Religions > Atheism > Israeli politicians worried about Kerry! Liberals Hate America!
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"DemocRATs Hate America" |
| Date: |
14 Aug 2004 10:04:58 AM |
| Object: |
Israeli politicians worried about Kerry! Liberals Hate America! |
Israeli politicians worried about Kerry! Liberals Hate America!
Although peace between Israel and its neighbors ranks high in John
Kerry's book released yesterday, many Israeli politicians have been
voicing concerns that a Kerry presidency could damage the region. The
Democratic nominee and his running mate, John Edwards, yesterday
released "Our Plan for America," in which Israel is discussed in the
first chapter. "We will ensure that under all circumstances Israel
retains the qualitative edge for its national security and its right
to self-defense," the book says.
The authors promise "genuine resolve and direct personal involvement
to ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict," a dig at President Bush,
whom the Democrats have accused of neglecting Middle East peace
efforts.
Kerry and Edwards also reiterate recognition of some Israeli claims to
the West Bank and rejection of a "right of return" for Palestinian
refugees, and say they would work to end Palestinian incitement
against Israel.
But many Israeli and American Jewish leaders are expressing concern
that a Kerry administration will cause more violence in the Middle
East. They say they are worried about Kerry's statements of
coordinating American foreign policy with the Europeans, and are
disturbed by his appointment of several former Clinton Mideast policy
directors as advisers, particularly former U.S. Ambassador to Israel
Martin Indyk.
Many blame Clinton's failed approach to the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict which sought Israeli territorial concessions for promises of
peace by Arafat and ignored indications of growing Palestinian
militancy and violations of security reform agreements for partially
causing the current intifada.
Indyk, who helped devise the 1993 Oslo Accords, was a driving force
behind Clinton's assessment of Arafat as a statesman, and urged
Clinton to accept Arafat as the legitimate ruler of the Palestinians.
For the past year, Indyk has been campaigning to dispatch U.S. troops
to intervene in the Middle East conflict, worrying many of Israel's
leaders, who don't want to see the IDF faced with having to confront
U.S. troops.
"Indyk managed to help Arafat wrest complete control over the
Palestinian people through deceit and subterfuge. And now, if he gets
his way, American troops may find themselves in the middle of the West
Bank and the Gaza Strip providing cover for Hamas and Palestinian
Jihad," wrote David Bedein, bureau chief of the Israel Resource News
Agency.
"The very mention of Indyk sends shudders down the spine of senior
members of the Israel defense and foreign policy establishment," wrote
Bedein.
Some in Israel were also upset that Kerry allowed former President
Jimmy Carter, who many Jews feel has taken a consistently
pro-Palestinian line since being voted out of office in 1980, to speak
at last week's Democratic National Convention, where he linked the
Bush administration's policy toward Israel to anti-American sentiment.
"Violence has gripped the Holy Land, with the region increasingly
swept by anti-American passions," Carter told the convention in a
prime-time speech many Democrats said marked his revival as a central
figure in the party.
A prominent American Jewish leader told WorldNetDaily, "Kerry's new
book rehashes all the old falsehoods of the Oslo era that ended up
bringing nothing but disaster to the region. We cannot afford anther
Clinton in the White House, and since Kerry is surrounding himself
with Clinton lackeys, he's got us all worried."
Several Democrats are accusing Sharon of playing favorites with Bush
and making it difficult for the Democrats to lure Jewish voters. They
say the Israeli prime minister is going out of his way to praise Bush
to the American media, and expressed disappointment Sharon wasn't able
to meet Kerry during his last trip to Washington in April. In fact,
the two men have never spoken.
Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, whose statements are considered
closely aligned with Sharon's policy, even recently told a meeting of
prominent American Jews that he prefers Bush over Kerry. The prime
minister's office says it has no plans to interfere with U.S.
elections, just as America should not be involved in Israeli
elections. Sharon has said he would meet with Kerry if the
presidential nominee travels to Israel.
October 2003: Kerry Calls Fence Barrier To Peace. And I know how
disheartened Palestinians are by the
Israeli government's decision to build a barrier off the green line,
cutting deeply into Palestinian areas.
We do not need another barrier to peace. Provocative and
counterproductive measures only harm Israel's
security over the long- term, they increase hardships to the
Palestinian people, and they make the process
of negotiating an eventual settlement that much harder. (Sen. John
Kerry, Remarks Before Arab American
Institute National Leadership Conference, Dearborn, MI, 10/17/03)
February 2004: Kerry Calls Fence Legitimate Act Of Self-Defense. US
Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the frontrunner in the race for
the Democratic presidential nomination, described Israel's
construction of a security barrier as a ‘legitimate act of self
defense' after Sunday's suicide bombing in Jerusalem, clarifying a
position he took in October when he told an Arab American audience ‘We
don't need another barrier to peace.' (Janine Zacharia, Kerry Defends
Security Fence, The Jerusalem Post, 2/25/04)
.
