Pajamas Media

49 Comments

1. David Thomson:

Why is the so-called concession regarding a Palestinian state such a big deal? The bottom line is this: the Pals must be willing to compromise—and that ain’t gonna happen! The Palestinian radicals will not be satisfied until all the Jews have left the area. Thus, Netanyahu knows nothing will really ever occur. It’s similar to me promising someone $100.00 if they jump over the moon.

Complaints concerning the settlements have always revolved around anti-Semitism. There’s nothing rational about it. These Palestinian bigots don’t want Jews living next door to them. Why is Barack Obama supporting such immoral prejudice? It’s against the law in the United States.

Jun 14, 2009 - 3:07 pm 2. R. Guest:

The question “were his concessions enough for Obama” is easy enough to answer. NO! Obama hates Israel, or should say all Jews.

Jun 14, 2009 - 3:55 pm 3. Athena:

The one and only reason for the wars of the Arabs against Israel, including the misnamed “Palestinians,” is the religious intolerance of Muslims for Jews.

Jun 14, 2009 - 4:05 pm 4. Lisa:

Bibi was absolutely right. However, nothing in his speech is a surprise to any Israeli. Israel CANNOT keep the West Bank; eventually, the Palestinian lack of family planning would overwhelm them.

Notice the Palestinians have already rejected peace again.

Jun 14, 2009 - 4:39 pm 5. Meryl:

To watch Bibi Netanyahu with his personal and national heritage have to respond to the arrogance of POTUS Wannabe Soetero is embarrassing.

With our ignorant POTUS running around the world telling off our friends and appeasing our enemies, sometimes I feel like a weaker member within an abusive family who knows EXACTLY what Uncle Dutch to doing to cousin Mandy.

I told my brother Bill and he doesn’t know what to do. We were going to call the cops, but then we found out that Uncle Dutch has paid them off.

Soetero is a sleazeball, and I am very, very sorry that Netanyahu has been made to feel that he has to please him at ANY level.

The Israelis should know by now that whatever Soetero has “promised them” will not be forthcoming. He does not care whether or not they survive. “Expendable” does not even begin to describe how he sees Israel.

Jun 14, 2009 - 4:41 pm 6. ricpic:

The horrible thing is that Nabil Abu Rudeinah was right when he spoke of “the Palestinian, Arab and American positions” as being one and the same.

America stands with its sworn enemies against its natural ally thanks to the enemy within, B Hussein O.

Jun 14, 2009 - 4:56 pm 7. Mike:

Press Releases
Manhigut Yehudit

Moshe Feiglin’s Response to Netanyahu’s Political Speech
22 Sivan, 5769 (June 14, ‘09)

Just a few years ago, Netanyahu made his vote in favor of the Disengagement from Gush Katif conditional on 14 reservations – and the rest is history.

In his speech at Bar Ilan University this evening, Netanyahu assented in principle to a Palestinian state. The door to continued American pressure has been opened wide, the price of the time to be bought will be dear and we can expect that in due time, all of Netanyahu’s reservations will evaporate.

The Likud must quickly elect a new chairman, who is loyal to its constitution, the decisions of its institutions and to the principles of the national camp.

http://www.jewishisrael.org/eng_contents/press/pressrelease018.html

———
Americans don’t know much about Feiglin, but they will in 6 months. I guarantee it.

Jun 14, 2009 - 4:57 pm 8. Tom H:

read the following column – then decide if the Palestinians want anything other than destruction of israel – not a link but it will come up in a search

Schadenfreude: An Interesting German Word that Fits the Writer’s Feelings for the Palestinians (and Some Well-Meaning Jews)
by Si Frumkin, (Los Angeles) Jewish Observer, October 3-5, 2005

Jun 14, 2009 - 5:01 pm 9. Tom H:

heres a link
http://pratie.blogspot.com/2006/03/schadenfreude-great-german-word-by-si.html

Jun 14, 2009 - 5:04 pm 10. Delia:

I humbly suggest required reading for all:

If you give a mouse a cookie

Do not play patty-cake with known psychos.

DO NOT.

Jun 14, 2009 - 5:04 pm 11. DLA:

“America stands with its sworn enemies against its natural ally thanks to the enemy within, B Hussein O.”

Exactly.

Jun 14, 2009 - 5:20 pm 12. Chileno:

Obama preaches empathy for all causes, American, Israeli, Palestinian, etc. Preaching moral equivalence is his way of being all things to all men -the eternal politician. Personally it’s disgusting to see American or Israeli acts equated with those of terrorists, thugs, or thieves.

