Apparently.
"Jerusalem must remain the undivided capital of Israel: Obama," from AFP, June 4 (thanks to JCB):
WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Democratic presumptive nominee Barack Obama said Wednesday that Jerusalem must remain the "undivided" capital of Israel in a speech to a powerful US-Israel lobby group here."Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided," Obama told the vast annual policy conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Council (AIPAC).
Addressing the group in almost his first act since claiming the Democratic nomination late Tuesday, Obama said he was a "true friend" of Israel and that the US bond with the Jewish state was "unbreakable."
Obama drew a standing ovation as he arrived to address the mighty US-Israel lobby, and also addressed perceived suspicion of him in some sectors of the Jewish community.
"As president I will never compromise when it comes to Israel's security," Obama said in a cavernous Washington conference center, his image emblazoned across eight massive cinema-style screens.
Obama said in the strikingly pro-Israel speech that the US bond with the Jewish state was "unbreakable today, unbreakable tomorrow, unbreakable for ever," adding he was speaking from his heart as a "true friend" of Israel. [...]
"We must isolate Hamas unless and until they renounce terrorism, recognize Israel's right to exist, and abide by past agreements. There is no room at the negotiating table for terrorist organizations."
He said he would push for an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal if elected president in November.
"Any agreement the Palestinian people must preserve Israel's identity as a Jewish state," Obama said.
That means, if he really means what he says, no agreement with the Palestinian people.
Personally, I don't believe him. But if what he says is true than Ahmadinejad and almost all Muslims in the blogosphere, nearly all of which who despise Israel, are going to be greatly disappointed in their candidate of choice.
I found it curious that Obama declared his "victory" speech last night in Minnesota, of all places.
Naivete wrapped in campaign rhetoric. What does Obama owe the Jewish lobby, anyway? And why worry about so few Jewish voters? Maybe he's trying to appeal to evangelicals who are strong supporters of Israel?
"CHANGE We Cannot Afford to Believe In"
champ nailed it.
Political Pandering is Change You Can't Believe In
Obama seems to be trying to undo the damage done by his remarks about meeting with Iran, and Hamas without preconditions. It's just talk...but he says it beautifully. He would roll over on Israel like a dog in heat.
Considering how anti-semitic his "spiritual leaders" are I doubt it would be rolling over, so much as throwing them to the wolves. B. Hussein Obama is no friend of Israel's.
Just a campaign speech, which means its bullshit.
After all we're talking about a man who has been endorsed by Hamas, Castro and Iran. Hangs around long term friends who have virulent anti-semitic and anti-white views - Reverend Wright and Pfleger. Then there is his friendship with Rashid Khallid whom agrees with on views regarding Palestine. Mind you Khallid used to be a PLO operative of sorts during the time it was a terrorist organization.
Who called Israel a "sore spot"
And who raised money for Palestinian refugee camps held in honor of Edward Said and who prior to his election to the Senate has no record of supporting Israel.
Lets not forget this is the same man who in his two books could not find a single good thing to say about the West and whites(who he despises in his books) and who stated he'll stand with the Muslims when the time comes.
This guy IMO makes McCain and Bush look like Crusaders.
Another contradiction. He wants to isolate Hamas but will push for a peace deal if elected. Whom does he expect to represent the Palestinians, who voted for, and vigorously support, Hamas?
"There is no room at the negotiating table for terrorist organizations."
That means no negotiations.
I take this as a very, very good sign. I mean, sure; it might all be election rhetoric, but it's good that he's on record with this very strong wording about Israel and Jerusalem. Look at this verbiage:
"Undivided"
"true friend"
"Never compromise"
"Unbreakable"
"No room at the negotiation table for terrorists"
"Palestinian people must preserve Israel's identity as a Jewish state,"
This is all good, right?
As of March of this year when Obama gave that speech in Philadelphia in which he threw his grandmother ("a typical white person") under the bus, didn't address the issue of how racist and anti-American his whole church was, not just Jeremiah Wright, and told America that we all needed to talk about race even more (enough already!), I knew then he would say anything to get elected President. Besides, he is a man of deplorable judgment in so many ways. I will believe nothing of what he says until it is independently substantiated. So, these statements by him about an undivided Jerusalem mean diddly squat.
