Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (15834)	11/11/2003 12:33:37 AM
From: JF Quinnelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793677

That part may have surprised them. But it's not news to them that Osama, and others like him, think the House of Saud is corrupt and shouldn't control Mecca and Medina.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (15834)	11/11/2003 1:28:21 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793677

Lerner's position is to be expected, but I am surprised West signed on. Unfair Tilt Toward Israel By Michael Lerner and Cornel West Tuesday, November 11, 2003; Page A25 In mid-September, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) joined Democratic Rep. Howard Berman of Los Angeles and several dozen other congressional Democrats in an extraordinary attempt to stop debate in the presidential primaries about America's approach to Middle East conflict. In a letter to candidate Howard Dean, the liberal Democrats criticized Dean's statement that if the United States wanted to play a positive role in bringing Israel and Palestine to peace, it would have to take a more neutral stance. Pelosi and others insisted that these words were a violation of America's traditional tilt toward Israel, and that they could be interpreted as abandoning the U.S. commitment to Israel's survival. Of course Dean had neither intended nor implied any such thing. In fact, Dean has not been particularly courageous on Middle East peace issues, so the public hand-slap sent a powerful message: Democrats can be against the war in Iraq, but they dare not question America's almost blind support for Ariel Sharon's government. Privately, some Democrats say they are doing this to ensure that their party does not lose the support of Jewish campaign contributors, who play a disproportionate role in the finances of the party. Pelosi, they say, was trying to reassure these contributors that the party would stay loyal to Israel. Yet in precluding a serious public discussion of our Israel-Palestine policy, the liberal Democrats who are normally the champions of free speech are actually hurting the best interests of the United States, Israel and the Jewish people. The United States has repeatedly been the object of anger and terrorism from people who refer to the oppression of Palestinians by a U.S.-funded Israeli government as a major reason for their antagonism. President Bush promised that the war in Iraq would give him new leverage with Israel to push for a peace settlement. But the road map proposed for this purpose has proved seriously flawed, in part because it allows acts of terrorism to derail the process, and in part because it fails to state from the outset whether the Palestinian state it envisions is in all of the West Bank and Gaza or just in the little sliver that Ariel Sharon would give. The Bush administration has passively acquiesced in Israel's refusal to free political prisoners (most of them never charged or given a trial), and has made only token protests against Israel's construction of a wall through the West Bank, demolitions of Palestinian homes and the targeted assassinations of Palestinian militants (usually carried out in ways that kill more innocent civilians than targets). Last month the United States vetoed a U.N. resolution that challenged Israel's right to expel or murder Palestinian President Yasser Arafat. The State Department offered vague warnings when Israel announced an expansion of existing West Bank settlements. These policies put all Americans at risk and do nothing to move peace forward. REST AT washingtonpost.com