The question is, after all the empathy talk, where does he really stand on the Middle East?
I’m afraid he’s aiming for Chamberlain-esque appeasement. Peace at all costs, even if it means sacrificing Israel. But don’t worry, if something were ever to happen to Israel, I’m sure Obama will be ready to deliver a lofty, empathic speech for all the dead Jews as well.

Jun 14, 2009 - 5:26 pm 13. JL:

Jews in the US secured Obama’s election. I doubt they voted for him because of his charming personality. Jew’s as a demographic loves the Dem’s and hates everything Republican. So what’s the problem?

Jun 14, 2009 - 5:26 pm 14. Someone75:

R. Guest: Why do I get the feeling that it’s actually YOU who hates Jews? Obama is as pro-Israel as they come. All you have to do is look at his record. But then, you’d have to be able to read the words of a grown-up.

Jun 14, 2009 - 5:39 pm 15. westerncanadian:

I read the transcript of Mr Netanyahu’s speech. I didn’t think that he conceded much at all. He was polite but unapologetic because there is very little for Israel to apologize for. I took the speech as a “steady as we go” exercise. In the Middle East words are just noises issuing from politicians’ mouths. Mr Obama apparently believes that issuing noises is a wonderful thing and moreover when he issues noise it is a miraculous thing. Unfortunately for him, in the unforgiving environment surrounding Israel actions mean everything. I think Mr Netanyahu and his government are focussed on action.

Jun 14, 2009 - 6:55 pm 16. WhyamInotsurprised?:

#14 Someone75 – Our Dear Leader is pro-Israel? … words of a grown-up? … look at his record? What record? What are you referring to dimwit?

This clown of czars is no supporter of Israel. He is the Clown-in-Chief and feels that the only way his muslim brothers will find peace is to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Then the Pals can go on welfare from their Arab brothers, or maybe by that time, Sec. State Clinton will have given the IMF, UN and others enough billions to provide for them. The One would support that since he is already dedicated to providing military aid to those surrounding Israel (so they can defend themselves from the Jewish scourge) while negating/delaying military contracts with Israel.

You are the idiot, and you don’t even know it!

Jun 14, 2009 - 7:13 pm 17. Ellen K:

Israel has to make these type of public attempts to show their rationality when compared to the irrational behavior of Hamas. Of course, anything short of simply moving out the entire Jewish population of Israel will be rejected by Hezbollah, Hamas and the usual cast of characters. Netanyahu has bigger fears. First of all, Iran’s bogus election and the violent aftermath means that there needs to be a false scapegoat to allay anger at the Mullahs. Since the US is so far away and has a black President that was raised in Indonesia, the first target for blame will be Israel. Don’t be surprised if Iran demands mobilization from Syria and Lebanon based on some trumped up charges against Israel. And then Israel has to deal with a UN council that is so biased against Israel that it’s a wonder the council can walk upright. So Israel is right to publicly make the offer. Privately, I bet they are rearming, closing ranks and setting up increased surveillance. Or at least that is what I would be doing if I were them.

Jun 14, 2009 - 7:13 pm 18. altalena:

JL — you say that “Jews secured Obama’s election.” Not so. Granted, a sizable percentage of the Jewish vote went to Obama, but the total Jewish vote was nowhere near big enough to secure the election — unless the election had been extremely close, which it wasn’t. The simple fact is, the Jewish vote in the United States isn’t large enough to achieve a critical mass in most national elections.

What secured the vote for Obama was a massive black vote, a huge Hispanic vote, and yes — in spite of his record on abortion — a large Catholic vote. Compared to all of these, the Jewish vote was piddling.

You say the Jews as a demographic love the Dems. Make that “some” Jews. I’ve voted Republican in every election since 1980, and I’m as Jewish as they come. And I know a pretty fair number of other Jews who can say the same.

Bottom line: If not one Jew had voted for Obama, the race would have been closer, but Obama would still have won. A lot of factors account for his victory, but the Jewish vote isn’t one of them.

Jun 14, 2009 - 7:28 pm 19. sheesh:

5. Meryl: . . . Uncle Dutch . . . cousin Mandy . . . brother Bill

Sounds like quite a family. Why is this such a problem with conservatives? WSo many have this weird contradictory fixations roiling just beneath the surface. But inevitably they erupt into the lives of others with tragic and tremendous perversity. You ever notice that?