I saw a video last night which underscored Obama's longstanding support for the Palestinian cause.
Obama's Wednesday speech looks like he is blowing smoke to garner the Jewish vote.
He has a whole hearted endorsement from Louis Farrakhan too, doesn't he?
If you support Israel, and vote for Obama, I have this bridge for sale in Brooklyn ...
I'll believe it when I see it.
Sorta OT:
http://www.cafepress.com/cp/moredetails.aspx?showBleed=false&ProductNo=261324071&colorNo=0&pr=F
LOL!
Hamas ain't gonna like this.
Well, Bush was thought to be the first president to transfer the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, and that never happened. Instead, he was the first prez to endorse a Pali state. Her thighness was the first to talk about it during the 90s, and her photo-op with Suha Arafat, and her lobbying to undo sanctions against Pakistan (including getting Clinton to include Pakistan in his visit to India) is well known. Nothing McCain has said about Jihad to date reveals any understanding of the fact that Islam is the enemy: if anything, he has thrown under the bus the pastor whose only fault was to make derogatory remarks on Islam. Oh, not to mention his active support for Kosovo.
I am happy to accept that Obama is turning a new chapter. Just as he has disowned Trinity, he's also likely to disown the Palis, now that he's seen the error of his ways. Since his single slogan is change, we are likely to see a change in the current tilt towards the Palis by this administration in favor of a more pro-Israeli tilt.
Besides, the GOP desperately needs, as Lee Rodgers put it, a constructive destruction: they need to be wiped out in this coming election in both Congress and WH, so that Conservatives can reclaim the party. If McClain wins, not only do we have a Dem Congress and a RINO prez - the RNC will be a sock puppet of Grammnesty, Specter, Snowe, et al, and Conservatives will be left with no outlet to oppose the Liberal policies coming down the pike. With Obama as prez, at least the RNC is free to be as Conservative as they deem fit even on things like ANWR, Gitmo, et al without Jihad McCain coming in the way.
That way, come 2010, the Dems would lose seats in Congress, although not enough to make it GOP. In 2012, the GOP could hopefully get back both Congress and the WH. But if McCain is prez, the GOP will continue to be blamed for the actions of a Liberal Congress and a RINO prez. Question is: can Conservatives show enough sense to at least sit out this election, if not downright vote Obama to send the Dem supermajority down the tubes?
Yes, We Can!!!
Sounds like his friends khalidi and said have schooled him well in the practice of taqiyya.
I am happy to accept that Obama is turning a new chapter. Just as he has disowned Trinity, he's also likely to disown the Palis, now that he's seen the error of his ways. Since his single slogan is change, we are likely to see a change in the current tilt towards the Palis by this administration in favor of a more pro-Israeli tilt.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 4, 2008 2:25 PM
Wow! I didn't think I could get a buyer so quickly for that bridge I have on sale.
Don't forget the power of Sarcasm.
Foreign policy advisers of presidential candidate Barack Hussein Obama like
Further examples can be found in this video . . .
But that is not the reason Barack Hussein Obama quit his church.
Then there is the issue of Ali Abunimah, Palestinain activist from Jan. '08 Obama's stance on Israeli-Palestinian relations on Fox television.
BHO behaves more and more convincingly like a muhammedan with such duplicitous and deceptive tactics. With evidence like this , how can any voter believe Obama is more pro-Israel than Olmert and Bush.
The friends of (Mu)Barack Hussein Obama have a peculiar way of showing up under buses once they've served their utility in advancing the young senator's boundless ambitions. He's got a genuine silver (forked) tongue to go with his snake-like character. The fact that millions upon millions of dupes fall for his flimflammery makes me very uneasy about the current state of our democracy.
heroyalwhyness,
Thanks for posting that video, that was the one I saw last night that makes me tend to doubt Obama's newly found support for Israel.
Infidel Pride,
I hope that I was falling for your for your sarcasm with your statement:
I am happy to accept that Obama is turning a new chapter. Just as he has disowned Trinity, he's also likely to disown the Palis, now that he's seen the error of his ways. Since his single slogan is change, we are likely to see a change in the current tilt towards the Palis by this administration in favor of a more pro-Israeli tilt.
