Rep. LaHood sides with those who side against Israel
There's a law being considered that would prohibit aid to the
Not only does the writer describe Rachel Corrie as an innocent person slain while protecting Palestinian homes (she was a terrorist sympathizer who burned the American flag and got killed trying to stop a bulldozer from demolishing tunnels being used to smuggle weapons for terrorists), it also heaps praise upon Hamas:
Why this extreme reaction to the beaten down Palestinian people? Because the Palestinians exercised their democratic rights and elected representatives of Hamas. Hamas has been demonized by Israel and many in the U.S. media despite the fact that it took a pledge against violence more than 18 months ago and has lived up to that promise. They have not committed acts of violence despite violence directed at the Palestinian people by Israel. Israel has demanded Hamas recognize Israel's right to exist -- but Israel is a country without clear borders. What exactly would Hamas be recognizing?
The rest of this article is just as charming ... and inaccurate.
Were I being praised by someone who expressed views like this -- as is Ray LaHood in this case -- I would seriously reconsider whether my position was correct.
Consider this, Ray:
Hamas wants to destroy Israel. Hamas uses money to buy weapons that it uses to kill Israelis. Since Hamas runs the Palestinian government, any money that government gets can be used to further Hamas' goal of killing Israelis (I doubt these people hold the concept of separate fund balances to be sacred).
This bill would stop money from getting to Hamas. So, wouldn't this bill, therefore, make it harder for Hamas to commit terrorism? Of course it would. Call me crazy, but I think that's a good thing.
Cross posted on Peoria Pundit.
UPDATE:
Above: Rachel Corrie, the "idealistic college kid who probably had no business hanging around the occupied territory, but that doesn't make her a 'terrorist sympathizer.' " That's her, burning the American flag at a Hamas rally.
40 comments:
You should find out where Rachel Corrie's grave is located. That way you can piss on it directly.
Or alternatively you could just let the woman rest in peace.
Or, her parents and their Jew-hating leftist friends can stay the Hell out of Peoria and stop suing Caterpillar for having the audacity to build ther tractor that ran overf the stupid flag-burning twit.
Hate must cloud the spelling center of the brain.
By the way, how exactly is opposing Isreali policies 'jew-hating'?
Is that the same way opposing French policies makes one a 'Christian-hater'?
ENOUGH ABOUT PEORIA, DAMMIT!
Bill,
You are way out of line. Rachel Corrie was an idealistic college kid who probably had no business hanging around the occupied territory, but that doesn't make her a "terrorist sympathizer."
I can't believe I'm defending Ray LaHood, but I'm sure he's voted for 95% of what AIPAC has asked for, the particular bill that you must be referring to is aiming to avoid a humanitarian disaster in the Occupied Territory. Even a right wing crypto facist like yourself could probably see the value of not letting babies born in the occupied territories die because they don't even have basic medicine.
Way to foster a dialouge!
While opposing Israeli policy and "Jew hating" could be mutually exclusive, very often it is not.
Interesting. We are all for democracy in the Middle East, unless the voters vote in a way we don't like.
I see nothing wrong with funding the regular working stiffs who do the day-to-day jobs in the Palestinian government.
There should be creative ways to help the regular people of Palestine without aid to those who back the attacks on Israel.
As far as Corrie goes: at least she had the guts to back up what she believed by going there.
That is more than you can say for all of those chicken-hawks to noisly support the Iraq war all the while ducking military service for themselves and their offspring.
Ollie:
Please explain why MY TAX DOLLARS should finance people who want to kill Americans?
They are terrorists.
This one is easy.
Gish,
anti semitism used to mean a world without Jews...
...now it means a world without a Jewish State.
Ollie,
The Hamas election victory was necessary and in the long run a good thing... Arabs on the West Bank were living a fraud bankrolled by western subsidies. They showed their cards, they have to accept the consequences.
Oddly one of those results has been a decrease in terror attacks.
Democracy doesn't make sense often times and people elect crazies (we in Illinois can't cast stones)... but it's the best way for peaceful poltics...
...the test for Arabs will be the second election... that's the real test for any democracy.
Bill,
I hope that one day you are delivered from your hatred for that dead woman. Nothing good can come from hating the dead. Whether in Heaven, Hell or just in the ground the dead are beyond our reach.
If the Corrie family are the bunch of anti-semites that you accuse them of being, they are not very effective because I've never heard of them outside of your posts. When bad people are that impotent, I suggest considering them beneath contempt. See e.g., Fred Phelps' anti-gay cult.