Jun 14, 2009 - 7:36 pm 20. Mongoose:

It is an empty gesture. They cannot possibly meet his criteria.

A momentary dodge.

Jun 14, 2009 - 7:45 pm 21. dmgold, Israel:

REfugees Refugees Refugees. This is one the palistinians and Arabs can never agree to, as it would end any and all claim to the Islamic lands they call as palestine. Islam cannot halt its Jihad to reclaim Islamic lands now occupied by the Kufar (unbeliever)anyone who does will be assasinated. This is not a bi national dispute over lands and settlements. The fact that OBAMA and his hundreds of experts are unable to recognise the real causes of this conflict means they can do nothing but cause damage and can offer no helpful direction other than to stir up the crap and ensure further open conflict between Israel and its neighbours for a long time to come.

Jun 14, 2009 - 8:15 pm 22. gadzooks:

JL — Jews are not a united tribe; throughout history and especially through the 20th century many Jews contributed to their own tribe’s demise, e.g. by being instrumental in the Soviet revolution and early state. The problem is that demise of Jews and Israel is bad for the rest of us in a big way — loss of specific contributions (what’s the chance that one of exterminated 6 million would have come up with cold fusion?) and of the general climate of inquiry and freedom that is possibly correlated to their abilities in letters and numbers (would it be harder for the left to take over Europe’s policy and open the doors to Muslim immigration if European Jews weren’t so diminished? Maybe)
So yeah, just like it would have been better for the rest of the world to come to the aid of Banu Qurayza so is now.

Jun 14, 2009 - 8:41 pm 23. idov:

The Palestinians have a fetish with this word “state.” That’s a well defined legal concept and it means they could sign treaties with Iran and station the whole Iranian army on their soil and let them fly their bombers through their air space. By qualifying the word with “demilitarized” and Israel reserving the right to control the borders, they can have their “state” but it’s just a vanity. I think India has a similar arrangement with Bhutan. He also in so many words told Obama up your nose with a rubber hose on demands to stifle natural growth of settlements, many of them large long established towns. Bibi did good.

Jun 14, 2009 - 8:47 pm 24. gadzooks:

Ellen K — no, Israel needs to make statements to counter the lies which by now are the media’s and politicians’ accepted discourse. The big lie about the birth of Israel (”holocaust victims pushed out indigenous Palestinians”) and the smaller lies (e.g. Fatah being pro-peace). Instead, Israelis repeat the lies spawned by their enemies because they think that will get them more “acceptance” — they repeat the denomination of “Palestinians”, don’t insist on legitimacy of West Bank settlements, and don’t work on exposing to the world the source and the essence of the lies against them.

Jun 14, 2009 - 9:32 pm 25. Someone75:

16. WhyamInotsurprised?:

Ooo! Name calling! You called me an idiot, so you *must* be right. Way to act your age.

I’m not even going to address your basely claims because you’ve clearly been living in a cave with no information from the outside world. Obama has been a strong supporter of Israel from DAY ONE. The fact that he recognizes Palestine’s right to exist says nothing about his support for Israel.

If you really think he’s a Muslim, then you’re a bigger idiot than you *think* I am. In the future, please keep your childish remarks to yourself.

Oh, and for the record, when you address someone at the end of a sentence, you need a comma, dimwit.

Jun 14, 2009 - 10:17 pm 26. Realist:

Don’t worry guys your Master of History that is the LIAR Messiah Barrack HUSSEIN O-BOW-ma will soon tell you the truth and that is that 80% of what was the Mandate of Palestine which was designated by the League of Nations and later the United Nations is already OCCUPIED by Arabs (Jordan, Syria and Egypt) whose only claim to it is ‘Right of Conquest’ but now they want part of the less than 20% that Israel has. Of course to accept this BS you have to agree that ONLY Arabs have the ‘Right of Conquest” and that all history begins with Mohammad. There never ever was a Country or State called Palestine and the term Palestinian was INVENTED as a Political anti semitic ploy by Arafat in the 60s which left wing idiots, Governments and the oh so gullible MSM have swallowed hook line and sinker so much so that its not even questioned any more. Wake up people this is not and never has been about land its all about killing Jews and now the Mohammedans have a powerful ally the first Mohammedan President of the USA the BOGUS POTUS, the Laughung Jackass, the Teleprompter Kid and LIAR Messiah Obambi.