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Israeli politicians worried about Kerry! Liberals Hate America! |
14 Aug 2004 11:23:18 AM |
|
|
"DemocRATs Hate America" <zebrax17@yahoo.com> wrote
Israeli politicians worried about Kerry!
Yeah, Sharon.
Go to google.com and type in:
"special commando unit 101"
Most of the references are from pro-Palestinian sites (you've
got to expect that), but even what the unbaised or pro-Israeli
sites say is enough to stand your hair up on the back of your
head.
Here's what the Israeli government's official bio of Sharon
says:
"In 1953, he founded and led the "101" special commando
unit which carried out retaliatory operations."
"retaliatory operations."
It was a case where, "If a Jew dies, we cross the border and
kill us one of them there A-rabs!"
...one dead Arab is as good as any other. I mean, right?
And, hey, you can't argue with success! It did bring peace to
the middle east, the indiscriminate murder of any random
civilian... in "retaliation," of course.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?D13421D09
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2003/2/Ariel%20Sharon
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dave Middleton" |
|
| Title: Liberal Media Protects Kerry! |
14 Aug 2004 07:14:08 PM |
|
|
Liberal Media Protects Kerry!
Drudge compiled this brilliant flashback into how the media grilled
George H.W. Bush over claims of infidelity in 1992. Now, contrast
that flashback from Drudge to this story in which a reporter from the
Washington Post says they wouldn't run the story about a Kerry affair
even if someone produced
photographs. So, you have to ask yourself whether or not the media
has a different standard for Republicans and Democrats. Duh! And
here's a good wrap-up from World Net Daily.
http://www.drudgereport.com/mattht.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3493277.stm
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37145
--
Left-wing liberals are EVERYTHING they accuse the right of being. They
are mean, vicious, hateful, greedy, cold-hearted, closed-minded,
selfish, intolerant, bigoted and racist.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rev. 11D Ricardo MadGello" |
|
| Title: Re: Liberal Media Protects Kerry! |
14 Aug 2004 07:29:30 PM |
|
|
Interesting how Kerry and other Bush opponents have exactly less than zero
need to make their campaign against Cheney/DUHbya a 'dirty war'. This is
due to the simple fact that Cheney/DUHbya and their moronic cabinet members
have done such an abysmal job in the White House the last four years that
there is no reason to lie in their campaign like Cheney/DUHbya have been
doing so ineffectively.
October Surprise!
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeee Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaw!
Ride 'Em Plowboy!
"Dave Middleton" <dmiddleton@N0TSPAM.0RG> wrote in message
news:ilath0dd3tdv643ra96idaosjvd63gqcft@4ax.com...
Liberal Media Protects Kerry!
Drudge compiled this brilliant flashback into how the media grilled
George H.W. Bush over claims of infidelity in 1992. Now, contrast
that flashback from Drudge to this story in which a reporter from the
Washington Post says they wouldn't run the story about a Kerry affair
even if someone produced
photographs. So, you have to ask yourself whether or not the media
has a different standard for Republicans and Democrats. Duh! And
here's a good wrap-up from World Net Daily.
http://www.drudgereport.com/mattht.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3493277.stm
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37145
--
Left-wing liberals are EVERYTHING they accuse the right of being. They
are mean, vicious, hateful, greedy, cold-hearted, closed-minded,
selfish, intolerant, bigoted and racist.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dave Middleton" |
|
| Title: The PATHETIC Liberal Media! |
14 Aug 2004 07:14:37 PM |
|
|
The PATHETIC Liberal Media!
Today marks the Wisconsin primary, the coronation of John Kerry as the
Democratic presidential nominee, and the completion of the destruction
of the dreams of America's Deanie Babies. As of tomorrow Howard Dean
has no campaign strategy, no campaign airplane, no campaign schedule
and no campaign manager. It couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.
Will today also mark the end of this absurd story about Bush's service
in the National Guard? Hopefully ... but probably not.
Did you folks know that about one week ago U.S. intelligence
operatives uncovered a memo from a leading terrorist bemoaning the
level of American success in Iraq? The memo was from Abu Musab
al-Zarqawi, one of the world's most wanted Islamic terrorists today.
