John Kerry's Words have Inflamed the Arab Community throughout the World

[DuctapeFatwa]

Just when I thought John Kerry would be fair to both sides... this article appears... ''The Cause of Israel is the Cause of America,'' by Senator John F. Kerry. He has lost his credibility as an honest broker! This statement flies in the face of his balancing the concerns of both Israel and the Arab world. John Kerry's words have inflamed Arabs thoughout the world... and in America. It is everywhere, in emails and publications throughout Europe, the UK, America and the Middle East .

I still support Kerry as President for his stance on the economy, jobs, health care and the environment but challenge him to clarify his position and acknowledge the wrongs that have been inflicted by the Israeli Zionists on the Palestinian people, many of whom are direct descendants of the ancient people of the Holy Land.

Kerry's other challenger Ralph Nader is an Arab, a Semite. Much of the leadership in Israel is composed of members of the Jewish religion who are predominantly descendants of white Europeans, not Semites...

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0402/S00201.htm

[WilliamPitt]

1. A mainstream American politician has sided with Israel

Stop the presses.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

17. Kerry takes the status-quo approach...

Don't bother stopping the presses...

[DrFunkenstein]

23. No, Actually Kerry Supports Parallel Concessions (Not Status Quo)

"Without demanding unilateral concessions, the United States must mediate a series of confidence building steps which start down the road to peace. Both parties must walk this path together - simultaneously. And the world can help them do it.

While maintaining our long term commitment to Israel's existence and security, the United States must work to keep both sides focused on the end game of peace. Extremists must not be allowed to control this process."

http://www.johnkerry.com/news/speeches/spc_2003_0123.html

[DrFunkenstein]

24. Kerry On Arab Civil Rights

Many of the victims of the Bush Administration’s civil liberties violations are of Arab-descent – but our Constitution is color-blind. An assault on one person’s rights is an assault on this nation’s fabric and on all our rights. The Americans threatened when basic rights become treated as disposable are not just those from the Mid East. They’re Americans from the Midwest and all over our country.

Many of this Administration’s abuses of civil liberties have nothing to do with the Patriot Act. That’s especially true of the hundreds of people that have been detained without explanation and without real cause. John Ashcroft’s Justice Department has been so arrogant and reckless in detaining people that even the Department’s Inspector General has cried foul. 762 people – Arabs and Muslims – were detained, sometimes for many months, regardless of the evidence. Most were never charged with a real crime. Not one was charged in relation to the terrorism probe. But the average wait for the FBI to clear a detainee for deportation was 80 days, with some waiting as long as eight months. In numerous cases, people not accused of any crime were locked down 23 hours a day, sometimes in solitary confinement, and shackled when outside their cells.

Nacer Fathi Mustafa and his father, American citizens of Palestinian descent, were stopped by immigration agents in Houston on their way back home from a business trip to Mexico. They were arrested and charged with altering their passports. The authorities finally decided that there, in fact, was nothing wrong with their passports. After they had been held in a Texas jail for 67 days. John Ashcroft calls the policy “hold until cleared.” That’s just a fancy way of saying “guilty until proven innocent.” It is at odds with everything America’s justice system should be about – and it is wrong.

The story of America is the story of people like Fawaz Ismail. His Palestinian parents came to America from Jordan when he was nine years old. Twenty-five years ago, he began selling American flags from the back of his Volkswagen bus because he loved what the flag stood for. Today, he is the largest retailer of flags in America.

After September 11th, people lined up for half a mile outside his stores. He sold half a million flags in a week and donated a portion of the earnings to the families of the victims.

But a few days after the attack, he was leaving a restaurant on a Saturday afternoon when sirens began to scream. The police officer told him it was just a routine check. But he knew that the only reason he was pulled over was because of his ethnicity. When law enforcement wastes resources on those who have done nothing wrong – it makes it harder to track down those who are truly dangerous.

America deserves leaders that are more concerned with prosecuting the War on Terror, than persecuting those who disagree with them or those of a certain ethnic background. No one will be stronger in defending this nation than I, but we are better than secret and indefinite detentions. We are better than the physical abuse of prisoners who don’t have the slightest connection to terrorism. And there is a better way to security than racial or religious or ethnic profiling.

America deserves more from its leaders. They deserve leadership equal to the courage Americans show everyday. That courage can change this country and transform the world. It can give us a government that values democracy and preserves our rights. It can protect our country and our liberties. It can end the era of John Ashcroft and renew our faith in the Constitution. Fawaz Ismail’s flags fly on posts all over America. Let’s join together to make sure that flag represents the best of us – and that it represents all of us. Thank you.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2003_1201.html

[DrFunkenstein]

26. What Kerry Learned During His Time In Israel

I went to Jerusalem a number of years ago on an official journey to Israel and I was absolutely fascinated by the 32 or so different branches of Catholicism that were there. That's before you even get to the conflict between Arabs and Jews.

I have spent a lot of time since then trying to understand these fundamental differences between religions in order to really better understand the politics that grow out of them. So much of the conflict on the face of this planet is rooted in religions and the belief systems they give rise to. The fundamentalism of one entity or another.

So I really wanted to try to learn more. I've spent some time reading and thinking about it and trying to study it and I've arrived at not so much a sense of the differences but a sense of the similarities in so many ways; the value system roots and the linkages between the Torah, the Koran and the Bible and the fundamental story that runs through all of this, that connects us-and really connects all of us.

http://www.americanwindsurfer.com/mag/back/issue5.5c.html

[DuctapeFatwa]

41. And that differs from what bush says how?

With the exception of his unfortunate suggestion that sharon show restraint when utilizing the fruits of American labor in the performance of routine assassination operations in densely populated residential areas, for which he was immediately upbraided by almost the entire congress, incluing Kerry and Edwards, the main difference between his statements on the subject and those of bush are that Kerry's use more elegant sentence structure.

[DrFunkenstein]

43. Wha?

Do you understand the difference between unilateral and parallel concessions? Let me give you a hint: One was backed by AIPAC, the other by Edward Said.

[DuctapeFatwa]

46. ROFL I'm talking about what they both SAY, as opposed to DO

Could you post a link to all the resolutions Kerry has drafted to change US policy on Israel?

And all his votes on whether to give Israel more of your tax money?