Jun 14, 2009 - 10:26 pm 27. naftali:

The only thing that is different regarding Israel’s statements of peace and the Arab continued rejection of peace, is that the POTUS doesn’t understand history, economics, human psychology, or cause and effect. And, this POTUS now has a painfully transparent speaking style, that he will say anything that he thinks a given audience wants to hear. Consequently, after nearly two years of campaigning, and nearly 6 months in office, no one in the world knows what he truly believes, no one knows to what he is committed–the US has become an empty space in world diplomacy.

Jun 14, 2009 - 11:06 pm 28. stuart Williamson:

Small wonder that the Prime Minister looked grim and ill at ease. It was a necessary speech, written with emotion and honesty, and it was essential to countering President Obama’s weak. ill-informed and self-aggrandizing performance in Cairo. Not Churchillian, but great and definitive.

He spelled out, crystal clearly, to any person of reason and goodwill, the true history of the Palistinian/Israeli conflict.

He placed the responsibility where it clearly belongs, in the implaccable, intractable refusal of the Muslims and Arab nations to accept the existence of a Jewish State, no matter how legitimate its historical claims.

It showed up Obama’s self-annointed role of negotiator to the World, and his “strategy” of continuing the endless non-negotiation, as weak and unrealistic. The idea of an apostate Muslim, with no experience outside of Chicago machine politics, “leading” intransigent, intolerant radical followers of Allah to compromise, is not risable to the Arab world; it is proof positive of a weak horse – to be taken advantage of wherever possible.

He offered a well-spelled out opportunity for resolution, and the few pre-conditions attached. Something any truly reasonable group would treat with consideration.

It was a statesmanlike move. It is a fair challenge to Obam and to the Palestinians.

You may consider it hopeless, as he probably does, but I’m in his camp. He’s put the Alinskyists in a spot of their own making, and they well may show spite. Certainly we’ll never get a better statement of the heart of the matter.

Jun 15, 2009 - 12:24 am 29. Confused in Virginia:

First, I would like to ask that people posting here not attack anyone on a personal level. Yes, we all have opinions, and those are going to clash from time to time, but PLEASE, disagree with the opinion stated. Our posts don’t need to include personal attacks.

Secondly, I don’t know very much about Jewish people, with the exception of knowing that I like kosher food. It is, of course, through my own failing that I have not learned more. I intend to begin learning. But, it does seem to me that since the years when President Carter was in office, the peace talks have always involved Israel making concessions.

Now, we have a President, who thinks that any country that wants to have nuclear capabilities should have them, because no country has the right to tell another country what to do (paraphrasing here). However, he feels comfortable enough to DIRECT (demand) Israel to make concessions in order to have a Palestinian state. Those two ideas are opposite to each other. Exactly where does he get off telling another country what to do? And to add insult to injury, President Obama has not asked the Palestinians to make any concessions.

I agree with those who believe that the Palestinians don’t want peace, or they would have found a way by now.

ricpic, #6, states, “America stands with its sworn enemies against its natural ally thanks to the enemy within, B Hussein O.” I think the American people stand with Israel, but it is the fraudelent President, who stands with his Muslim brothers. But, the winds of change are starting to blow, and it won’t be long before they blow him out of office.

Jun 15, 2009 - 2:10 am 30. SAF:

Immediately after the speech Hamas said “No Palestinian will accept Israel as a Jewish state in 1000 years.” This entire thing is a non starter. There will never be peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis.

Obama will push for more of course. But no Israeli leader will give into making Israel into a non-jewish state which is required by the Palestinians and always has been.

Jun 15, 2009 - 3:52 am 31. Chileno:

If the Jews permitted a Palestinian state to be established next to theirs, would this satisfy the Palestinians? No.

If Israel compensated the Palestinian refugees for their losses, would this satisfy them? No.

Why? Because though loss of land, lack of self-determination, and desire for a homeland are all valid Palestinian grievances, they belie the real goal: governance by Palestinians over ALL of Palestine. The issue is not land ownership, it’s land SOVEREIGNTY. Hamas will never stop fighting Israel, as Israeli sovereignty over part of Palestine is incompatible with this goal. Even moderate Arabs who espouse the “one-state” solution are essentially working for the same goal of complete Palestinian governance. The difference is that Hamas would kill the Jews, while the moderates would tolerate them as a minority (though most must realize that religious minorities have historically not fared well in Muslim-dominated societies).