But do you really think we need to suffer a full slam dunk of the "Liberal policies coming down the pike" before a more conservative agenda can come to the surface? I am worried that the country's conservative base has shrunk, is rapidly aging, and is no longer as potent. The younger generations have been sipping the liberal kool aid being taught in our universities, and they are voting now.
"The fact that millions upon millions of dupes fall for his flimflammery makes me very uneasy about the current state of our democracy."
...posted by jsla
Precisely. Jefferson and Adams are squirming in their graves.
About the only positive thing the snake-oil peddler has accomplished to date is exposing the true nature of the money-and-power-obsessed Clintons and turning their former media sycophants against them.
"CHANGE" we aren't too sure about! ???????????
Part of the problem with Obama's Change-Campaign is that we don't know exactly what he's talking about it, and I would never assume that what is meant by that slogan is that he'll change his postion about the Palestinians.
We need clarification from Obama, not left to wonder what changes he intends to implement by filling in the "BLANK" for ourselves.
Obama has one thing going for him and that is he is not under the thumb of the Arabians (yet). People have to realize that nothing happens in a vacuum, and the reason the US has bulked at the whole Jerusalem question was our love affair with the Arabians. Obama has no such ties at least as of yet. Obama is clueless. In fact he is so clueless that it might be useful. The fact is this is the second time he has done something which raised my eyebrows. The first time was when he wanted to bomb Pakistan and now this.
Here is my opinion or take…
I remember Obama saying once that some of his supporters and friends would be disappointed in him if they knew what he really believed (or something along those lines, if someone has his dam book they can find the quote it would help). Obama does not know who he is, or what he really believes. He joined that church of his, because he wanted to gain “street cred” in the black community. He needed their votes in Illinois to get elected. The question is what does he really believe? What are his real views? The man gives all sorts of speeches that contradict each other as if the right hand does not talk the left. It is truly bizarre.
The hope is (funny using the word hope when talking about Obama) he is so naïve that he morphs into something better. He really thinks this is all about economic oppression. He does not understand religion at all (despite his crazy church which he belonged to for the votes it would bring). I think he really thinks Israeli Jews can have Jerusalem, and the Palestinians can have a state too, and all will sing around fire of love. He really thinks he can talk to Iran and make them understand. That is how naïve this man is. His first year in office will decide his presidency. His liberal idealism will get crushed before his eyes, and he will either, become Jimmy Carter (and go insane) or perhaps become something great. It is so hard to tell with so little to work on.
One thing is clear, if he was just doing this to gain votes it was stupid beyond belief. Not even Bush has come down with a statement like this. Get ready for Obama rage week! Friday is only two days away!
This just speaks to what is wrong with our political system today…
Bush is just stupid
Clinton is crooked
Obama is naïve
McCain is senile
How do these folks get nominated? Why are the American people always forced to choose between the lesser of evils. Conservatives can go on about Obama all they like, but the reason we have an Obama is because the GOP wanted to become nation builders and win the hearts and minds of Muslims.
We can thank those who keep supporting the Iraqi venture for this. The age of “O” is upon us! Congratulations! We went from a “W” to an “O”…god help us all.
You are judged by the company you keep, in Obama's case, its not real good for him. Rev.Wright, etc. point that Obama is no real friend of freedom loving people who happen to love the US, Israel, and people of European ancestry, unless you look Hispanic.
Obama is a great speaker of empthy words, he is the product of racist practice of "affirmaive action" where you are judged by the colour of your skin and not your deeds.
How do these folks get nominated? Why are the American people always forced to choose between the lesser of evils. Conservatives can go on about Obama all they like, but the reason we have an Obama is because the GOP wanted to become nation builders and win the hearts and minds of Muslims. greatcometof1577
Because we let the media choose the Republican candidate and the liberals love their crooks. Given someone of integrity and traditional values like Romney, Ron Paul, or hell even a lunatic like Huckabee, we let the media decide we wanted McCain?
Yep, I do, unless what we want is another generation of RINOs. You may be right that the conservative base has shrunk, but OTOH, Universities aint the only source of what the yutes take in.
As for my cited statement, it was partly tongue in cheek, but partly hopeful of a new trend. Having seen what we have from the others - Bush, Clintons and McCain, I don't like any of them, and therefore don't want to reject Obama just to see a Republican prez elected.