That said, I enjoy your other writing -- although I don't really care much about Peoria.
I'm right there with you, Bill. Anybody who burns the flag or fails to denounce people you call terrorists deserves to die. And if they do both, I'll even pull the trigger!
Yes, yes, I like the way you think.
Stick to the Peoria political scene Bill. You are way over your head when it comes to the Middle East.
Do the Palestinians deserve the protections of international human rights law?
Should Israel be able to violate Palestinian human rights?
Palestinian opposition to occupation should be seem in the context of Israel stealing land and violating Palestinian human rights.
Carl,
Hamas has declared war on Israel. What rights do you expect Israel to confer on them?
Why can't Arab lands grant Arabs in refugee camps citzenship?
About a 1 in 5 Israelis is Arab and they enjoy citzenship.
Why can a gay Arab visit a Gay Club in Tel Aviv but risk their life to visit one on the West Bank or Gaza?
While were at it, why can't Syria grant citzenship to the the 1 in 5 Kurds living there?
Why in the world the US should continue funding Arabs in Gasa and the West Bank with welfare makes no sense what so ever.
Mr. Baar:
It does no good to try to insert logic into any argument regarding Israel. There is a segment of the population that cannot conceive of Israel as anything but evil. It has something to do with the fact the Israel is a democracy and a friend to the United States .. another entity the left writes off as an evil influence.
And of course ... some people simply hate Jews.
Hey gish...who cares about spelling, does it make you feel good to point out a simple mistake? You're worthless.
I am still boggled by the opposition to the original post. LaHood is clearly wrong and it should be obvious to anyone.
I have no problems with the election of Hamas. They can elect whoever they want. However, if you are going to elect Hamas -- a terrorist group that wants to blow up innocents -- don't expect my tax dollars to support you, and if you end up blowing up Americans when you are killing innocent bus passengers, don't be shocked when you look up and see the U.S. Air Force looking for targets. They are free to elect Hamas, but then they all must expect the consequences of a nation run by terrorists.
American schools or Hamas? Border security or Hamas? Better health care or Hamas? Where is American money better spent?
Like I said -- this one is easy.
I'm not sure many people realized the West funded the PA until Hamas won.
Another case for Democracy... all of sudden there is clarity.
Bill Dennis,
You had me until you accused those of opposing Israel as being anti-semitism. That shows that you are as ideologically nuts as those who say Hamas is suffering because of world hatred of the Palestinians or a Jewish Conspiracy or whatever bs you speak.
I would say that less than 5% of Americans who speak against Israel do so out of anti-semitism and you have lost all respect from me by trying to equate the two. You are sick and we really need to move away from this victimhood debate on both sides.
I accused Hamas and the people who expressed support for the "democratically elected" government of Palestine as being anti-Jew. I did so because it is a true.
Please, please, please take a look at the propaganda that virtually all Arab nations feed their populace regarding Israel. It's straight out of Mein Kampf and the Articles of Zion.
Nonsense about how Israel is violating borders etc. and how all they want is a Palestinian homeland is what they tell their own people. They tell their own people that they want to kill all the Jews. They tell American leftists it's about justice and peace.
Trying to reach a compromise with these people about Isreal is like trying to appease the Nazis during the 1930s. It won't work. We have the benefit of history to see that it won't.
That's why siding with Palestine doesn't work and will be a disaster for Israel, and the loss of Israel would be a disaster for Jews everywhere. Hence, siding with those who pick the Palestinian Authority over Israels is being anti-Jew. Period. It doesn't matter how many Jews you consider a friend here in the state. You cannot support anti-semitism abroad and have the right to object when you are called on it.
I guarantee you this: There isn't an Arab politician anywhere who is going to complain about someone calling him anti-Semitic or anti-Jew. These guys look for ways to demonstrate how anti-Jew they are. Their stooges in the West, however, worry about it.
They are not anti-semitic, they are anti-Israel. If Israel had been set up in Mexico, they would not be saying the things they are. Stick to Peoria.
Like I said Jangaloo...anti-semitic used to mean a world without Jews; now it means a world without Israel i.e. anti-Israel.
I don't think there is much difference.
Ahmadi-Nejad wants Jews to leave Israel and go back to Europe. I don't think he's suggesting Jews from Arab countries should go back to Bhagdad, Teheran, etc...
Politics is existential for Israelis.
That still doesn't mean this girl should of been run over by a tank.
I am NOT a fan of Hamas, but they were elected and now what do we do with them.