The irony is that Palestinians vehemently claim sovereignty over a piece of land which they have never governed. The Ottomans ruled over the land for centuries, until they transferred sovereignty to the British. Why did the British transfer partial sovereignty to the Jews? As far back as 1917, Lord Balfour declared the British intent of helping the Jews establish a homeland, long before the Holocaust. Jewish immigration was already in full swing in the 1920’s and 30’s, helped by European anti-Semitism, including the 1935 Nuremberg Laws that that stripped over 300,000 Jews of their German citizenship. It soon became obvious (even before WWII) that the growing Jewish and Arab populations in Palestine would be ungovernable under one state, so the British decided to partition their Palestine Mandate to create a homeland for each. The Arabs rejected the offer of partial sovereignty, as they still do to this day. The Jews accepted it, as their agenda has always been simply to have a homeland, as do the Armenians, the Turks, and many other ethnic groups. It is curious to see how Muslims vociferously rejected the British partitioning of Palestine, but none opposed the British partitioning of India -to create Muslim Pakistan.

So while the West may rightly pressure Israel to compensate the Palestinian refugees and to accept a Palestinian state, it is questionable whether this will stop the conflict. The main issue has never been the refugees, or the creation of A Palestinian state. The issue is the existence of Israel, and how it blocks the creation of THE Palestinian State.

Jun 15, 2009 - 5:08 am 32. Tomp:

This will not end until one side is completely destroyed.

Jun 15, 2009 - 5:17 am 33. Old Soldier:

Obama has no knowledge of history, even recent history. Clinton tried all this 9 years ago and failed. He blamed his failure squarely on Arafat and the Palestinians. They negotiated in bad faith and chose war instead of peace.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/cd2000art.html

I’m sure the Israelis would love to negotiate but they won’t make any changes on the ground until there is a signed guaranteed agreement. That won’t happen for several reasons – the above mentioned requirement of recognizing Israel, the fact that the negotiators are terrorists, and the victim / revenge mentality that has fester there for 50 years.

Jun 15, 2009 - 6:22 am 34. WhyamInotsurprised?:

#29 Confused in Virgina – what are you, a school marm? Don’t lecture here. Make your statement and leave it at that.

Jun 15, 2009 - 6:32 am 35. WhyamInotsurprised?:

#25 Someone 7′5″ – in his own mind! Big shite!

Alright, cut to the chase. You make statements about Our Fearless Reader being pro-Israeli. By what evidence do you make such a claim?

And who is the childish one here when asked to back up your statement, all you can respond with is, ” … then you’re a bigger idiot than you *think* I am.

Why was his first speech as US President to a Muslim group and not the American people?

Why is he bowing to the Saudi King?

Why is he continually “apologizing” for the big, bad USofA in countries with dictators, and then to the Muslim world via Cairo?

As for my punctuation, you are anal retentive and I do not give a rats ass what you think about a missing comma. This is not a place to post a thesis with “correct punctuation” or footnotes, although it would be nice for you to support your belief that B. Hussein Obama is pro-Israel. Har har har! What a joke!

He claims “he” made the difference in the Lebanese election. Then a day later claims the same with Iran, oops, until Ajad steals it and Barry’s thunder. We will see who has the last cry here after all is said and done, if we live to see it.

Jun 15, 2009 - 6:44 am 36. Ivri:

B H O is a muslim. Period.

Jun 15, 2009 - 6:49 am 37. chris in Toronto:

“Our Fearless Reader”

Excellent!

Jun 15, 2009 - 7:07 am 38. Realist:

#25 Someone75 says
‘If you really think he’s a Muslim, then you’re a bigger idiot than you *think* I am. In the future, please keep your childish remarks to yourself.’
So ponder this Someone75 Barrack HUSEIN Obama born to a Muslim father adopted by a Muslim stepfather attended two schools in Indonesia one of the a Multi faith school and in both schools he was registered as a Muslim. Obambi writes of his scj=hool experiences in his book and he says “I was chastised by the teacher for pulling faces in KORANIC STUSIES” . This is a fatal slip for Obambi who is so fond of telling us he was ‘ALWAYS a Christian’. You see in Indonesia Christian children do not and in fact are not permitted to study the Koran in fact it is incomprehensible that an Indonesian school especially a Multi faith one would allow a Christian to study the Koran if they did there would be riots and blood on the streets. Indonesian Christians have been oppressed and attacked by Muslims for decades and are rightfully very sensitive and very protective of anything done by Muslims to their children.
So out of his own mouth Obambi confirms he WAS a Muslim in Indonesia and that therefore makes him a LIAR which is all you really need to know about him.