As an aside, since he's had problems with perceptions of being both Muslim and then a Trinity Christian, maybe he should now embrace Judaism and put that one to rest. We'd have the first Black and the first Jew as president. That way he can stay a Liberal w/o endorsing some wacko sect out there. And make NM tax cutter Bill Richardson the VP.
How do these folks get nominated? Why are the American people always forced to choose between the lesser of evils. Conservatives can go on about Obama all they like, but the reason we have an Obama is because the GOP wanted to become nation builders and win the hearts and minds of Muslims. greatcometof1577
Because we let the media choose the Republican candidate and the liberals love their crooks. Given someone of integrity and traditional values like Romney, Ron Paul, or hell even a lunatic like Huckabee, we let the media decide we wanted McCain?
An Obama presidency would be a disaster for this country period.
I'll take McCain and gridlock any day.
And why in the hell should we elect a man, who has no qualifications except a ability to read off a teleprompter and promise people paradise if elected?
Who BTW has nothing but Marxist radicals, racists and ex-terrorists as friends. People like Wright, Moss, Meeks, Pfleger, Bill Ayers, Bernadetta Dorn, Auchi, Rezko, Khallidi, etc.
A man who attended a church for 23 years that preached Black Liberation Theology. Which is preaches white racism, Black superiority and separation mixed with Marxism.
You think it hasn't sunk into him? well it has.
Support him, you won't just get jihad here, you'll get the shariah and PC police like in Canada and Europe. My bet, sites like this will be banned under a Obama regime under the guise it promotes hate and racism.
No, as much as I hate McCain I'll take him over that steaming pile of Marxist/Muslim crap calling itself Obama.
Obama is not able to stand and deliver--unless it's to the Iranian paymasters of HAMAS and Hizballah.
I think Obama meant what he said as much as the Nazis meant it when they told the Jews to get on the trains for a vacation.
He'll say whatever he needs to get the gullible liberal Jewish vote and then once in office throw Jews and/or Israel under the bus, to join his ordinary white mother.
He is a smooth chameleon. I wonder if he has three 6's anywhere on his body.
Obama may just "get" what Islam is really about. I would not vote for him since he supports abortion, however don't discount that he might just be a serious anti-jihad supporter.
The same goes for liberals who think that McCain is a stupid hawk. He's a hawk, but his love for the soldiers might just cause him to pull out of the Iraq mess.
"History is full of surprises, therefore only the short-sighted despair." - Me.
I once heard John McCain choke back the tears when asked about his love for "His Country", whereas Obama won't even wear a US flag on his lapel. Hmmmm.
The promise by Obama in his AIPAC speech to "personally" take part in a renewal of Israeli-"Palestinian" negotiations is worrisome. Very. It should fill everyone with anxiety. For everything about Obama until now -- the people he has allowed to tell him all about "Palestine" (Rashid Khalidi), the people who were his early financial backers (Anton Reczko, who in turn is backed by an Iraqi billionaire), his early political backers (Rev. Wright, possibly Louis Farrakhan), his choice of foreign-policy advisers (Zbigniew Brezezinski, and Samantha Powers), his endorsement by Jimmy Carter, all point in one direction.
And his endorsement of one undivided capital is "just words" until we see exactly what he means by this. And he should be asked. Does he mean Jerusalem as the Israelis now define it, and include the Old City? And what else does he mean>?
Given all of Obama's connections in the past, given that he has not once spoken out about the texts and tenets of Islam, not shown that he understands why the Iraq war makes little sense (it makes little sense because the goals, as now set by the Administration, will not weaken the Camp of Islam; it would be far better to allow ethnic and sectarian fissures to fester and to widen) but is simply opposed to it for possibly all the wrong chomskyan reasons, the burden is on him.
Those who care about Israel's wellbeing should be doing two things. They should be attempting to persuade McCain to get unstuck from Tarbaby Iraq, and to begin to understand why the Iraq venture does not, can not, have much of an effect on the Money Weapon, Da'wa, and demographic conquest, in Western Europe, or elsewhere.
And the second thing they should be doing is trying to persuade Barack Obama that they don't want him involved, "personally" or otherwise, in any negotiations between Israel and the Arabs. Every single bit of peace-processing by any Americans has always led to pressure on the Israelis, and a cruel blackening of their mage. Every single attempt has been one more effort where the Americans give credence to a false view of the Arab war against Israel, a war without end, a war that has no "solution" (as some seem to think, and even seem to assume in that silly phrase "the two-state solution"). There is no "solution" but that does not mean that open war is necessarily inevitable. If Israel stays strong, and overwhelmingly so, the principle of deterrence will continue to work. Egypt does not refrain from going to war because it "made peace" with Israel. It does not go to war for the same reason that Syria doesn't, or Saudi Arabia. The consequences of such an act -- the damage that Israel could and would inflict -- are too great, and the Egyptian govenment knows it.
But every single negotiation and bit of peaceprocessing, every attempt to come to grips with what some American neogiators, such as the comical Aaron Miller, like to call, breathlessly, "thefourcoreissues....settlementsrefugeesjerusalemsecurity" -- missees the point. There are not, as the aaron-millers believe, "four core issues" -- settlemenets, refugees, Jerusalem, security." There is only one issue. And that issue is Islam, and the view that Islam inculcates, the view deeply imbedded inthe texts and tenets of Islam, the view that no Inifidel nation-state, whatever its size or status, can be permitted to exist on land that was once possessed by Muslims. And that is particularly true if the Infidels in question are thye Jews, who under Muslim rule were seen as weak, and therefore to be treated with appropriate contempt, for they had no powerful friends in Western Christendom (as the Christians could at least think they did). And still worse, Israel is located right between the two wings of what the Arabs regard as the heart of Islamdom, the Arab Muslim domain.
If Barack Obama, whose father was a Muslim, whose stepfather was a Muslim, who himself was treated as a Muslim when he lived in Indonesia from the ages of 2 to 10, does not see the necessity of his learning about, and without the officious intervention of apologists such as the assorted espositos and MESA-Nostrans, those on the Saudi or other Arab payroll, or those who, being Muslims themselves, or having entered the field, as so many of the non-Muslims in it have, because they are deeply attracted to the idea of Islam, and would be, for Obama, dangerous guides indeed, if he is not capable of seeing why he needs to distance himself, for the sake not only of those whose support he asks for, as he presumes to claim a high office that requires of him the ability to both instruct and protect the citizens, but also so that Muslims do not think they have a secret friend in the White House, which might lead to all kinds of dangerous rashness, and if, furthermore, he doesn't understand as yet that the threat or menace of Islam is not a fiction dreamed up by right-wing crazies, but has been a fact of world geopolitics for the past 1350 years, and in the past, before the Great Age of Inhibition, all of the keenest minds, from Hume to Tocqueville to Churchill, saw and wrote with apprehension about the nature of Islam.
He has time to educate himself. He is now done with any need to placate Farrakhan, or Wright, or Pfleger, or to limit his learning to that smyler with the knyf under the cloke, a former propagandist for the PLO in Beirut, so we are told (and the recipient of the no-courses-and-no-waiting D. Phil. that Albert Hourani used to hand out to Arab and Muslim graduate students without too much fuss, with their favorite topic being, bien entendu, "The Construction of a Palestinian Identity."
He's got to do this. This undivided capitol stuff just won't do. He's got to understand what prompts the endless Arab and Muslim war against Israel, not only because he should not repeat the mistakes of the past presidents, including Bill Clinton, and devote time and energy to an impossible and depleting and pointless task that can only help the Arabs and weaken Israel (and make many enemies in this country, who will not forget in 2012), but forget about Israel and the Arabs, and concentrate on the big questions - global warming, and the menace of Islam, and the instruments of Jihad that really count, such as Da'wa, deployment of the Money Weapon, and -- in a Western Europe about which Barack Obama seems to take no interest (while he has said he wants to spend $50 billion in Africa, and there is a very great third-world element to his outlook that, while hardly surprising, is unsettling and potentially dangerous for those who still think the West matters, and the heart of the West, without which the West has no meaning, is Europe).