You should look into WHY Hamas got elected
ALSO the persecution of ISRAEL and the MUSLIMS of CHRISTIANS
I have nothing against Israel. I think the ideal solution would be to tell the settlers they have 5 years to leave the West Bank and then let the West Bank and Gaza become a new state and build an impenetrable wall around Israel.
But I do sympathize with those who argue it made no sense to push out Arabs to build a Jewish state after they were faced genocide from Germans. It's like setting up a state for Native Americans in China because they faced genocide from White Americans.
Jangaloo said:
"But I do sympathize with those who argue it made no sense to push out Arabs to build a Jewish state after they were faced genocide from Germans. It's like setting up a state for Native Americans in China because they faced genocide from White Americans."
So the proper and rational response is to blow up busloads of kids? To do suicide bombing of innocents in restaurants?
Hamas targets civilians. They do it on purpose, and as a matter of policy.
LaHood should be ashamed of his support for terrorists.
So that's Rachel Corrie? Where did that picture come from? How do you know that's a Hamas rally? Where did that picture come from, Front Page?
You honsetly believe Rachel Corrie was a Hamas agent who choose to stand in front that bulldozer becuase she want to protect Hamas tunnels?
You imply that Ray LaHood supports terrorists? What a joke!
You are engaged in such blatant demagoguery that I can't believe I'm even responding, but since this is a public forum I feel the need to call you out for your horrible rhetoric.
I didn't justify Hamas, they're evil terrorist bastards, and certainly should receive no direct funding. Any humanatarian aid we give to the Palestinians should vbe through an organization like the Red Crescent, not through their government. Saying that I support Hamas because I believe that Israel's founding had shaky grounds is as outrageous as Jill Stanek saying that someone who opposes parental notification supports child rape.
It's a bad situation all around because both sides have so much innocent blood on their hands, that I fear any solution will have to be messy.
Anon-
Written medium = spelling
Spoken medium = pronunciation
Mostly you missed the focus of my quip. The focus was 'hatred' not 'spelling'. Too bad you didn't get it.
Bill-
It is such a sad tactic of Israeli apologists to equate anti-semitism with anti-Israel thought.
It is as lacking in merit as equating anti-islamic thought with anti-Iranian thought.
It is too bad people can't understand that.
Wyh do we even fund Israel. They are supposed to be this great economic bastion and center of freedom. Keep the money we spend on them, and Hamas, at home.
Also, Israel has some pretty bad policies as well. For example, Extra-judicial killings and collective punishments.
gish,
Israel is the only country anyone is suggesting be wipped off the map.
Jew's almost got wipped off the map once. What makes you think Iran won't finish the job.
It's no joke. Anti-Israel means no Israel and no Israel means no more Jews.
It's as simple as that.
Some people, including some in the US, think that's ok, or just indifferent.
So Israel disappears and all of a sudden there are no more Jews? That makes no sense.
All it is, is a border dispute. One that has killed innocent Israelis and innocent Palestinians. There are two sides to this issue, and calling one a "Jew-hater" or a "terrorist" solves nothing. That kind of pathetic, hate-filled rhetoric is the stuff that suicide bombers and other general kooks like to use.
So that's Rachel Corrie? Where did that picture come from? How do you know that's a Hamas rally? Where did that picture come from, Front Page?
Yeah, how about it? Where'd that picture come from? WingNutDaily, perhaps?
Like others have said: stick to Peoria, hick, because you don't know doodly squat about the Middle East
The whole anti-semetism thing is a digression.
The main point of the piece was that Hamas is a terrorist group that kills innocents as a matter of policy.
La Hood is wrong. No tax dollars for people who blow up buses of children.
Larry,
So those Azeri's protesting in Tabriz yesterday and today are anti-Muslim?
Those students shouted Down with Tyranny, Down with Dictators this week. That's not anti muslim. They weren't shouting down Allah.
Nor are the insurgents in Iran's Balochistan anti muslim.
The sad thing is one of our local progressives is over in Iran at the moment of these events and telling the Iranian's he's sorry for the US Gov, instead of saying America's Liberals and Progressives and all Americans will side with the Iranian People at a moment of crisis.
That's an American Liberal siding with Tyrants agains Muslim Iranians fighting for Democracy.
Read Iranian Dissident Akbar Ganji's essay on courage,
It is futile to think that the society and the political system will be democratized by sitting and playing with concepts like freedom, civil society, tolerance, approval, human rights, secularism and the separation of the pubic and private realms. The human rights are there for the protection of human dignity and the principle of personal autonomy. Freedom of expression is justified based on the right of the speaker to expressing his ideas, and the right of the listener to hearing those ideas, and the collective good of a free society. But the society will not attain the freedom of expression, just by writing about it and its justifying bases. Belief without action, is no belief at all.
