I’m having trouble with the “proportional response” doctrine, and Juan Williams “scoring” the war at 130+ Hamas dead verses five Israeli dead is not helping. If a group of 100 terrorists or crack-heads tried to invade a well-armed gated community here in the United States and they were all killed by residents who suffered one casualty, would the residents be chastised for “overkill?”
The leader of the Hamas militant training programs in Gaza has been driving around in a civilian vehicle with “TV” imprinted on the hood. The dirty trick – making things even more dangerous for real journalists – didn’t work, and Israel targeted the goon anyway.
Bully. So Mahmoud Abbas is demanding the United Nations officially recognize Palestine as a state and at the same time is letting the world know there is no way they will recognize a Jewish state in return. It’s all or nothing.
So while the all-knowing “peace-makers” at the United Nations are urging Israel’s leaders to keep calm and avoid violence, what would be the Palestinians be doing and saying?
I’ll be the first to admit my knowledge of Middle East history going back to the end of World War I is pretty thin, but I found this video – narrated by Bill Whittle – pretty interesting.
Respectful, calm, but firm in resolve, Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu made it crystal clear to the President there will be no agreement as outlined by the President yesterday. If Obama thought that Bebe would roll over in the presence of the One, he badly miscalculated. Video below the fold. Listen as the PM outlines his conditions for peace, and reasons for his positions. Watch the grim face on the President. Read more
Sure, you can call it a biased report since the video release is from Shraga Simmons at MediaGoliath.com, but why not watch the video and discuss the facts? It will be our featured video for the next few days.
This is just classic lefty “a few misplaced words stuff. First the Helen Thomas sound bite … then the apology. Is it good enough for you? My answer to that at the end.
Now the apology. Nicely worded, by a publicist?
In a written statement issued Friday, Thomas apologized, saying, “I deeply regret my comments I made last week regarding the Israelis and the Palestinians.”
She said the comments “do not reflect” her “heart-felt belief that peace will come to the Middle East only when all parties recognize the need for mutual respect and tolerance.”
So … satisfied? I am always happy when folks recognize silly stupid statements, and as a member of the WH Press Corps, she should apology. This is not a free speech issue, not for Helen. But I also am not satisfied. Read the apology again, and then watch the video. Ms Thomas claims that what she said is not her heart felt belief, but when you listen to video you can tell it is. Thus in my mind the apology is more a PR redo rather than a heartfelt apology.
If Helen Thomas believes that Israelis are occupiers, so be it. This is America, and those are her views. But as a journalist, she should keep it to herself, and spare us the carefully crafted apology. That’s my view, I hope over time she proves me wrong.
A clear and concise opinion piece from Charles Krauthammer listing out the options Israel has had during the last 50 years. Forward defense, then active defense and more recently with the blockade, passive defense. If none of these defensive approaches are acceptable, what’s left?