And I'm still waiting for a list of differences in what they say. Bush calls for "both sides to make concessions" too.

[DrFunkenstein]

76. Tell Ya What

Why don't YOU back up your claims, and then will talk about what Kerry will do as Chief Diplomat.

[DuctapeFatwa]

84. I think the records and statements of both speak for themselves

I don't make any claims that either is likely to change their positions, do you?

[DrFunkenstein]

92. What Records Are You Referring To?

That's what I'm asking for, please.

[DuctapeFatwa]

99. Kerry's record as a Senator, bush's as president

Isn't one of Kerry's selling points that he supports sharon more than bush?

Just because most of congress was signing the letter, he didn't have to. I have no reason to suspect that he signed for any reason other than his deeply held principle that sharon should not be asked to use restraint when deploying US-funded equipment into residential areas for the purposes of routine assassinations.

The Congress votes to give Israel money.

If you are suggesting that Kerry has ever voted against giving Israel money, or introduced any resolution critical in any way of US policy toward Israel, please inform me of my error.

[_Jumper_]

101. Clinton

What did you think of Clinton's ME policy?

[DuctapeFatwa]

102. Find a recent article or editorial about Israel, post it in the IP forum

and underneath, paste the text strings below

======================
Comment: What did you think of Clinton's ME policy?
=======================================

If I even attempt to answer your question here, they will lock the thread, and the above referenced method is the only way you can ask a question even in the IP forum without them locking it

[_Jumper_]

103. I forgot about that

n/t

[DrFunkenstein]

108. Let Me Tell You What I Think Of The Whole I/P Situation

Nah, just kidding.

I'm still holding out on the who's lazier contest between me and Ductape over who is going to look up Kerry's I/P voting record. I'm thinking tie.

[DuctapeFatwa]

114. I already did, weeks ago, even though I think we both know that if he had

ever once faltered or strayed too far from the Gary Bauer approved Rapture-Ready, oilngun annointed policy on Israel, he would have been declared "unelectable" and catapulted to Cynthia McKinneyland long ere this.

[Kahuna]

50. *Snarf*

Whew boy!

[waldenx]

52. Kerry apologists

are exactly the reason why he will change nothing if he becomes President.
What motivation would he have, when there is an army of sheep who think he can do nothing wrong?

[George_Bonanza]

66. A truly unfair characterization

Kerry's supporters are an army of sheep? Only to those who cannot comprehend why other people may have different beliefs than they do.

[DrFunkenstein]

78. Very Well-Researched Sheep At Least...

Bah?

[littlejoe]

70. Israel IS our only real ally in the region. But the bigger question is,

how are the oil producing Arab countries going to cope and react, when President Kerry neutralizes our dependence on foreign oil?

[_Jumper_]

82. Real ally?

What has it done for America that "fake allies" like Turkey and Jordan haven't done?

[Scott Lee]

71. So Kerry IS "business as usual" eh, Pitt?

Thanks for confirming that for us.

[derby378]

2. Oh, brother

I've got nothing against Israel, but it would have been nice to see what happened if Shimon Peres didn't get assassinated. Israeli-Palestinian relations went seriously south afterward.

[mobuto]

5. Shimon Peres is alive and well, thank you.

Its Yitzak Rabin who was assasinated.

[blondeatlast]

11. The real trouble began when Anwar Sadat was assassinated.

Some thought it was Clinton's penis, but apparently it was Mr. Kerry.

Sheesh. And sheesh again.

[IndianaGreen]

6. It was Rabin who was assassinated, not Peres who is unelectable

because of his personality.

[KittyWampus]

55. Speaking Of Unelectable... Edwards Didn't Even Know Who Rabin Was

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/10/news-ireland.php
“One evening while he was campaigning for the Senate in North Carolina, Edwards was faced with a choice
of several events he might attend. An advance man suggested, ‘Maybe we ought to go to the reception for
Leah Rabin.’ ‘Who’s she?’ ‘Yitzhak Rabin’s widow,’ replied the aide. ‘Who was he?’ asked Edwards.”

[mobuto]

3. Snore

I don't think Senator Kerry really gives a rat's ass about the votes of Arabs around the world. Just the ones in the United States matter.

Kerry's other challenger Ralph Nader is an Arab, a Semite. Much of the leadership in Israel is composed of members of the Jewish religion who are predominantly descendants of white Europeans, not Semites.

Where do I even begin?

[Iverson]

4. He should just tell the Middle East to get in line ...

... like the progressives and other anti-war voters. There is no other permissible choice, I hear.

[JohnLocke]

7. My opinion of Senator Kerry just shot up!

[DuctapeFatwa]

8. Kerry believes that bush does not support sharon enough

He signed the letter reprimanding bush for saying sharon should show restraint when firing US-taxpayer funded helicopter gunships into residential areas.

[IndianaGreen]

9. Kerry's silence on the plight of Palestinians is deafening!

I am distributing this counterpunch article by Kerry to all of my contacts. They are ABB, but I they don't realize how bad Kerry is about the issues we care about, which include a just and peaceful settlement and the dismantling of all the Israeli settlements on land occupied since 1967.

[molly]

10. Maybe Kerry wants to start by fixing the US

[DuctapeFatwa]

13. Not at all silent, see post 8 (nt)

[anti-NAFTA]

12. Ashkenazi Jews are not descendants of "white Europeans"

1. Ashkenazis are descedants of a Turkic people. (note: I am Sephardi and semitic)

2. Ralph Nader? The man's a joke. He supported the Kataeb, and his family belonged to the Lebanese upper class which was demolished by the Muslim uprising in the 1970s.

3. Major candidates MUST pander to Israel. You have to understand that a good portion of campaign contributions to both parties come from Jews. I would hate to see my people convert to neoconservatism. Without us, the Democrats will not be as financially successful.

4. Candidates who denounce Israel are often portrayed as "antiSemites". Kerry can't afford that label.

[11cents]

15. No.

>1. Ashkenazis are descedants of a Turkic people. (note: I am >Sephardi and semitic)

LOL. No. This bit of pseudo-science, first promoted (to my knowledge) by the novelist Arthur Koestler, is now a standard piece of neo-Nazi and white supremacist propaganda. The fact that "Ashkenazi" and "Sephardic" Jews are in fact one people with a common line of descent has been amply shown by genetic studies, contrary to both you and the ever-ill-informed DuctapeFatwa. If you really are a Jew you might want to avoid parrotting this particular line.