Al-Zarqawi was exhorting Al Qaeda to promote a Sunni - Shiite civil
war in Iraq, the only way he sees to turn around the American success
in Iraq.
We're winning! That's news, isn't it? A leading Islamic terrorist
says that the United States is "suffocating" the jihad in the Middle
East! Isn't that just what we went over there to do? Don't you think
that's news?
Apparently it's not.
Columnist Diana West searched the transcripts of the White House media
briefings for last week and found that there was only one question
about the memo. Only one. The enemy admits it's losing, and this
gets only one question. But what about President Bush's service in
the National Guard? Well, that issue brought over 100 questions.
We're fighting a war on terror in the middle east. The enemy is
bemoaning our successes, and questions about Vietnam rather than the
war on terror overwhelm White House press
briefings by a factor of over 100 to 1.
I think that former ABC news correspondent Peter Collins pretty well
sums things up. He says that there is a working template that the
mainstream Washington and DC press corps is using to formulate its
coverage of both the war on terror and the presidential campaign.
That template is summed up in four words: "Democrats good. Bush
bad." If there is a news story out there that can make George Bush
look bad, the media is going to pursue that story to the end. If
there's a story that makes Democrats look good, the media will go for
it.
The National Guard story had the potential (though unfulfilled) to
make Bush look bad ... so the press rode it for all it was worth. The
al-Zaqawi memo had the potential of making Bush look good. It was
ignored.
Let's not leave this discussion without addressing John Kerry's little
bimbo eruption last week. This is a story that was largely ignored by
the mainstream political press. Let's turn the clock back to 1992.
The Drudge Report contains this summary of media reaction to a rumor
of an affair George H.W. Bush, who was running for reelection. A book
hit the newsstands with a quote contained in a footnote. The quote
was from a long-dead ambassador. The ambassador said that he had
arranged a little afternoon delight for George Bush 38 back in 1984.
The media jumped on this like a crow on a June Bug. A CNN reporter
confronted Bush with the allegation as he was hosting the Israeli
Prime Minister in his office.
Drudge compiled this brilliant flashback into how the media grilled
George H.W. Bush over claims of infidelity in 1992. Now, contrast
that flashback from Drudge to this story in which a reporter from the
Washington Post says they wouldn't run the story about a Kerry affair
even if someone produced photographs. So, you have to ask yourself
whether or not the media has a different standard for Republicans and
Democrats. Duh! And here's a good wrap-up from World Net Daily.
A brief sidestep here .... what of the Kerry infidelity story? Isn't
it a bit odd how the father of Alex Polier changed his story over the
course of a few days? In this story the father of Alex Polier is
quoted as saying that he thinks that John Kerry is a "sleazeball."
Terry Polier said "He's not the sort of guy I would choose to be with
my daughter." Then, yesterday Terry Polier issues another statement.
This time saying that he intends to vote for him for president of the
United States.
Let's just take one example here. Joe Conason wrote a story in Salon
last week about the alleged Kerry affair. Conason wrote "But the kind
of proof usually required by national news organizations isn't what
Drudge needs in order to put innuendo into circulation."
So .. Joe Conason pursues a high standard before he puts innuendo into
circulation? Back to the 1992 rumors about Bush 38. Back then Drudge
reveals that Conason wrote a magazine article entitled "1,000 Reasons
Not to Vote for George Bush." Reason number one was "He cheats on his
wife."
You get the picture here, don't you? For more you can Just read
Drudge's summary to see the extent to which the media went to pursue
the 1992 Bush rumor, and to ignore the 2004 Kerry rumor.
Most of you are unaware of a little gem that appeared on an ABC News
website last week. It was written by ABC News Political Director Mark
Halpern. Halpern wrote:
"The Washington and political press corps are biased. There's a
universal sense that liberal political positions on social issues like
gun control, homosexuality, abortion and religion are the norm. That
there's a belief that government is a mechanism to solve the nation's
problems. That more taxes on corporations and the wealthy are good,
and the press does not accept President Bush's justifications for the
Iraqi war."
Know this. Over 90% of the people who bring you your news every
morning in The New York Times, USA Today and your local newspaper will
vote for John Kerry in this year's presidential election. Most of
these people will be using that "Democrats good; Bush bad" template
for their coverage.
The vast majority of the mainstream media believes that George Bush is
bad and must be replaced. They will be doing everything they can in
their "objective" coverage of this campaign to see to it that this
comes to pass.
--
Left-wing liberals are EVERYTHING they accuse the right of being. They
are mean, vicious, hateful, greedy, cold-hearted, closed-minded,
selfish, intolerant, bigoted and racist.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