Will he rise to the occasion? Or will he sink into the swamp of that peace-processing that in and of itself inevitably becomes anti-Israel,for it is Israel that is always asked to give up the tangible for the intangible promise, and Israel that, in every single agreement with the Arabs it has ever made, has scrupoulously fulfilled its obligations, only to see the other side breach its own in any way it can, and to do so without the United States stepping in to remind that country that it did, after all, agree to this or to that. Egypt has failed to live up to the only thing it was asked to do under the Camp David Accords, which was to encourage friendly relations and an end to hostility. Mubarak has only once, and only at the border, gone to Israel -- save for Rabin's funeral. The Der-Stuermber-like campaign in the Egyptian press, and on television, including a series based on "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," does not constitute living up to the solemn commitments Egypt -- not Saint Sadat but Egypt -- made under the Camp David Accords. And not once has the American government, which forced the Israelis to make concession after concession, dared to remind Egypt, the recipient so far of $65 billion in disguised Jizyah (for "Jizyah" is the money that is given by Infidels out of fear, and that Muslims receive as by right, without any felt gratitude -- which exactly describes the aid given by the Americans to Egypt).
No one who worries either about Israel's fate, or about the fate of the Infidels, should be consoled by this speech. Obama will have to address, and intelligently, the texts and tenets and attitudes and atmospherics of Islam. He has to offer a strategy for dealing with campaigns of Da'wa, for ending the Money Weapon (with the Saudis alone having spent nearly $100 billion to promote Islam's spread in Infidel lands, not least by building mosques and madrasas and conducting propaganda campaigns, and buying up academic centers, and employing a small army of Western hirelings -- ex-diplomats, ex-C.I.A. agents, businessmen eager for contracts, journalists, teachers.
He's got to do this. He's got to see Islam plain, and not repeat the idiocies of the Bush Administration, nor engage in any of the sentimental messianism.
By god, if he looked at this task in the right way, he would see that it is manageable, if only he doesn't get distracted and sinks into the swamp of "Israeli-'Palestinian' negotiations, and hudnas, and treaties of Al-Hudaibiyya.
I'd put up right here a dozen things that could be done to divide and demoralze the Camp of Islam - for less than a billion dollars, and that compares favorably with the 2-3 trillion that the fiasco in Iraq, based on messianic sentimentalism (for how else to describe the project of bringing "freedom" to "ordinary moms and dads" in the Middle East?), except that I'd rather not allow others in the enemy camp to listen in.
Yes, Obama has to do all of this.
And so, of course, too, does McCain.
Being from Illinois, I feel it my duty to explain Illinois politics for those from other states where such things as ethics have clouded their political outlook.
In Illinois there are basically two kinds of politicians, there are the members of the combine, political fixers, log rollers, beneficiaries of armies of patronage, and then there are the mavericks who are in politics for civic reasons.
The last national politician from Illinois who was a maverick and not part of the corrupt combine was Senator Fitzgerald, who was able to appoint a federal prosecutor who has recently nailed Obamas real estate fairy, Tony Rezko. The combine was able to block the appointment of the federal prosecutor for the southern Illinois district.
Our last governor is now serving time, and it might be a short while until the present governor joins him, these politicians are supporting Obama as the hope to end the prosecution of corruption.
Lies, damned lies and campaign promises.
Dubya promised to move the US embassy to Jerusalem when he was campaigning against Gore in 2000. As Clinton did before him.
State will use ample supply of skeletons in closet to do whatever it takes to erase Truman's recognition of Israel.
"Read my lips, Jerusalem must remain undivided"
Obama will stand up for Israel the way the French and British stood up for Czechoslovakia.
Another "little country, far away".
But he needs to deceive the Jewish people until November 6th, at least.
Then its back to chumming around with the Louis "Gutter Religion" Farrakahns and Jimmy "No Apartheid for Hamas" Carter crowd.
Barack must have to shave twice every morning.
Infidel Pride,
I understand your position with regard to Obama and Israel, and to the extent you are being hopeful and open minded, I hear you.
But the video heroyalwhyness posted is very troubling, as is the whole hearted endorsement from Louis Farrakhan.
So you have to ask yourself:
a) Did Obama have an epiphany, and is he now suddenly pro Israel?
or
b) Is Obama just trolling for the Jewish vote?
I have to go with b.
Bush is just stupid
Clinton is crooked
Obama is naïve
McCain is senile
Posted by: greatcometof1577
Of these qualities, the only one that isn't permanent is naïve, i.e., Obama is potentially comparatively educable.