Genetic studies also show a close connection between Jews ("Ashkenazi" and "Sephardic" alike) and Palestinians, unsurprisingly.

[DuctapeFatwa]

16. Could you repost the link to remarks by me on the subject of genetic

studies of Ashkenazi Jews?

Don't know what went wrong, but it did not show up in your post.

Thanks!

[11cents]

25. You said ...

... that the Israeli leadership is largely made up of "white Europeans" as opposed to Semites. Yours is a specious quasi-racial distinction anyway, but the suggestion that "European" Jews are not of semitic descent is incorrect.

[DuctapeFatwa]

36. LOL And when you clicked the link, what name did you see?

My interpretation of the text below the letter was inconsistent with any information pertaining to me at all.

Am I missing something?

[anti-NAFTA]

22. All I know for sure

is that I don't look like an Ashkenazic Jew, and Ashkenazic Jews don't look like Arabs. :shrug:

[11cents]

28. Oh what nonsense

What does an Arab look like? I've known blond Palestinians and black Saudis. What does an Ashkenazi Jew look like? I've known some who were blond and some who were dark-haired and dark-complexioned. It takes very little "mixing" to produce variation in physical characteristics. The now-vanished population of Chinese Jews looked pretty much like other Chinese, but they were largely descended from Persian Jewish travellers.

[DuctapeFatwa]

37. Perhaps the Sepoy Rebellion could have been prevented if England

had sent only Picts to colonize South Asia?

[IconoclastIlene]

29. The Khazars

There is a theory that Ashkenazi Jews are descendents of the Khazars, a group of Jews who emigrated to the Caucaucus mountains at the time of the diaspora.

Madame B.

[anti-NAFTA]

That's what I had in mind.

A Turkic tribe. I never knew it was a neo-Nazi argument. It's all but established fact in the French Sephardic community. Ashkenazim don't like it maybe, but if they don't like it they should accept Sephardim as fellow Jews. I've been called an Arab (edit: and a ni**er, believe it or not) one too many times in my life to really give a hell.

[_Jumper_]

53. Jews are 2% of the population

I doubt that their share of campaign contributions exceeds single digits. We should obviously take it into account because they donate far more than Arabs. However, that does not justify blank-check support for Israel that harms US security.

[mobuto]

77. Um, no

You look closely, you'll find that Jews contribute about half of the Democratic Party's money. Jews are also extremely important electorally (varying from 70-80% Democratic), unless you forget what happened in Florida in 2000.

However, that does not justify blank-check support for Israel that harms US security.

The US and Israel share many common interests. I don't think anybody has ever suggested however that the US endanger its security. If you're suggesting, however, that we should appease terrorists to avoid offending them, I'd answer that that's not a recipe for success.

[_Jumper_]

86. Link?

I find it hard to believe that 2% of the population contributes half of money that the Democratic Party raises. That sounds like an anti-Semitic myth to me.

What is the % for the GOP?

They are important electorally but it doesn't justify us causing 1.2 billion people to hate us and cause more 9/11's. The fact that our Israel policy played a major role in 9/11 cannot be denied. Moreover, is there any evidence to suggest that most Jews will vote based on foreign policy? That sounds like a "5th column" anti-Semitic myth.

[mobuto]

117. How can anyone know for sure?

Last time I gave money to a political candidate, nobody asked what my religion was. I gave my guess - you can dismiss it if you want.

That sounds like an anti-Semitic myth to me.

Really? Well, wouldn't that depend on whether you were a Republican or a Democrat? I think it would be philo-Semitic, indicative of the American Jewish community's long-standing commitment to social justice and progressive politics.

They are important electorally but it doesn't justify us causing 1.2 billion people to hate us and cause more 9/11's.

Let me get this straight - you're saying that America should abandon the Jews because 1.2 billion people hate them? Is that what this country is all about?

Moreover, is there any evidence to suggest that most Jews will vote based on foreign policy?

You've lost me there. What are you talking about?

[_Jumper_]

120. Response

I did an internet search and I found a few estimates close to what you said, so apparently it is true.

Abandon "the Jews"? I merely said that we should not give blank-check support to a foreign country if it harms that interest. Why have a nation if you aren't going to fight for its interests?

Do you think most US Jews vote based on what happens in a distant nation? I don't. I think they vote based on American interests like everyone else.

[berry]

14. I wonder when this speech was made and when published.

If it was a long time ago, I certainly will want to hear how he speaks about this issue now. If it was recently, I have to wonder about Kerry's judgement--there's no need to say things like this. No way is a statement like this going to make peace more likely....

I do suspect that this is an old speech--and if so, it's pretty irresponsible of counterpunch not to put a date on it.

[JHBowden]

18. We should not support Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad.

I've seen many make excuses for the suicide bombings, since the occupation somehow justifies every act of Palestinian violence. I know the Palestinians have taken on more losses, but we need to recognize when terrorists say "death to America," they mean it, as seen on 911.

[Bombtrack]

30. the softly anti-semitic, "anti-zionist" Israel-hating chic has dug in deep

on an ever growing population of the knee-jerk left. I SUSPECT, but would be the first to admit I could be wrong, that DUCTAPEFATWA is a victem of the warped propaganda from the destributors of such garbage

[Scott Lee]

72. Good grief, whats next? Palestinian dignity and self determination?

We may never survive this. Dread God, help us.

[_Jumper_]

54. They oppose Israel, not America

However, they are symptoms of the same disease and that alone should make us favor the Israelis over the Palestinians.

[wabeewoman]

19. Kerry's Israeli policy

is here http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/foreignpolicy/ I couldn't find when the article was written but it likely represents his current feelings based on his web site.
snip
John Kerry believes that history and our own best interests demand that the United States maintain a steady policy of friendship and support for Israel. As the only true democracy in the Middle East, Israel is our most important ally, and a critical partner in the quest for peace and security in this troubled region. America’s longstanding commitment to Israel’s independence and survival must never waver.