Muslim's are acting in Iran and Iraq and throughout the middle east.
They get little support or recognition from progressives.
If you're just anti-Israel Larry, where do you expect Jews to go when you get rid of Israel?
What becomes of Jews without a Jewish State?
They become non-citzens like Muslim-Kurds in Syria? That's your model?
Or will they just be driven into the sea?
Bill Dennis,
Don't put up another post here again. Your time would be much better spent losing weight.
By the way, I support Israel and hope the leaders of Hamas get raped. This post is actually meant as a friendly suggestion to you. You're really really really fat, and I don't want to see you get a heart attack in the next couple years.
Bill,
Are you claiming that progressives are MORE GUILTY than conservatives about supporting dictatorships?
Libya is now a democracy? How about Saudi Arabia? Kuwait?
In the alternative, is George W. Bush a liberal/progressive?
Enlighten us, Bill. Give us some answers.
In many respects, Bush is more liberal and progressive.
Disraeli said,
In a progressive country change is constant; and the great question is not whether you should resist change which is inevitable, but whether that change should be carried out in deference to the manners, the customs, the laws and the traditions of a people, or whether it should be carried out in deference to abstract principles, and arbitrary and general doctrines.
Liberals lean towards principles. Conservatives lean towards deference to the past.
Note Bush spoke last night of his belief that aspirations for Democracy was a universal. It's a principle he thinks all people aspire too. Just read his second inaugural.
Liberals, Progressive, the Left have become greatly tangled and confused over universals. Many, if not most, favor a relativism.
Here's Nick Cohen on Iranian dissident Maryam Namaize,
Namazie is on the right side of the great intellectual struggle of our time between incompatible versions of liberalism. One follows the fine and necessary principle of tolerance, but ends up having to tolerate the oppression of women, say, or gays in foreign cultures while opposing misogyny and homophobia in its own. (Or 'liberalism for the liberals and cannibalism for the cannibals!' as philosopher Martin Hollis elegantly described the hypocrisy of the manoeuvre.) The alternative is to support universal human rights and believe that if the oppression of women is wrong, it is wrong everywhere.
Here are articles two and three of the Euston Manifesto. I'm guessing more Bush supporters would support these then Democrats these days in the US. Liberals have become the reactionaries.
No apology for tyranny.
We decline to make excuses for, to indulgently "understand", reactionary regimes and movements for which democracy is a hated enemy — regimes that oppress their own peoples and movements that aspire to do so. We draw a firm line between ourselves and those left-liberal voices today quick to offer an apologetic explanation for such political forces.
Human rights for all.
We hold the fundamental human rights codified in the Universal Declaration to be precisely universal, and binding on all states and political movements, indeed on everyone. Violations of these rights are equally to be condemned whoever is responsible for them and regardless of cultural context. We reject the double standards with which much self-proclaimed progressive opinion now operates, finding lesser (though all too real) violations of human rights which are closer to home, or are the responsibility of certain disfavoured governments, more deplorable than other violations that are flagrantly worse. We reject, also, the cultural relativist view according to which these basic human rights are not appropriate for certain nations or peoples.
Only Jews get singled out for boycott if they don't denounce Israel.
No one's ever proposed boycotting Iranian Intellectuals if they don't oppose Ahmadinejad's intent to wipe Israel off the map".
Isolationist Liberals have been here before,
These "progressive" religious thinkers preserved their political and moral neutrality only by downplaying Hitler's anti-Semitic rage. Methodist leader Ernest Fremont Tittle claimed that Nazism could be overcome non-violently -- "with truth and love even unto death" -- yet said almost nothing about the Jewish deaths demanded by his pacifist ideal. When thousands protested the persecution of German Jews during Kristallnacht, Catholic writer Paul Blakely saw only "a fit of national hysteria" orchestrated to drag America into war.
They knew better. The arrests, deportations, and imprisonment of Jews across the continent were widely reported in the American press. Yet the nation's Christian leadership failed even to lobby for immigration reform to absorb more refugees. No wonder: From 1933 to 1941, more than 100 anti-Semitic groups appeared in the United States, many with a Christian hue.
Larry Horse: Are you completely uninformed? Have you seen any of the propaganda these people are fed every day? It's straight out of Mein Kampf and the Protocols of Zion.
Post a Comment