DNC's New Pro-Hamas Platform

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Calminian, Sep 7, 2012.

  1. Calminian

    Calminian New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    Messages:
    3,888
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Guess what else got taken out of the DNC platform.

    The United States and its Quartet partners should continue to isolate Hamas until it renounces terrorism, recognizes Israel’s right to exist, and abides by past agreements.​


    Gone! Read the full story below, but I find it amazing how left wing anti-semitism has taken over the democratic party. Why in the world would they fight this statement?

    I think what's happening is, Obama can't put together his original coalition, so he needs to bring in others, including the anti-semites. He's willing to win at any cost.

    Democratic Party’s New Pro-Hamas Platform
    Posted By Daniel Greenfield On September 4, 2012 @ 5:36 pm In The Point | 7 Comments

    How bad would a second Obama term be for Israel? Really, really bad.

    The campaign is generally not the time that crucial voting groups get thrown under the bus, but the Democratic Party’s new platform gives us a peek at what the next four years will be like if Israel’s best friend in the White House since Jimmy Carter gets another four years.

    There were significant rumors of backdoor contacts between the Obama Administration and Hamas all along. Still Obama did not openly cross that threshold in Term 1. In Term 2, it’s another story.

    The United States and its Quartet partners should continue to isolate Hamas until it renounces terrorism, recognizes Israel’s right to exist, and abides by past agreements.

    That’s from 2008′s platform. It’s completely absent from the current platform where the word Hamas does not appear. Period.

    And let’s be clear here, Obama has not had any problem breaking campaign promises. Hamas not being mentioned in the platform means that the next term will see open contacts between the United States and Hamas.

    Here is what the language from the 2008 platform becomes in the 2012 platform. “We will insist that any Palestinian partner must recognize Israel’s right to exist, reject violence, and adhere to existing agreements.”

    “Any” partner is significant. The standard assumption was that the Palestinian Authority under Fatah was the default partner. That’s gone now. The generic “partner” represents an end of exclusivity for the PA and a shift to Hamas. The language is a blank space into which any “partner” can now fit. The old language for Hamas has now become the default language for a Palestinian “partner”, yet to be named, but clearly meant to be Hamas.

    The three demands, right to exist, rejection of violence and adherence to existing agreements, sound reasonable, but they’re meaningless. The US decided that Fatah met all three, even though it spent a decade violating all three. “Existing agreements” rather than “Past agreements” is also a significant goal-shift.

    Language about Jerusalem remaining the capital of Israel and no Right of Return has also disappeared from the new platform, which means that the new Obama paradigm is Israel being pressured to negotiate with Hamas over the status of Jerusalem while accepting at least half the so-called refugees.

    The most significant differences, once you strip away all the rhetoric, comes in terms of specific commitments. The 2008 platform had a number of specific commitments. The most significant ones were “Peace-Supportive Commitments”, assurances from the United States that limit the scope of concessions that Israel will be asked to make.

    For example when the 2008 DNC platform said, “l understand that it is unrealistic to expect the outcome of final status negotiations to be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949. Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. ” This was a way of reassuring Israel that if it continues negotiating, it will not lose its shirt.

    These commitments were almost meaningless and destructive, because the United States did not actually abide by them. But removing them is a signal that Obama 2.0 will not make any commitments to Israel in return for continued negotiations, besides some of the usual joints arms development and sales that are popular with Congressmen and Senators with defense industries in their districts.

    The new platform has some soothing language for the pro-Israel crowd, but few specific commitments. It’s all wordplay. And if this is what’s in the platform, imagine how bad the reality will be.​

    Breitbart is all over this issue as well.
    DNC PLATFORM STILL GUTS PRO-ISRAEL LANGUAGE
     
  2. Grokmaster

    Grokmaster Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    55,099
    Likes Received:
    13,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Astounding in its ignorance. I guess we're all supposed to be pretending that HAMAS is our 'friend"? Just like the muslim brotherhood, which,BTW, has installed ISLAMIST ADMINISTRATORS THROUGHOUT EGYPT, to further assist in the implementation of sharia law there. Next election, NO ONE who is NOT in the muslim brotherhood, or possibly the salafis, will even be ALLOWED to run for office....wait and see.
     
  3. Never Left

    Never Left Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    30,220
    Likes Received:
    410
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It is disgusting, not unlike giving China favored nation trade status. We must bow before our enemies. Leftists suck.
     
  4. Grokmaster

    Grokmaster Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    55,099
    Likes Received:
    13,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I can never figure out how the Left thinks kowtowing to our ENEMIES is "good"..
     
  5. Never Left

    Never Left Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    30,220
    Likes Received:
    410
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think it is a misguided attempt to show that we are not the bad guy, while pretending our enemies are not bad guys. Its leftninny goofy think.
     
  6. Brewskier

    Brewskier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    48,910
    Likes Received:
    9,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It helps them stay in power. That's "good" in the sense that the ends justify the means. They'll gain lots of new Muslim voters by embracing Hamas and other terror groups.
     
  7. Fear-And-Loathing

    Fear-And-Loathing New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,003
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So what the article is effectively saying is Hamas will be at the negotiating table in future 'peace discussions'. This in reality reflects two things:

    1. Hamas is being courted
    2. Israel has a right to exist

    From that it is easy to deduce that the Hamas (a proxy of Iran but an independent group nonetheless) is being brought to the negotiating table so as to apply pressure on Iran indirectly. Picture this: With Hamas being given concessions and recognised as a legitimate political force within Palestine, we (the West) gain the ability to lure Hamas away from Iran. This directly points to Israel/US/EU trying to isolate Iran from it's traditional allies with a mind to obviously limiting the potential fallout from a 1980's esque air strike on Iranian nulcear facilities. With this in mind I do not find this news startling but in fact, welcome it.

    Sure, Hamas have used brutal and violent tactics in their bid to exert political power and this is deplorable. Nonetheless one should look to reconciliation in the British Isles between the UK and the Republic of Ireland. 20 years ago it was laughable that the eradication of violence for political means could be achieved yet here we are and the Queen went to meet with the leaders of Sinn Fein!!! While two entirely different situations, the fundamentals there are striking. Hamas is still an independent organization and courting them with a mind to isolating Iran is plausible. Hamas have a precedent for being uncompromising yet with the right amount of carrot and stick could be corralled into our camp.

    Obama throwing the Israeli's under the bus? I doubt it.....
     
  8. fiddlerdave

    fiddlerdave Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Messages:
    19,083
    Likes Received:
    2,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    An utterly absurd statement.

    We ALL know that the Hamas plank would NOT have been removed without the Israel lobby approval.
     
  9. Ivan88

    Ivan88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,908
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Calmination

    When talking about the right wind and the left one, try to remember they are both attached to the same chicken.
     
  10. fiddlerdave

    fiddlerdave Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Messages:
    19,083
    Likes Received:
    2,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Reagan and Bush I are "leftists"????? :roll:
     

Share This Page