[Mobius]

20. Question: Who do you think the ARAB people hate lots more?

:shrug:

[Bombtrack]

21. The goverments in the middle east are the most deplorable on earth

Israel is dead last in violations of progressive principals and basic human rights in the middle east, and the basic law of Israel is based on democracy and human rights. It is a liberal democracy with a problem rooted in a fundementally flawed idea, but one that does not merrit the hypocritical hypocracy of the corrupt, ruthless muslim governments who more often than not turn a blind eye to or are actively involved in the promotion of pure unbrideled racist hatred towards Israel and jews.

I am not a supporter of John Kerry. But I am a supporter of Israel and it's right to defend itself from terror.

[Shanty Oilish]

27. They're a lot better on women's rights too

:thumbsup:

[Bombtrack]

32. "alot better" is an understatement

Islam is being driven by a fascist, totalitarian, cheuvenist, racist, screed that is being pumped into 10s of millions of muslim children every day.

Make no mistake about it. We are in a clash of civilizations, and some "liberals" or "progressives" want to argue for or defend something I don't apply to very much, evil. It's more evil than Stalinism, probably more than Naziism

[anti-NAFTA]

33. OK, now Islam is more "evil" than Stalinism and Naziism

That is an ignorant statement. I urge you to renounce it.

[Bombtrack]

34. No, the strain of it that is DRIVING the religion

But it's not like that twisting of my words wasn't inevitable.

What is the net effect of dominant Islamic law doing to muslim countries right now. Particularly in regard to Israel. The knee-jerk anti-Israel western liberals don't seem to ever see them as the ones more responsible for these countries being complete feudalistic cesspools for the most part. I do.

You can speak in flowery terms about passages in the Koran and how beuatifle and peaceful a religion it is. But that's not it's state. It's state is fostering governments that are utterly abhorable and not even in the same universe of comparability to the missteps of Israeli policy.

I'm not going to stand silent while liberals regurgitate the insane talking points of these governments

[DuctapeFatwa]

38. Just about every state with a large Muslim population is a US client state

ruled not by what Mohammed said, but by what Uncle Sam says.

[Bombtrack]

42. First that isn't true, and second, if it was Israel would still be

justified in defending itself from the murderous racist, evil ideology-brainwashed terrorists which these countries export and from the governments of these countries themselves.

Where does your machiavellian paranoia end? What is Uncle Sams and Israels evil benefit from being the fosterer of all of this from the innocent Muslim countries? Right now the longterm goals of the US and UN and Israle NATO and all the democratic civilized countries within those bodies in regard to the middle east should be to promote the moderatization of Islam, and it's your contention that that shouldn't be a goal. That everything that can and should be done should be to stop Israel from being bad

[DuctapeFatwa]

47. The governments of those countries are installed by the US

and paid good money to do as they're told, which they do, for the greater glory of the US arms and energy industry.

Don't you think the Israeli people deserve better than being used as the the fat little pitbull of a weapons dump to guard America's strategic petroleum resources in the region?

[Bombtrack]

49. government(s) ? Name them

prove that your not just off on whatever speil you read on Whatreallyhappened.com or some other hate site. The US has no interest in an entire generation of hate-filled drones who want to murder us. It saddens me that more sensible DUers aren't speaking up for non-fringe perception of reality

[DuctapeFatwa]

51. Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Bahrain, Pakistan, Indonesia

Lebanon, Nigeria, Mautitania, Qatar, UAE - hey wouldn't it be more efficient for you to name the ones that are NOT?

And oh, yeah, Iraq and Afghanistan, such as either can be said to have a government. Iran, Syria and Libya are still works in progress but will be either brought into full client state compliance and/or occupied shortly.

If you don't realize the raving Mullahs are the best friends the bush regime ever had, I suggest you reflect on whether Jerry Falwell's frequent newsletters and pronouncements on his view of world events is helpful or harmful to Democrats.

Many people find that history can be an interesting and informative topic to read about.

I'm sure I've left out whole buckets of client states, but my fingers got tired.

[_Jumper_]

64. Israel's role can't be ignored

The truth is that the #1 reason the US is hated in the Muslim world, especially the Arab world, is US backing of Israel over the Palestinians. This is why settling that conflict should be a top priority of the next administration.

The world actually is pro-Palestinian. The US is the pro-Israel country. Everyone else is pro-Palestinian. They all can't be wrong. There indeed is a problem there. Their diagnosis is incorrect, however, in my view. They blame Israel first and the Palestinians second. The Palestinian failure to stop terrorism is the main reason that conflict festers today, in my view, and we need to make them realize that if they do not stop it there will never be peace. We also should allow Israel to do whatever it needs to destroy the terrorist groups it faces. If the Palestinians will not stop terrorism voluntarily, they must be compelled to do so with overwhelming force.

The Palestinians do suffer greatly and that is ignored by the American media, which is the reason we are the only people that are pro-Israel. The rest of the world sees it and blames both sides but sympathizes with the weaker side.

[_Jumper_]

61. Evidence?

I have heard that time and again but haven't seen any evidence proving it.

[DuctapeFatwa]

106. LOL You don't get out much, do you?

Go talk to some regular old non-oil company or govt affiliated Egyptians, Arabians, etc. ask them how they like Hosni, the Princes. Lather, rinse repeat. Collect em all.

Do you really think the people of these countries sincerely place a higher priority on US business interests than their own needs?

Maybe Kuwaitis. Ask a Kuwaiti what he pays for gas. He'll tell you he doesn't know, the chauffeur handles that.


edit to put the "u" in chauffeur.

[_Jumper_]

110. I don't live in any of those countries so I don't see any real Arabs

Sure the US backs those governments and the deal with US companies but does America control them?

[DuctapeFatwa]

113. Well, that's pretty much the deal.

And the deal includes doing whatever is necessary to prevent any democracy from accidentally springing up :)

The "leaders" of these countries are well paid to do that, and to give the US whatever it needs, whenever it needs it, and they do.

The raving Mullahs are an important part of the deal.

When you want to keep a population poor, barefooted and ignorant, the two best strategies ever devised by man for this purpose are the one-two punch of oppression of women and convincing people that God commands it.

If you've read the Koran, you know that of all the Abrahamic scriptures, Islam cuts women a way better deal, and in fact many of the arguments popular with westerners against the pre-Islamic tribal customs that they perceive as Islam are not too different from the objections the Prophet had to them.

