Obama and Hamas
Not good news for Obama supporters. According to FactCheck.org McCain's recent comments about Hammas speaking favorably about Barry Obama are true. I hope he didn't plan on getting votes from the Jewish community. (Or the community of people who believe that there is such a thing as evil, that Hammas is evil, and that giving the dignity of a voice to a group like Hammas by meeting with them is not good, and not what we want from our leaders.)
On the other hand, I'm sure this will look great to people who are concerned with the 'image of America in the eyes of the international community', but not particularly concerned with whether the USA does the morally correct thing. How progressive of America to meet with terrorist organizations!
[UPDATE: As far as I know, Obama has never said that he would unconditionally meet with Hammas, and according to the article, he has criticized Jimmy Carter's doing so. ]
posted by InterestingPhysics @ 9:05 AM
3 Comments:
I find it frustrating that you pick and choose from your sources. From that same article you linked to:
"Also, saying that Hamas supports Obama is not saying that Obama supports Hamas, or that he would acquiesce to the group's demands as president. Indeed, Obama has explicitly condemned Hamas. When former president Jimmy Carter met with Hamas leaders in April, Obama criticized his decision, saying that "we must not negotiate with a terrorist group intent on Israel's destruction.""
Insinuating that Obama has EVER said he would talk without preconditions to Hamas or any other terrorist organization is inflammatory and untrue. Besides, by caring what Hamas says about our politics gives them "the dignity of a voice."
Hi Laurel. Thanks for posting. I was wondering If I was doing this for my own good.
Interesting point. I like factcheck because they don't throw out the baby with the bath-water. They tend to be pretty fair. I suppose my intent in posting was that usually the a comment like this, that Hammas favors Obama, is unfounded or misrepresented. I was as suprised as anyone to see that McCain's statement was true.
It may strain the truth to suggest that Obama would unconditionally meet with Hammas, which (truthfully) was an unintentional assertion on my part. I had linked Hammas and Ahmadinejad in my thought process, likely because Ahmadinejad has said so many things that jibe with the views of Hammas.
From my point of view, meeting with Hammas or Ahmadinejad would require the pre-condition of them recognizing Israel and publicly renouncing the call for their destruction.
As for giving them a voice, I don't have to. They have a voice. Perhaps I should have chosen another phrase. Certainly you would agree that reporting what a person or a group says, and sitting across a table from them in an attempt to work together with them are different things.
"Insinuating that Obama has EVER said he would talk without preconditions to Hamas or any other terrorist organization is inflammatory and untrue."
Actually Laurel that statement is a bit misleading, though perhaps unintentionally because it depends on what you mean by "terrorist organization". Obama has in fact said that he would meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinijad without precondition. I think the fact that someone who represents a terrorist organization, though it may not say anything about who he supports, it does say a great deal about the things that he supports. Why is it that it doesn't at least make you stop a question: "Why would someone from Hamas say something good about the guys I want to be president of the US?" And if it doesn't I must assume that you have had a drink of the same Obama kool-aid that slightly more than 50% of the voting democrats have also partaken of.
Post a Comment
<< Home