The majority of posters above are skeptical about Obama's statements, but eventually we're going to have to do more than incessantly griping about his numerous weaknesses and start thinking about constructive ways in which these weaknesses can be remedied. If it's glass-half-full vs glass-half-empty, then let's take the glass-half-full approach and see if the remainder of the glass can be filled in the way we know it should be.
A challenge to posters here: What, specifically (and realistically, meaning that actions amounting to committing political suicide don't count) would it take for Obama to constructively address your reservations about him?
Until and unless I see the US Embassy in Tel Aviv packing its bags and setting up in new digs in the Old City quarter of Jerusalem, I will not believe this.
Word to the leaders of all free non-Muslim lands, and even the UN-FREE (yoo hoo, Russia! yoo hoo, China, the jihadis are dreaming of looting and enslaving YOUR countries too):
If you truly wish to strip the masks off any pretended Muslim friends and allies you may have, if you want to see them apoplectic with fury on the floor of the UN, you will do this one thing -
without fanfare, without telling anyone beforehand, you will confer quietly quietly together and then, one fine morning, the Islamosphere will wake up to a devastating fait accompli:
all your newly-moved Embassies hanging out their shingles and their flags together in what used to be known as the Old City of Jerusalem,
and front pages of national newspapers all over the world announcing that this government, or that government, as it may be, Russia, or China, or India, all those already battling against or assailed by Jihad such as Ethiopia, Thailand, the Philippines, and little East Timor, and Australia, RECOGNISES THE CITY OF JERUSALEM, IN ITS ENTIRETY, AS THE SPIRITUAL AND POLITICAL, HISTORIC AND CONTEMPORY CAPITAL OF THE JEWISH STATE OF ISRAEL, and affirms the permanent sovereignty of the Jewish people over Judaism's single most sacred site.
dear god how I wish that both parties in my country could see their way to moving the Australian Embassy in Israel, from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
Even if no-one else does.
Even if the USA won't.
PM Rudd, and Leader of the Opposition Mr Nelson - if either of you really cared one jot for Israel, and for the Jews, you would pip Mr Obama at the post by herding your respective MPs into voting for Australia to recognise Jerusalem - ALL of Jerusalem, ESPECIALLY the Temple Mount area and the so-called 'Old City' - as Capital of the Jewish state of Israel, and set up our Embassy there already.
We're already a target of jihad - as Infidels, nothing we do or say can alter that - so we may as well be as upfront anti-jihad, Uber-Infidel, as we possibly can, and there is no better way to do THAT, than to recognise and affirm Jewish sovereignty over Jerusalem.
http://usawakeup.org/
http://usawakeup.org/
Don't forget McCain was a Ace piolt. That means five planes downed. Ace McCain they called him.
Oh, they were all U.S. planes. Details.
"A challenge to posters here: What, specifically (and realistically, meaning that actions amounting to committing political suicide don't count) would it take for Obama to constructively address your reservations about him?"
Posted by: Eastview
As a Canadian, I'm as flummoxed about it as you are, Eastview. Is it just American partisan politics? A great deal of the posters on this board make it very clear that they hold the Democratic Party in complete and utter contempt, and can't seem to get their heads around the possibility that a Democrat may actually do or say something they approve of. Is approving of something Obama says to be seen as a political betrayal? Cut the guy some slack, people. Maybe he's not saying this because he needs "the Jewish vote", which he doesn't; maybe, just maybe, he's saying it because it's really what he believes.
To paraphrase W.C. Fields: "Anyone who pisses off the leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah can't be all bad."
A challenge to posters here: What, specifically (and realistically, meaning that actions amounting to committing political suicide don't count) would it take for Obama to constructively address your reservations about him?
Posted by: Eastview at June 4, 2008 8:58 PM
Accepted.
I would like Senator Obama to serve three terms in the Senate (if he can, of course) and actually establish a voting history so his perspective can be guaged.
His foreign policy positions and his stance on Islam is suspect, but that is not the only thing that troubles most conservatives. In my estimation, there are a hundred reasons to not vote for him.
Anyway, the lack of an established voting record requires that you buy into Obama's "change you can believe in" mantra, and essentially he is asking for your vote based on his character alone.
To date, his "character" is what is sorely lacking in my opinion.