But just as the message of Jesus is irrelevant to the political guidance offered by Falwell, Robertson and ilk, the message of Mohammed has little to do with Mullah Omar's Guide to Gracious Living.

If you can let people vent on the mosque steps on Friday, they are less likely to show up on the steps of the Palace on Monday morning, and this saves American taxpayers money, as even more guns would have to be provided to the sheik to shoot them.

[_Jumper_]

60. Islam has little to do with most of that

Most Muslim nations are not fundie run. The anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism many of those governments preach is a result of political expediency.

[Scott Lee]

73. Wahhabism is not dominating the MidEast.

It's prevelant in A'saudiyah (Saudi Arabia) but not the whole M.E. Hence you have no point. Again.

[WheresWaldo]

100. You sound pretty ignorant Bombtrack

I doubt you've ever even talked to a Muslim...

how can you say a religion of 1.2 billion is driven by an ideology worse than nazism and stalinism. yes, the fundies, crazies, terrorists, and assorted villains are out there, but what religion doesnt have them? Hinduism, Judaism, and even chrisitianity has its fair share of religious extremists.

i suggest you go visit a muslim country, and if thats not possible, go visit a mosque in your town to get a better idea of what islam means to MOST muslims.

[DuctapeFatwa]

107. Come on, anybody can study different religions and talk to people and

then discuss them. But to hold forth on the subject when you haven't done either takes both creativity and chutzpah!

[_Jumper_]

59. What clash of civilizations?

We are fighting one terrorist group that has attacked the homeland once when the Bush administration "let down its guard." And they are fighting a handful of countries, most of which are Arab Muslim countries. Al-Qaeda is not out to destroy "the West."

If Islam were indeed being driven by what you say it is being driven by we'd be screwed. We'd have hundreds of millions of terrorists. However, it is true that Islamism and radical Islamism exert influence far greater than their numbers. They are a serious threat and must be contained. Democractizing and modernizating the Muslim world should be the top foreign policy priority of America.

You are right about it being exported worldwide and we need to look at who is behind it: Saudi Arabia. Until we crackdown on the Saudi's exportation of hatred we will never win the War on Terror.

[IconoclastIlene]

118. Short Memories: Who was dancing in the streets on 9/11?

Does anyone remember? Does anyone believe the hoax that it was pre arranged videotape from some other event?

Please remember who stands up for the US and who is our ally and it is not any of the Arab states; no matter how you would like to re-write history.

Let alone, from what country did the perpetrators of 9/11 come from? Please, let us not for get that either.


Thank you.

Madame B.

[_Jumper_]

119. Spin

There were people in all ethnic groups who celebrated 9/11. Moreover, Israel is a tenous ally, just like the Arab states. I would list the reasons but that would cause this thread to get locked. I am sure you are very familiar with them, though...

[Cheswick2.0]

31. one sentence in this post is just funny

challenge him to clarify his position

Don't hold your breath.

PS.. I met and got to know some gentlemen from Pakistan this weekend. I think there is going to be a shift in their voting this primary season. They are determined to get rid of bush, but I don't think they will like this statement by Kerry. I see some Edwards voters in development.

[DrFunkenstein]

35. See Posts #23, 24, & 26

If you are sincerely weighing the issues, rather than just trying to trash one of the Democrats.

[DuctapeFatwa]

39. Are you suggesting that Edwards supports sharon less than Kerry?

Link?

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

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

[Bombtrack]

44. Frankly if it's a choice between promoting the wants of the mainstream jew

the mainstream US jewish community, and appeasing the the sensitivities of the US muslim community, which you seem to indicating it is, regardless of the fact that the jewish community is probably more right 99 percent of the time, as a purely logistical and honerable choice I'm going with the Jewish community, who have been THE backbone of the democratic party more than any other group in the last half century.

[_Jumper_]

57. That is a false choice

First, substitue the word "white" for "Jewish" and the word "black" for "Muslim" and realize what is wrong with your post.

US Jews and US Muslims both favor a two state solution. The fundies make the groups as a whole look bad. Moreover, both parties are pro-Israel. Hence, that issue is off the table. Muslims will not vote based on that. Lastly, I consider it fundamentally racist to assume that most Jews or Muslims vote based on what occurs in a foreign land. Most of them vote based on the same issues everyone else votes on: defense, health care, the economy, education, etc.

Backbone of the Democratic Party? White Christians have been the backbone of the Democratic Party. Deciding future policy based on past group support is dangerous. Using that reasoning we would have sided with conservative white Christians in the South against blacks.

[_Jumper_]

56. So what is your "final solution"?

:eyes:

[Duder]

45. Not to worry...

...

'Kerry said American can't neglect its role in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the Mideast, a breeding ground for terrorist activity. He pledged to appoint a presidential ambassador to the peace process, who would report directly to him and to the secretary of state.

"There are a handful of uniquely qualified Americans I would consider appointing -- President Carter, President Clinton or, in the interests of bipartisanship, James Baker," he said.'

Kerry vows to reverse Bush policies

[DuctapeFatwa]

48. In fairness to Kerry, Daniel Pipes had already been tapped for bush's

Institute of Peace. He's just one man, he can't be everywhere.

[Tinoire]

58. Kerry: I believe Ariel Sharon willing to make peace (Israeli paper)

Bush:

Q: Mr. President, you said progress has been made toward our vision. Where? And secondly, do you believe that Ariel Sharon is a man of peace, and are you satisfied with his and his government's assurances that there was no massacre in Jenin?

THE PRESIDENT: I do believe Ariel Sharon is a man of peace.
http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/summit/text/0418bshpwl.htm
====

Kerry: I believe Ariel Sharon willing to make peace

Last Update: 27/01/2004 10:40

Kerry: I believe Ariel Sharon willing to make peace

By Shmuel Rosner in New Hampshire and Nathan Guttman, Haaretz Correspondent and Reuters

"I believe Ariel Sharon is willing to make peace, I really believe it," leading Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry said to a crowd in Salem, New Hampshire on Monday, in his last public appearance ahead of Tuesday's Democratic primary.

<snip>

Kerry delivered the remarks on Sharon only hours after being quoted as saying that the government in Israel currently lacks someone who can provide the goods when it comes to negotiations with the Palestinians.

He was also quoted as saying that he believed the Palestinian Authority needed to be strengthened in order to overcome a power struggle with Hamas. Apparently the attributed quote was misinterpreted and did not accurately represent Kerry's stance.

<snip>

Israeli officials who analyzed Kerry's comments on the Middle East said they were, at worst, a misunderstanding. They believe he meant that Israel does not have a partner for talks on the Palestinian side, since the Palestinians are unable to provide the goods.

<snip>

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=387255&contrassID=1&subContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y

==

Last Update: 23/01/2004 01:51

American Democrat hopefuls sticking to pro-Israel policies

By Nathan Guttman

WASHINGTON - Surprising results this week in the Iowa primary have caused the American Jewish community, and supporters of Israel in the United States, to take a closer look at Democratic candidates who have up to now been trailing the pack.

In past months, the Jewish community was preoccupied with then front-runner Howard Dean. It monitored closely what appeared to be worrisome comments made by Dean, particularly his reference to an "evenhanded approach" toward the Middle East conflict. Though the obsession with Dean obscured the other candidates, the other Democratic Party hopefuls did not forget the Jewish community.

On Wednesday, Wesley Clark's staff organized a nationwide event aimed at his Jewish supporters. In dozens of cities around the country, rallies were held for Clark, and the retired general greeted his supporters in conference calls. Clark tried to allay Jewish voters' fears, most of them related to Israel. "I believe we should take risks for peace, and we will reach peace in the Middle East," Clark declared. He declined, however, to detail a peace plan. He did take a hard line toward the Arab countries. "Years ago, I saw that the Palestinians are teaching hate in classrooms, and I am also worried about the Saudis preaching hate. When I am president, I will take action against that," he stated.

<snip>

As far as American Jews are concerned, the jury is still out on the Democratic Party's new star, John Kerry. An experienced politician with 18 years on the Senate's Foreign Relations Committee under his belt, he has a solid record of supporting Israel. American Jewish sources in Washington indicated that Kerry's comments in off-the-record talks recall the approach adopted by the Clinton administration: unqualified support for Israel, yet also insistence that a resolution to the conflict with the Palestinians depends upon Israeli concessions in the territories.

<snip>

The bottom line, says one seasoned political observer in Washington, is that Israel has nothing to fear from Kerry, Clark or other Democratic hopefuls. All of the candidates endorse their party's supportive stance toward Israel, and the candidates are surrounded by staff workers who are long-standing friends of Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=386103&contrassID=1

[_Jumper_]

67. I agree with Clark and Kerry

However, why isn't there any major pro-Palestinian politician? What cost is there to a Democrat from Wyoming for being pro-Palestinian?

[mobuto]

81. Because American politicians understand

that Israel is the only bastion of democracy in the Middle East, that she shares the same interests as the United States, that our enemies are the same, and that were we in Israel's position, our reaction would be as harsh if not far harsher.

[_Jumper_]

88. So why is the USA the only pro-Israel country?

BTW, I generally agree with what you said aoubt shared interests, values, and common enemies.

[DuctapeFatwa]

104. Because the US is the only one who uses it as a weapons dump

to guard its oil in the region.

The US is also the only country that considers that America owns the oil in the region.

[Tinoire]

85. Earl Hilliard. Cynthia McKinney. Paul Findley. Prime examples

& they weren't even pro-Palestinian- they were pro-fairness.

You saw what happened to Dean and the stink that even-handed comment caused. It had Pelosi & co firing off letters as if it were the end of the world.

[_Jumper_]

89. But they were backbenchers

n/t

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

62. "John Kerry's Words have Inflamed the Arab Community throughout the World"

Oops!

[mobuto]

79. They weren't already inflamed?

Well, I guess this means Kerry can rule out winning Abu Dhabi. He might be able to pull out a plurality in Syria if the Ba'ath Party continues to self-destruct.

[_Jumper_]

91. Look at the author of post #62's avatar

That is what this is all about. Reckless comments like this will only increase terrorism.

[PurityOfEssence]

63. Yes, it's idiotic, but it won't be an issue in the General Election

Kerry said about Dean that "you can't be President and make a half-dozen gaffes a week". Big John has made a few corkers of his own.

Truly, Israel is the third rail in politics; they can do no wrong.

[_Jumper_]

65. Third rail?

Only 2% of Americans are Jews and I would imagine that only a fraction of them vote based on Israel. The Muslim electorate is about the same size as the Jewish one so the net result is almost a wash. How can being pro-Palestinian significantly harm a Democratic candidate?

[PurityOfEssence]

98. Absolutely

Look what heat Congressman Moran took for mentioning that there was a strong pro-Israel bias that was skewing our foreign relations at high levels.

Why did so many otherwise decent Jewish politicians vote for the IWR? I would flatly say that it's because of hatred of Saddam Hussein for his payments to the families of Palistinian suicide bombers. (Here in L.A., four Congresspeople voted for it: Harman, Schiff, Berman and even Henry Waxman.) To mention that sustaining the state of Israel is wrong is political suicide in this country.

The evangelicals are largely pro-Israel, too, and they're a thoroughly dangerous and energetic lot.

Can anyone pipe up and say that the constant sabre-rattling about Syria has nothing to do with anything except for the PNAC's obsession? Not really. To mention Israel as being counterproductive or out of line is essentially off limits in this country.

Don't let population percentages fool you; Jews have to be the most disproportionately successful cultural group on Earth, and it's to their credit. Statistically, there should only be two Senators in the whole body, but there are a lot more than that. Same in the House, many prominent industries, the Arts and other influential niches. Having been slaughtered wholesale while the rest of the world cynically did very little, they are not to be toyed with.

It is virtually impossible in American Politics to actively dispute the actions of extremists like the PNAC without being called to account for it.

[farmbo]

68. Remember Dean's "evenhanded" gaffe?

Who says social security is the 'third rail' of American politics? When Dean had the audacity to suggest an "evenhanded" approach to the Israeli/ Palestine problem, the negative reaction was swift, loud and seemingly unanimous.

It was as if he had pissed on that rail.

Alas, Kerry too has learned that lesson.

[Scott Lee]

74. Yes, I was outraged that Dean advocated fairness!

Shocked. SHOCKED, I say!

