Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18
  1. #1 Obama "demands" changes in Gaza 
    Sonnabend
    Guest
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-...ouncement-gaza

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

    June 20, 2010

    Statement by the Press Secretary on Israel's announcement on Gaza

    The President has described the situation in Gaza as unsustainable and has made clear that it demands fundamental change. On June 9, he announced that the United States was moving forward with $400 million in initiatives and commitments for the West Bank and Gaza. The President described these projects as a down payment on the U.S. commitment to the people of Gaza, who deserve a chance to take part in building a viable, independent state of Palestine, together with those who live in the West Bank. These announcements resulted from consultations with the Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad.

    Today, the United States welcomes the new policy towards Gaza announced by the Government of Israel, which responds to the calls of many in the international community. Once implemented, we believe these arrangements should significantly improve conditions for Palestinians in Gaza, while preventing the entry of weapons. We will work with Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the Quartet, and other international partners to ensure these arrangements are implemented as quickly and effectively as possible and to explore additional ways to improve the situation in Gaza, including greater freedom of movement and commerce between Gaza and the West Bank.

    There is more to be done, and the President looks forward to discussing this new policy, and additional steps, with Prime Minister Netanyahu during his visit to Washington on July 6.

    We strongly re-affirm Israel's right to self-defense, and our commitment to work with Israel and our international partners to prevent the illicit trafficking of arms and ammunition into Gaza. As we approach the fourth anniversary of the capture of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, we call again for his immediate release, and condemn the inhumane conditions of his detention.

    We believe that the implementation of the policy announced by the Government of Israel today should improve life for the people of Gaza, and we will continue to support that effort going forward. We urge all those wishing to deliver goods to do so through established channels so that their cargo can be inspected and transferred via land crossings into Gaza. There is no need for unnecessary confrontations, and we call on all parties to act responsibly in meeting the needs of the people of Gaza.





    He "demands??? Just who the FUCK does this arrogant prick think he is, anyway? :mad:
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    12,871
    I know it's semantics, but the statement was that the situation in Gaza is unsustainable and demands change, not that the President demands change.


    It was also made clear that those who wish to deliver aid to Gaza do so throught the official channels, and affirmed Israel's right to defend itself. The statement also supports Israel's newest policies toward Gaza.


    I just hope that Obama is putting as many conditions on the Palestineans' aid as he is expecting a great deal from the Israeli side.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    I know it's semantics, but the statement was that the situation in Gaza is unsustainable and demands change, not that the President demands change.

    It was also made clear that those who wish to deliver aid to Gaza do so throught the official channels, and affirmed Israel's right to defend itself. The statement also supports Israel's newest policies toward Gaza.

    I just hope that Obama is putting as many conditions on the Palestineans' aid as he is expecting a great deal from the Israeli side.
    Israel's newest policy is a watering down of the previous policy, and it's still not enough for Obama. It appears that nothing short of having every Jew in Israel voluntarily walk into a gas chamber will satisfy this administration, since that is the goal of Hamas and Hezbollah.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member Chuck58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Posts
    990
    Gaza = muslim

    Israel = Jewish

    Anointed One = I say he's a closet muslim

    In my opinion, that just about says it all.
    The poster formerly known as chuck58 on the old board.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck58 View Post
    Gaza = muslim

    Israel = Jewish

    Anointed One = I say he's a closet muslim

    In my opinion, that just about says it all.
    Nah. Obama worships himself, not Allah.

    He has internalized the anti-Semitism in the radical parts of the Black community (remember, Jeremiah Wright is a pal of Louis Farakhan) and the hard left, which sees Israel as a colonial presence among what they think of as the indigenous Arabs. That's why they keep reverting to past imagery, such as Apartheid in South Africa, and the American Indians vs. the white man memes. They are stuck in an old narrative and it does not apply in Israel, but the left doesn't care. They know that western civilization is the enemy, Israel is a western democracy and therefore it has to go.

    BTW, Goldstone, who wrote the report condemning Israel's actions in Gaza, is a former South African judge who enforced the Apartheid system, even handing down death sentences to ANC and Inkatha opponents of the government, which makes him exactly the wrong guy to be entrusted with writing that report. He sees it as a way of distancing himself from his past and gaining acceptance among the progressives at the various transnational agencies who may be able to find a use for him in the future.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck58 View Post
    Gaza = muslim

    Israel = Jewish

    Anointed One = I say he's a closet muslim

    In my opinion, that just about says it all.
    This is so ignorant. To sum up a nation and their actions by religion, we might as well dumb down all foreign trade economic policies by reducing countries to race. Let's see what sort of picture that produces.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    Gaza does not equal Islam and Israel does not equal Judaism.

    Too hard to think about? Deal with it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,449
    Why did Hamas cancel the legal elections in January Wei Wei? What are they afraid of?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    Ooh, that looks so bad, especially if you don't know the laws of warfare, which you clearly don't.

    The individual on the hood was caught throwing rocks, so he wasn't an innocent bystander but a combatant, and the border guards were not firing on the rock throwers and the vehicles were not being used as firing platforms, so the rock thrower wasn't shielding a combat target. OTOH, Hamas and Hezbollah routinely set up rocket launchers in, or in close proximity to, hospitals, mosques and private residences. Why is the latter a war crime and the former not? Simple: because if you engage an enemy from behind a civilian shield, you are forcing them to return fire at or through that shield. Thus, when Hamas fires rockets, they know that Israel will either return fire, causing civilian casualties, or not return fire because of their concerns about civilian casualties, allowing them to kill Israelis with impunity.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    Gaza does not equal Islam and Israel does not equal Judaism.

    Too hard to think about? Deal with it.
    So, you are arguning that Hamas, which is the sole government of Gaza, and which considers itself an Islamic group which includes the establishment of a global caliphate under Sharia law doesn't represent Islam? Or, for that matter, Hezbollah, which translates to "Army of Allah," and which is not even Palestinian, isn't motivated by Islam? Or that Israel, the sole Jewish state in the world, is not attacked because it is the sole Jewish state in the world? That the Muslim states which attack Israel, some Arab, some not, some not even sharing a border with Israel, are motivated by... what exactly? By all means, think about it. It would be nice to see you do that for a change. But, until you do, many others have thought about it, and come to the same conclusion, that this is a Muslim-Jewish conflict, rather than a Palestinian-Israeli one. The following article from the American Thinker sums up the positions quite well:

    June 30, 2010
    Why Islam Will Never Accept the State of Israel
    By Steven Simpson
    It is a common belief that the "Arab-Israeli conflict" is a conflict of two peoples fighting over the same piece of land and is therefore one of nationalism. Rarely, if ever, do we hear or read of the religious component to this conflict.

    However, if anything, the conflict is more of a "Muslim-Jewish" one than an "Arab-Israeli" one. In other words, the conflict is based on religion -- Islam vs. Judaism -- cloaked in Arab nationalism vs. Zionism. The fact of the matter is that in every Arab-Israeli war, from 1948 to the present, cries of "jihad," "Allahu Akbar," and the bloodcurdling scream of "Idbah al- Yahud" (slaughter the Jews) have resonated amongst even the most secular of Arab leaders, be it Nasser in the 1950s and 1960s or the supposedly "secular" PLO of the 1960s to the present. Indeed, the question must be asked: If this is really a conflict of different nationalisms and not Islamic supremacism, then why is it that virtually no non-Arab Muslim states have full (if any) relations with Israel?

    There is a common Arabic slogan that is chanted in the Middle East: "Khaybar, Khaybar! Oh Jews, remember. The armies of Muhammad are returning!" It would be most interesting to know how many people have ever heard what -- or more precisely, where -- Khaybar is, and what the Arabs mean by such a slogan. A short history of the Jews of Arabia is needed in order to explain this, and why Islam remains so inflexible in its hostile attitude towards Jews and Israel.

    Until the founder of Islam, Muhammad ibn Abdallah, proclaimed himself "Messenger of Allah" in the 7th century, Jews and Arabs lived together peacefully in the Arabian Peninsula. Indeed, the Jews -- and Judaism -- were respected to such an extent that an Arab king converted to Judaism in the 5th century. His name was Dhu Nuwas, and he ruled over the Himyar (present day Yemen) area of the Arabian Peninsula. In fact, it is most likely that the city of Medina (the second-holiest city in Islam) -- then called Yathrib -- was originally founded by Jews. In any event, at the time of Muhammad's "calling," three important Jewish tribes existed in Arabia: Banu Qurayza, Banu Nadir, and Banu Qaynuqa.

    Muhammad was very keen on having the Jews accept him as a prophet to the extent that he charged his followers not to eat pig and to pray in the direction of Jerusalem. However, the Jews apparently were not very keen on Muhammad, his proclamation of himself as a prophet, or his poor knowledge of the Torah (Hebrew Bible). Numerous verbal altercations are recorded in the Qur'an and various Hadiths about these conflicts between the Jewish tribes and Muhammad.

    Eventually, the verbal conflicts turned into physical conflicts, and when the Jews outwardly rejected Muhammad as the "final seal of the prophets," he turned on them with a vengeance. The atrocities that were committed against these tribes are too numerous to cite in a single article, but two tribes, the Qaynuqa and Nadir, were expelled from their villages by Muhammad. It appears that the Qaynuqa left Arabia around 624 A.D. The refugees of the Nadir settled in the village of Khaybar.

    In 628 A.D., Muhammad turned on the last Jewish tribe, the Qurayza, claiming that they were in league with Muhammad's Arab pagan enemies and had "betrayed" him. Muhammad and his army besieged the Qurayza, and after a siege of over three weeks, the Qurayza surrendered. While many Arabs pleaded with Muhammad to let the Qurayza leave unmolested, Muhammad had other plans. Unlike expelling the Qaynuqa and Nadir, Muhammad exterminated the Qurayza, with an estimated 600 to 900 Jewish men being beheaded in one day. The women and children were sold into slavery, and Muhammad took one of the widows, Rayhana, as a "concubine."

    In 629 A.D., Muhammad led a campaign against the surviving Jews of Nadir, now living in Khaybar. The battle was again bloody and barbaric, and the survivors of the massacre were either expelled or allowed to remain as "second-class citizens." Eventually, upon the ascension of Omar as caliph, most Jews were expelled from Arabia around the year 640 A.D.

    This brings us, then, to the question of why modern-day Muslims still boast of the slaughter of the Jewish tribes and the Battle of Khaybar. The answer lies in what the Qur'an -- and later on, the various Hadiths -- says about the Jews. The Qur'an is replete with verses that can be described only as virulently anti-Semitic. The amount of Surahs is too numerous to cite, but a few will suffice: Surah 2:75 (Jews distorted the Torah); 2:91 (Jews are prophet-killers), 4:47 (Jews have distorted the Bible and have incurred condemnation from Allah for breaking the Sabbath), 5:60 (Jews are cursed, and turned into monkeys and pigs), and 5:82 (Jews and pagans are the strongest in enmity to the Muslims and Allah). And of course, there is the genocidal Hadith from Sahih Bukhari, 4:52:177, which would make Adolph Hitler proud. "The Day of Judgment will not have come until you fight with the Jews, and the stones and the trees behind which a Jew will be hiding will say: 'O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him!"' Thus, the Arab Muslims had their own "final solution" in store for the Jews already in the 7th century.

    The fact that Muslims still point to these (and many other) hateful verses in the Qur'an and Hadith should give Jews -- not just Israelis -- pause to consider if there can ever be true peace between Muslims and Jews, let alone between Muslims and Israel. When the armies of Islam occupied the area of Byzantine "Palestine" in the 7th century, the land became part of "Dar al-Islam" (House of Islam). Until that area is returned to Islam, (i.e., Israel's extermination), she remains part of "Dar al harb" (House of War). It now becomes clear that this is a conflict of religious ideology and not a conflict over a piece of "real estate."

    Finally, one must ask the question: Aside from non-Arab Turkey, whose relations with Israel are presently teetering on the verge of collapse, why is it that no other non-Arab Muslim country in the Middle East has ever had full relations (if any at all) with Israel, such as faraway countries like Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan? Indeed, why would Persian Iran -- conquered by the Arabs -- have such a deep hatred for Jews and Israel, whereas a non-Muslim country such as India does not feel such enmity? The answer is painfully clear: The contempt in which the Qur'an and other Islamic writings hold Jews does not exist in the scriptures of the Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, and other Eastern religions. Therefore, people that come from non-Muslim states do not have this inherent hatred towards Jews, and by extension, towards Israel. But when a people -- or peoples -- is raised with a scripture that regards another people and religion as immoral and less than human, then it is axiomatic why such hatred and disdain exists on the part of Muslims for Jews and Israel.

    Islam -- as currently interpreted and practiced -- cannot accept a Jewish state of any size in its midst. Unless Muslims come to terms with their holy writings vis--vis Jews, Judaism, and Israel and go through some sort of "reformation," it will be unlikely that true peace will ever come to the Middle East. In the meantime, unless Islam reforms, Israel should accept the fact that the Muslims will never accept Israel as a permanent fact in the Middle East.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •