by Ramzi Kysia

Israel has bombed power plants, roads, and bridges all across Lebanon. Israel has bombed gas stations and fuel depots, grain silos, lighthouses, the seaports in Beirut, Tripoli, Jounieh and Tyre. Beirut's airport is in flames. Beirut's Shi'a suburbs have been almost completely demolished. Firefighters are pleading for help, because they do not have enough water to put out the blazes. (1)

I think of Guernica.

Israel has ordered all of the people living in Southern Lebanon to flee their homes and villages. Avi Dichter, Israel's Minister of Internal Security, told us that "tens of thousands of Lebanese who will flee towards the north will create the right pressure on Hezbollah." (2)

Two nights ago, eighteen people in the South were burned alive when Israel bombed their fleeing convoy with incendiary shells. Eleven of the dead were children under the age of twelve. Mahmoud Ghannam, the father of two of the killed children, broke down when he saw their bodies. He struck himself in the head repeatedly and cried, "my God, my God. I can't make out the faces of my children. They are burnt black... Which ones are my children?" (3)

A copy of Pablo Picasso's famous painting of the annihilation of Guernica was hung outside the chambers of the UN Security Council, as a reminder of why the United Nations was created, and of what the Security Council is supposed to prevent. In 2003, the United States ordered the eleven foot painting covered, so as not to even subtly embarrass American diplomats pressing for a war against Iraq. (4)

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0717-23.htm

Sources

1. "Israelis intensify bombardment of Lebanon's civilian infrastructure," Daily Star (17 July 2006)
2. "Lebanese villagers ordered out," AFP (17 July 2006)
3. "Jets 'incinerate' fleeing family," AFP (16 July 2006)
4. "The Lessons of Guernica," Toronto Star (9 February 2003)

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0717-23.htm

[Dutch]

91. Well said! I agree absolutely.

Clinton and Feingold are both in the right here.

[IndianaGreen]

94. I will remind of this when New York City is attacked by terrorists

avenging the deaths of their loved ones in Lebanon.

Those that live by the sword, shall die by the sword!

[ProudDad]

142. They're called

Prisoners of War captured in battle.

[symbolman]

72. Clinton is a war monger

I will NEVER vote for her or anyone ELSE who supports WAR of any kind.

HOW many people have been taken hostage and beheaded in the middle east? If we bombed all infrastructure each time that happened the earth would be a blackened ball by now.

This shit needs to END NOW. IT is completely inappropriate to destroy entire countries on a WHIM, just because you have the power to do so. Hundreds of thousands of innocent people are nothing more than worms beneath the feet of these monsters KILLING US ALL.

And don't think that this is not going to happen to YOU or ME, it's just a matter of time once the precedence is created.

Bush has killed us all, and now a DEMOCRAT is standing behind SLAUGHTER.

I cannot support that. THis world is for peace, people are for love, children are for the future, they are not all protein units that happen to be standing in the WAY when those with weapons decide to TRASH the whole world.

Live by the sword, Die by the Sword it says in the Bible (and most holy books), and can someone tell ME that Jesus would have said, "Go bomb the fuck out of anything that's in your way.."

Clinton is scum for promoting death. Where are the Plans for PEACE? Why isn't her speech about PEACE?

[JCMach1]

78. Scratch another possibility off the Primary List

I will not vote for a Dem in the primary who uneqivocally supports Israel.

[IndianaGreen]

81. I am against Hillary because she is a neolib imperialist

not because of her phony declarations of support for Israel.

[MGD]

119. You better get a new sharpie marker then

because you're gonna be scratching out a lot of names.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

88. This doesn't matter to me as I have already written her off

because of Hillary's position on the Iraq war. That's a make-or-break issue to me in my support of any candidate. If she's the eventual Presidential candidate on the left, I will probably vote for her, but do it with enormous reluctance.

[CuteNFuzzy]

89. "stand with Israel" as Lebanese kids are butchered

way to go Hilary! Make us proud!

[OneBlueSky]

92. yet another reason for me to vote against her in the primary . . .

and there are already so so many others . . .

[robcon]

93. I'll vote for her for the Senate this fall...

and vote for her in '08. She'll be our next president.

[ckramer]

98. Sen. Clinton is a rightwing in many ways

Very disappointed

[gorbal]

99. They are destroying the civilian infrastructure...way to go.

So would would she support the destruction of the US infrastructure if some crazy right-wing group kidnapped soldiers from another country...oh wait...

[eagler]

106. When the enemy who has vowed to kill you hides

within the infrastructure it's either them or you.

[Hardrada]

109. But you will only create more enemies that way.

And not just in the ME. World opinion will not go Israel's way on this one.

[MGD]

120. They are completely surrounded by enemies already.

And world opinion never goes Israel's way.

[gorbal]

118. And there are no right wing nuts in the US infrastructure

And none of them have ever kidnapped people from other cultures, tortured or killed them. You can trust me on that. I've met them, they're swell guys. (sarcasm)

[treestar]

130. Gee, I hope they don't ever decide any of their enemies are hiding

in our infrastructure.

Just because the Israelis claim a thing doesn't make it true.

[TankLV]

110. Good for her! Who else is she gonna support - the TERRORISTS?!

Let's see - support the only Democratic country in the region from intentional surprise unjustified TERRORIST attacks on UNARMED civilians, or support the TERRORIST organizations doing the attacking?

What to do, what to do...

[MGD]

121. It does appear to be a bit of a quandry for many nt

[Critters2]

124. Both Palestine and Lebanon have democratically elected governments

The fact that you don't like a nation doesn't mean it isn't a democracy. You need to stop with the NeoCon talking points.

[Name removed]

111. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Roland99]

112. Good one.

[JackNewtown]

113. Perhaps this has a little to do with Clinton backing the Bush position?

Pro-Israel:
Money to Congress

Election cycle: All Cycles 2006

List: Summary Top 20 Members All Senators All Members of the House All Senate Candidates All House Candidates Sort by Amount Sort by Name Sort by State

Candidate
Amount

Clinton, Hillary Rodham (D-NY)
$83,818

Kyl, Jon (R-AZ)
$79,750

Stabenow, Debbie (D-MI)
$77,406

Kirk, Mark (R-IL)
$66,664

Nelson, Ben (D-NE)
$65,500

Conrad, Kent (D-ND)
$63,600

Lieberman, Joe (D-CT)
$63,000

Talent, James M (R-MO)
$61,010

Nelson, Bill (D-FL)
$60,111

Santorum, Rick (R-PA)
$57,000

Berkley, Shelley (D-NV)
$44,000

Menendez, Robert (D-NJ)
$43,611

Lugar, Richard G (R-IN)
$39,710

Hoyer, Steny H (D-MD)
$37,250

Feinstein, Dianne (D-CA)
$33,500

DeWine, Mike (R-OH)
$33,000

Engel, Eliot L (D-NY)
$32,000

Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana (R-FL)
$30,500

Carper, Tom (D-DE)
$29,650

Cardin, Ben (D-MD)
$29,192

[treestar]

133. Makes you cynical, doesn't it?

One has to wonder whether these SOBs ever vote on principal.

[dailykoff]

114. Is Hillary the Mildred Pierce of politics or what?

And the grasping kid is herself.

[Zomby Woof]

116. Of course

She knows which side of the bread, etc.

[zara]

117. And the Israel lobby hammerlock on Dem pols continues....

[redqueen]

122. i hope she softens those statements,

since israel is now attacking civilian infrastructure... things are spiraling out of control... we need someone to speak for peace!

[Clarkie1]

123. That's a bit overly simplistic.

What is her plan?

[treestar]

128. Israel stands for American values?

What is she basing this on? I don't think so. Israel stands for Israeli values only.

Why do we have to stand with Israel? Why don't we stand with the Lebanese? The Kenyans? The French? The Watusis?

Why do we have to be involved? Is Israel can't defend itself, it can't. If it takes over the entire effing area, it does. Why does our government care?

[ProudDad]

143. 'Cause the U.S. government

owns Israel...

$4 billion a year's worth..

[NotGivingUp]

136. Take a frigging hike Hillary!!! What a true disappointment you are.

[ProudDad]

140. Ok, here you go -- a Solution that would work!

Instead of mindless, knee-jerk destruction the Israeli government might try following the sage advice at this site:

http://www.tikkun.org/rabbi_lerner/news_item.2006-07-13.2604750814

The Short Term Plan:

"The most desired end of the current crisis would be a return of the Israeli kidnapped soldiers from Lebanon and Gaza, the release of prisoners in Israeli jails, an end to cross border attacks, including rockets in both directions on the Israeli-Gaza border and the Israeli-Lebanese border, and the strengthening of moderates and the weakening of extremists.

The current strategy to end the crisis employs extreme long-term violence and escalating threats against civilians that may or may not end with the release of the kidnapped soldiers and prisoners in Israeli jails. It may or may not end the cross border attacks; it will most likely strengthen extremists and weaken moderates and will cause vast damage and human suffering.

At times when anger rules, it is difficult to think logically, nevertheless; there is a more rational course that could be advanced that might have a better chance of achieving the desired results written above. Our proposal is as follows:

Prime Minister Olmert will immediately meet publicly with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and tell him the following:

1. Once Corporal Gilead Shalit is released from Gaza, Israel will immediately release all of the women and children prisoners in Israeli jails (without blood on their hands).

2. Israel will declare a ceasefire including the end of all shelling in Gaza, all targeted killings, and all arrest campaigns in the West Bank. If the Palestinians adhere to a ceasefire on their side, effective for all of the factions, after one month of full ceasefire, Israel will release all of the Palestinian prisoners incarcerated in Israel since before September 1993. If the ceasefire holds for another month, another several hundred prisoners will be released, etc.

3. Olmert will also tell Abbas that if the two Israeli soldiers kidnapped by Hizballah will be released, Israel will release all of the Lebanese prisoners being held in Israeli prisons."

------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------

http://www.tikkun.org/rabbi_lerner/news_item.2006-07-17.9426591429

The Long Term Plan:

"1. Permanent boundaries for both states that roughly resemble the pre-67 borders, with some border adjustments mutually agreed to along lines developed in the Geneva Accord (Israel incorporating some of the border settlements into Israel, in exchange for Israel giving equal amounts and quality of land to the Palestinian State).

2. Sharing of Jerusalem and its holy sites, with each side entitled to establish their national capital in Jerusalem, Israel to have control over the Jewish and Armenian quarters plus the Wall and adjacent territory, and Palestine to have control over the Temple Mount with its mosques.

3. All states participating in the International Conference would dedicate at least .1% of their GDP toward an international fund for reparations for Palestinians who lost property, employment or homes in the period 1947-1967, and to Jews who fled from Arab states in the same period (however, reparations will not be paid to any Arab or Jewish family with current gross assets of more than $5 million dollars).

4. A joint Israel/Palestine/International Community police force will be set up to enforce border security for both sides. The U.S. and Nato will enter into a mutual security pact for both parties guaranteeing that each side will be protected by the U.S. and Nato from any assault by the other or by any assault from any other country in the world.

5. Creation of an Atonement and Reconciliation Commission which will unveil all records of both sides, bring to light all violations of human rights on both sides, bring formal charges against those who do not confess their involvement in those violations and testify to the details, and supervise a newly created peace curriculum for all schools and universities aimed at teaching reconciliation and non-violence in action and communication. The explicit goal of this Commission will be to foster the conditions for a reconciliation of the heart and a new understanding on the part of both peoples that each side has been cruel and insensitive, and need to repent, and that both sides have a legitimate natrrative that needs to be understood and accepted as a legitimate viewpoint by the other side."