[Tinoire]

75. Dean on that comment. Very sad.

Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, after jumping down Howard Dean’s throat last fall when Dean suggested that America should pursue an “even-handed” policy in Middle East negotiations, used a similar phrase himself on the campaign trail in New Hampshire, according to a tape supplied by a rival campaign.

Dean later apologized for using the expression, saying he had come to understand that it was considered by some to be “code words” for pressuring Israel to make concessions to the Palestinians. Kerry said at the time of Dean’s now-infamous “ought not to take sides” remark that Dean was looking to depart from more than a half-century of pro-Israel Middle East policy, but he apparently dropped his hostility to Dean’s wording when responding to a question last week.

http://www.forward.com/campaignconfidential/2004_01_04_archiveindex.html

[Tinoire]

69. From http://www.us-israel.org/ (2004 Dem candidates)

2004 Presidential Candidates' Views on the Middle East
John Kerry

Policy Statements
"Working for Peace in the Middle East and Security For Israel."

“Americans’ security depends on helping the people of the Middle East see and act on a legitimate vision of peace.”

John Kerry believes that history and our own best interests demand that the United States maintain a steady policy of friendship and support for Israel. As the only true democracy in the Middle East, Israel is our most important ally, and a critical partner in the quest for peace and security in this troubled region. America’s longstanding commitment to Israel’s independence and survival must never waver.

Forging a stable and lasting peace in the Middle East is vital to American national security, to the security of Israel and other countries in the region, and to the aspirations of the Palestinian people for a viable Palestinian state. It is also an essential part of winning the war on terror. Ignoring or downplaying the conflict, as the Bush Administration did for far too long, is a dangerous game.

<snip>

Prime Minister Qureia must take serious, demonstrable steps to stop the bombings against Israelis and to rein in militant Palestinian groups bent on destroying the peace process. In Kerry’s view, it is critical that our European and Arab allies support this effort aggressively. If Prime Minister Qureia is committed to this course of action, the United States and its allies should provide technical assistance and training to the Palestinian security forces to strengthen their capacity to root out terrorist groups. The United States must also work with both Israelis and Palestinians to create acceptable and verifiable security benchmarks that the Palestinian Authority can reasonably achieve. While Israel must never give up its right to protect its citizens, the Israeli government must be prepared to respond with steps to alleviate hardships on the Palestinian people. The United States must work with Israel to identify and implement these confidence building measures.

<snip>
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/foreignpolicy/#

===

Excerpts from John Kerry's 12/23/03 foreign policy speech at Georgetown University

"I propose the following policy goals:

We should build on the success of Clinton Administration's Jordan Free Trade Agreement. Since the United States reduced tariffs on goods made in "qualifying industrial zones," Jordan's exports to the US jumped from $16 to $400 million, creating about 40,000 jobs. Let's provide similar incentives to other countries that agree to join the WTO, stop boycotting Israel and supporting Palestinian violence against Israel, and open up their economies.

We should also create a general duty-free program for the region, just as we've done in the Caribbean Basin Initiative and the Andean Trade Preference Act. Again, we should set some conditions: full cooperation in the war on terror, anti-corruption measures, non-compliance with the Israel boycott, respect for core labor standards and progress toward human rights.

Let's be clear: Our goal is not to impose some western free market ideology on the greater Middle East. It's to open up a region that is now closed to opportunity, an outpost of economic exclusion and stagnation in a fast-globalizing world.

These countries suffer from too little globalization, not too much. Without greater investment, without greater trade within the region and with the outside world, without the transparency and legal protections that modern economies need to thrive, how will these countries ever be able to grow fast enough to provide jobs and better living standards for their people? But as we extend the benefits of globalization to people in the greater Middle East and the developing world in general, we also need to confront globalization's dark side.

We should use the leverage of capital flows and trade to lift, not lower, international labor and environmental standards. We should strengthen the IMF's ability to prevent financial panics from turning into full-scale economic meltdowns such as we've seen in Argentina. And in the Middle East especially, we need to be sensitive to fears that globalization will corrupt or completely submerge traditional cultures and mores. We can do these things.

Fifth, and finally, we must have a new vision and a renewed engagement to reinvigorate the Mideast peace process. This Administration made a grave error when it disregarded almost seventy years of American friendship and leadership in the Middle East and the efforts of every President of the last 30 years. A great nation like ours should not be dragged kicking and resisting - should not have to be pressured to the task of making peace. A great nation like ours should be leading the effort to make peace or we risk encouraging through our inaction the worst instincts of an already troubled region.

Israel is our ally, the only true democracy in this troubled region, and we know that Israel as a partner is fundamental to our security. From Truman through Clinton, America has always been committed to Israel's independence and survival - we will never waver.

Israel's security will be best assured over the long term if real and lasting peace can be brought to the Middle East. I know from my own trips to Israel that the majority of the Israeli people understand and expect that one day there will be a Palestinian state. Their frustration is that they do not see a committed partner in peace on the Palestinian side. Palestinians must stop the violence - this is the fundamental building block of the peace process. The Palestinian leadership must be reformed, not only for the future of the Palestinian people but also for the sake of peace. I believe Israel would respond to this new partner after all, Israel has already indicated its willingness to freeze settlements and to move toward the establishment of a Palestinian state as part of a comprehensive peace process.

Without demanding unilateral concessions, the United States must mediate a series of confidence building steps which start down the road to peace. Both parties must walk this path together - simultaneously. And the world can help them do it. While maintaining our long term commitment to Israel's existence and security, the United States must work to keep both sides focused on the end game of peace. Extremists must not be allowed to control this process. American engagement and successful mediation are not only essential to peace in this war-torn area but also critical to the success of our own efforts in the war against terrorism. When I visited the region last year, in meetings with King Abdullah of Jordan, President Mubarak of Egypt, and Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, it became clear that September 11th had changed the imperatives of these countries. The Bush Administration has missed an opportunity to enlist much greater support in the peace process and needs to focus on this urgent priority- now.

The transformation of the Middle East which can come from these efforts will determine much of our future - but we must also look to the challenges on the rest of the planet. We must build a new and more effective role for the United States in the rest of this complex world."