Jun 15, 2009 - 7:43 am 39. David W. Lincoln:

As long as those, from the Greater Middle East, who gathered in Oslo last month (George Jonas referred to them in his piece, “Hitler’s dream come true”) become the segment with the most clout in the Arab world, then it is
possible for Israel to have the kind of neighbours that Obambi takes for granted.

Jun 15, 2009 - 8:29 am 40. SAF:

The Egyptian’s response to Israel being a Jewish State: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1244371100536&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

No peace in the middle east ever without one side being completely obliterated.

Jun 15, 2009 - 9:11 am 41. JR:

The Palestinians already have three nations – Jordan, PA, and Gaza. That they have made of sewer of the latter two (PA, GAZA) is their own fault. That they have not made a sewer of the first (Jordan) is to the credit not of the Palestinians, but of the Hashemites.

Jun 15, 2009 - 10:26 am 42. Warren Bonesteel:

That was no ‘concession’ speech. That was a ‘recognize Israel or else’ speech. Cluebat: That ain’t happenin’. His speech changed nothing and was a warning. “Yeah. I’ll give ya a Palestinian state, but Islam has to recognize Israel as a legitimate state.” That just ain’t gonna happen, folks.

Just like Putin’s 2007 ’state of the union’ speech as the official HMFIC in Russia, when he told the West to take a long walk off a short pier. The Western media and talking heads declared it as a ‘concession’ to Western values. No. Putin was tellin’ us to stay outta his back yard, or else. That’s why the whole Polish missile defense and Ossetia, thing blew up in our faces. Which is also why a certain CIS nation kicked us out.

We weren’t listening. Just like we’re not listening to Bibi.

Jun 15, 2009 - 2:40 pm 43. Warren Bonesteel:

Oops. I had the date of Putin’s speech wrong. The speech I was thinkin’ of is from Feb 2008. ‘Russia’s Development Strategy to 2020.’

Jun 15, 2009 - 2:45 pm 44. David W. Lincoln:

I could have rephrased it better. People from various parts of the world were in Oslo, not just
from the Greater Mid East.

Now, given that the best interests for everyone
are in line with the triumph of these folks referred to above, positive action would dictate
all options being looked at to see that they triumph.

Jun 15, 2009 - 3:54 pm 45. Brian:

This was a well written speech.The kind of leadership ive been looking for from Israel.Its the Palestinians who will actually have to think now long and hard about peace.This man also knows the cost of war and paid the ultimate price with family.He will not draw Israel into an unnecessary war.He will protect Israel at all costs.Kudos Bibi!:D

Jun 15, 2009 - 5:44 pm 46. Typos_R_us:

To the Clueless. Once a Muslim , always a Muslim. If you are in denial of that basic fact, read this;

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/001590.php

Sorry, but your boy the Usurper is what they call a murtadd in the ME.
While the West doesn’t really notice an apostate, since Westerners change religions more often the Arabs change underclothes, in the Islamic Crescent, A Murtadd has less status then a child molester does in America.
You, him, and as many Americans as you want can deny it all you want, but almost a billion Muslims say you are wrong.

These are simple FACTS. Spin them all you want, they won’t change. According to the Laws of Islam, Berry is a Muslim. Period. NOTHING can change that.
Once a Muslim, always a Muslim. There is no choice involved as hard as that is for Americans to understand.
Now if it matters or not is a different issue, one that has many sides. Berry being a muslim isn’t an issue, but a fact.
Denial won’t change that fact.

Jun 15, 2009 - 7:09 pm 47. Jack in Silver Spring:

The Arabs continue to the play the “NO” game. So far it has netted them a great deal. They can continue this game with the gutless wonder in the West until the only thing left to concede is the beach in Tel Aviv. Munich anyone?

Jun 15, 2009 - 7:31 pm 48. David P:

Israeli demands:
-a cessation of incitement
-end to indoctrination
-total demilitarization of splinter offshoots
are far from unreasonable & actually vital interests of the United States no matter who’s at the helm.

Obama, while “not good enough” in his mind is bound by western logic & must respond diplomatically with encouragement & enthusiasm.

The Islamic world that’s waged an endless Jihad against Israel since before it’s inception knows full well they are fundamentally incapable of meeting these rational & necessary pillars for an agreement.

Jun 16, 2009 - 9:00 am 49. hangnail:

#21 dmgold: Amen! Now get your people together & go kick ass!

Jun 17, 2009 - 7:34 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: