Peace, Peace and NO PEACE PARTNER
President’s first interview since taking office
Obama tells Al Arabiya peace talks should resume
Tuesday, 27 January 2009
Q: President Bush framed the war on terror conceptually in a way that was very broad, “war on terror,” and used sometimes certain terminology that the many people — Islamic fascism. You’ve always framed it in a different way, specifically against one group called al Qaeda and their collaborators. And is this one way of —
THE PRESIDENT: I think that you’re making a very important point. And that is that the language we use matters. And what we need to understand is, is that there are extremist organizations — whether Muslim or any other faith in the past — that will use faith as a justification for violence. We cannot paint with a broad brush a faith as a consequence of the violence that is done in that faith’s name.
And so you will I think see our administration be very clear in
distinguishing between organizations like al Qaeda — that espouse violence, espouse terror and act on it — and people who may disagree with my administration and certain actions, or may have a particular viewpoint in terms of how their countries should develop. We can have legitimate disagreements but still be respectful. I cannot respect terrorist organizations that would kill innocent civilians and we will hunt them down.
But to the broader Muslim world what we are going to be offering is a hand of friendship.
These are President Barack Obama’s words recorded in his interview with Al Arabbiya News Channel.
Obama warned Hamas fighters, who seized control of Gaza in 2007, that they must halt rocket fire on southern Israel and that Washington would continue to support Israel’s right to defend itself.
“For years Hamas has launched thousands of rockets at innocent Israeli citizens. No democracy can tolerate such danger to its people,” Obama said.
“To be a genuine party to peace … Hamas must meet clear conditions, recognize Israel’s right to exist, renounce violence and abide by past agreements.”
“To be a genuine party to peace …”or the prerequisite conditions laid down by the aggressor requires the victim to “recognize the legitimate right to exist, renounce violence and abide by past agreements.”
Failure to meet these standards or prerequisites by either side would mean that side is NOT a “genuine party to peace.” Barack Obama says he “cannot respect terrorist organizations that would kill innocent civilians and we will hunt them down.”
Who is killing innocent civilians, mostly children? Anyone see the rank hypocrisy here? The Zionist Jews for 60 years refuse to recognize the Palestinian peoples legitimate right to exist, to renounce violence against the civilian population or keep any agreement. Yet that is what Barack Obama demands. That isn’t making peace. That is forced SURRENDER AND RAPE!
It should be noted that what Israel did to the Palestinians in this latest assault shoves Gaza right up America’s derriere.
Addendum :: Wednesday, Jan. 28 2009
The United States and Israel conspire with their Palestine collaborators to justify more assaults on Gaza. Reuters’ latest, Israel strikes in Gaza as Obama envoy holds talks says in part:
Moments earlier, a militant group with links to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah movement claimed responsibility for firing a rocket at southern Israel late on Wednesday.
Israel has said it will hold Gaza’s Hamas rulers responsible for all attacks launched from the coastal territory, and had warned of a stronger response to the killing of a soldier on Tuesday in an explosion by a Gaza border fence.
Mitchell met Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Wednesday and will meet Abbas on Thursday.
Western diplomats said Mitchell would not meet Hamas, a group shunned by the U.S. and Europe for it refusal to recognize Israel.
Refusing to recognize the duly and legally elected Hamas government is a refusal to recognize the Palestinian people. Obama is no peace partner.
This is what it all leads to and why: Breaking News: SE Asia Groups Claim to Plan Retaliation for Gaza Killings. Said to Target Israeli Government, Intel in Bangkok, Manila, Singapore. By Allan Nairn
The sources for this report, themselves religious Muslims, say they condemn the groups’ tactics but share their anger at Israeli forces’ repeated killings of civilians.
It is not clear if the planning talk is just bravado, or if it’s true they’ll just target combatants, since — like their Israeli and US counterparts — these groups have repeatedly shown their willingness to kill many civilians to make a point. (Islamist terror leaders like Bin Laden and Abu Bakar Baasyir frequently state this openly; for a rare, frank statement of near-identical Western pro-terror thinking see Thomas L. Friedman, who writes approvingly that in Gaza, Israel was “trying to ‘educate’ Hamas” by attacking not just Hamas combatants but also by “inflicting” “heavy pain on the Gaza population,” just as in Israel’s attack on Lebanon ‘06 “the only long-term source of deterrence was to exact enough pain on the civilians…” Thomas L. Friedman, “Israel’s Goals in Gaza?,” New York Times, January 13, 2009. Also see News and Comment posting of Nov. 28, 2007, “Thomas L. Friedman and the Bali Bombers. Cold-Blooded Celebrity”).
Those that moralize the justification for “inflicting” “heavy pain on the Gaza population Friedman says regarding Lebanon’s Hezbolla:
Israel’s counter strategy was to use its Air Force to pummel Hezbollah and, while not directly targeting the Lebanese civilians with whom Hezbollah was intertwined, to inflict substantial property damage and collateral casualties on Lebanon at large. It was not pretty, but it was logical. Israel basically said that when dealing with a nonstate actor, Hezbollah, nested among civilians, the only long-term source of deterrence was to exact enough pain on the civilians — the families and employers of the militants — to restrain Hezbollah in the future.
need to be taken out and stood against a wall. It is as simple as that.