Much more here: http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/kerry.html

Edwards is basically the same but much less wishy-washy about his convictions. http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/edwards.html

For a refreshing change reflecting true fairness and care for both peoples: http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/kucinich.html

[DrFunkenstein]

83. Sh*t, I Thought That Was Pretty Good, Actually

Is this an anti-Kerry post? That is not far from what my position would be.

[Tinoire]

97. It is a factual post based on his words

The major difference between us is the creedence we put in the campaign rethoric.

For Kerry to be taken seriously, we will need to address the continued expansion of Israel's deliberately undeclared borders, the settlements (all of which are illegal), the water theft (only Kucinich has dared mention this), the brutality of the IDF, the home demolitions, or the Palestinian children who are at African starvation levels.

He doesn't dare address those issues as they serve US interests. Instead, he pointedly ignores them and seizes the opportunity to push WTO & globalization. Most disheartening for me. Kerry is just not the man I used to think he was.

[DrFunkenstein]

109. Actually, Kerry Has Proposed Overruling The Secret Tribunals

And most of the downside of NAFTA, while opening up economically isolated regions to trade in order to build up a stable middle class (including former Soviet states with little natural resources for you cynical folk).

Kerry has referred to the WTO as run by "clearly unaccountable bureaucrats." Kerry would fight to end such practices (he's proposed legislation to do such), yet still believes that open markets and lowered tariffs can be a positive force.

http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:L3dpESAnS2wJ:www.twq.com/01spring/kerry.pdf+john+kerry+stopping+at+the+water%27s+edge&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

[kodi]

80. 22 arab states and not a single true democracy, were as israel is one

that is the common cause of the US and Israel, and when in the fullness of time the arab states throw off the shackles of authoritarian governments, then they will be in common cause with the US and with Israel.

[Scott Lee]

87. Do you have any idea what a Saudi democracy would be?

Do you think that even in their wildest fits of insanity the US wants a real democracy there or any other place with a majority of Muslisms, especially with a large contingent of fundamentalists?

Saudi Arabia is overwhelming Wahhab, an excrutiatingly fundamentalist sect that is the same held by the Bin Ladens.

Can you imagine? This is why the Bushhole rhetoric about wanting democracy in the MidEast is hokum, and inn fact would really be a security risk for the US as it stands.

[kodi]

93. so, you are for democracy, but not in the arab world? how nice of you

only westerners should be allowed to have democracy. becuase we are, what? white people who know how to be democratic?

yes, let us leave the swarthy races to their own devices.

[_Jumper_]

90. Are you serious?

Do you actually think that our policy is based on who is or isn't a democracy?

[kodi]

95. policy? the initial post was about kerry's remarks, not the state dept's

''The Cause of Israel is the Cause of America,'' by Senator John F. Kerry.

try reading the post again before you get too excited about showing us how saintly you are.

[DrFunkenstein]

94. Kerry: The Middle East is Not Monolithic

If you look at countries stretching from Morocco through the Middle East and beyond - broadly speaking the western Muslim world - what you see is a civilization under extraordinary stress.

The region's political and economic crisis is vividly captured in a recent report written by Arab scholars for the United Nations Development Program and the Arab Fund for Social and Economic Development. Let me quote:

"The wave of democracy that transformed governance in most of the world has barely reached the Arab states...The freedom deficit undermines human development and is one of the most painful manifestations of lagging political development."

According to Freedom House, there are no full-fledged democracies among the 16 Arab states of the Middle East and North Africa. The Middle East is not monolithic; there are governments making progress and struggling effectively with change in Jordan, Morocco and Qatar.

But Iraq, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Syria are among the 10 least free nations in the world.

Political and economic participation among Arab women is the lowest in the world and more than half of Arab women are still illiterate.

And these countries are among the most economically isolated in the world, with very little trade apart from the oil royalties which flow to those at the very top.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2003_0123.html

[_Jumper_]

96. But most of them don't have white skin

Hence, they must all be alike. /sarcasm off

[Nicholas_J]

105. You are forgetting his other statements about the peace process:

Israel is our ally, the only true democracy in this troubled region, and we know that Israel as a partner is fundamental to our security. From Truman through Clinton, America has always been committed to Israel's independence and survival - we will never waver.

Israel's security will be best assured over the long term if real and lasting peace can be brought to the Middle East. I know from my own trips to Israel that the majority of the Israeli people understand and expect that one day there will be a Palestinian state. Their frustration is that they do not see a committed partner in peace on the Palestinian side. Palestinians must stop the violence - this is the fundamental building block of the peace process. The Palestinian leadership must be reformed, not only for the future of the Palestinian people but also for the sake of peace. I believe Israel would respond to this new partner after all, Israel has already indicated its willingness to freeze settlements and to move toward the establishment of a Palestinian state as part of a comprehensive peace process.

Without demanding unilateral concessions, the United States must mediate a series of confidence building steps which start down the road to peace. Both parties must walk this path together - simultaneously. And the world can help them do it. While maintaining our long term commitment to Israel's existence and security, the United States must work to keep both sides focused on the end game of peace. Extremists must not be allowed to control this process. American engagement and successful mediation are not only essential to peace in this war-torn area but also critical to the success of our own efforts in the war against terrorism. When I visited the region last year, in meetings with King Abdullah of Jordan, President Mubarak of Egypt, and Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, it became clear that September 11th had changed the imperatives of these countries. The Bush Administration has missed an opportunity to enlist much greater support in the peace process and needs to focus on this urgent priority- now.

http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/issues/kerr012303spfp.html

[DrFunkenstein]

111. I Don't Think It Is A Matter Of Forgetting

So much as blocking it out.

[corporatewhore]

112. why am i not suprised

[NewYorkerfromMass]

115. and the Cause of Palestine is the Cause of America

the same can be said. and it is true. No controversy here.

[Freddie Stubbs]

116. The Democratic Party Platform supports Israel

Al Gore and the Democratic Party are fundamentally committed to the security of our ally, Israel, and the creation of a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace between Israel and its neighbors. We helped broker the Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty, the Wye River accords, and the Sharm el-Sheik Memorandum, and will continue to work with all parties to make progress towards peace. Our special relationship with Israel is based on the unshakable foundation of shared values and a mutual commitment to democracy, and we will ensure that under all circumstances, Israel retains the qualitative military edge for its national security. Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.

http://www.democrats.org/about/2000platform.html#peace