Kerry flip on West Bank wall may cost votes, some say

[Freddie Stubbs]

By S.V. Date

Palm Beach Post Capital Bureau

Friday, September 24, 2004

Efforts to secure part of the Democratic Party's Florida base may cost Sen. John Kerry support from a smaller, but possibly vital, constituency: Arab-Americans.

In a recent interview with The Palm Beach Post, Kerry reiterated his support for the Jewish state, including its right to built a security barrier through the occupied West Bank territory and its ability to buy advanced weapons, such as "bunker-busting" bombs.

Israel used such a bomb two years ago to assassinate a terrorist leader in the Gaza Strip, but the explosion also killed 15 civilians, including children.

Kerry also said that, although he would encourage movement toward a peace plan between Israel and the Palestinians, he would not do so "at the expense of Israel's right to defend herself."

more: http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/epaper/2004/09/24/a13a_kerry_0924.html

[w4rma]

1. A "flip" when Kerry does it. A "clairification" when Bush does it.

Who the heck are these headline writers and how do we get some unbiased ones to replace them on these papers?

[krkaufman]

3. Yes, isn't the phrasing telling?

Bush "misspeaks" and later "clarifies."

While Kerry vacillates, flips, flops, etc.

Just pitiful.

[Rockholm]

13. Bush "misspeaks" and his MINIONS "clarify"

or would that really be "scrubbing reality" and replacing with what the neocons want said.

[PATRICK]

6. Does Kerry realize

those bunker busters are aimed at plans for Iran's nuke facilities?

The real approach- well, at least the most progressive one- to Israel would be to stress on getting peace talks down and serious. Bush gave EVERYTHING to Sharon- who himself is in constant political hot water. Now Sharon dumps the "Roadmap" sham with barely a ripple raised- but he does get delivery of more weapons to conduct the ME takeover agenda.

I know, you can't have it just the positive way, but Bush has nearly ruined Israel's future by torpedoing the peace efforts- the same as in Korea. He simply does not care who lives and dies over there. War will mean more dead people on all sides, more undying bitterness and fear.

And the Bush dynasty Nazi roots are not completely unknown in the Jewish community. It is all part of the same soft delusion the whole country is under in rewarding this evil clan. I guess people backing Sharon will automatically back Bush since neither position is sane.

[RubyDuby in GA]

2. Blah blah...blahblahblah

I'm seriously sick of the latest revelations of flip-flops. Kerry's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

[shockingelk]

30. James Zogby flip-flopped, not kerry

,Jerusalem Post, Feb. 25, 2004:

In his October speech to a conference held by the Arab American Institute in Michigan, Kerry stressed the fence's negative aspects.

"I know how disheartened Palestinians are by the Israeli government's decision to build the barrier off of the Green Line – cutting deep into Palestinian areas," Kerry said. "We don't need another barrier to peace. Provocative and counterproductive measures only harm Israelis' security over the long term, increase the hardships to the Palestinian people, and make the process of negotiating an eventual settlement that much harder."

Sources inside the Kerry campaign said Kerry's position on the fence was misconstrued after the October speech. While he has objected to the route of the fence – as has Bush – Kerry has never opposed Israel's right to build the barrier for security reasons, they said.

When Kerry said, "We don't need another barrier to peace," he meant a barrier that deviates from the Green Line and makes peace talks harder, the sources added.
James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, said he sees no contradiction between Kerry's two statements.

"What he said in October displayed an understanding of Palestinian suffering and a specificity about that suffering that one doesn't find typical in political statements," he said. "It also laid blame for that suffering on the fact of occupation, which is both common sense and is also unusual."

Compare to this article's,

"It certainly was a bit of a slap in the face to us," said James Zogby, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Arab American Institute. "It was embarrassing."

So did James Zogby flip-flop? Or maybe the Palm Beach Post was misquoting Zogby and he was referring to the fence itself as "slap in the face to us"?

Maybe Adam Hasner, a Delray Beach Republican and Florida chairman of the Bush-Cheney campaign's Jewish Outreach Coalition had a bit more influence on the article as it would seem?

[displacedtexan]

4. On planet OH RIGHT SURE, Arabs just love George W.!

They love being spirited away in the dead of night to exotic Cuban destinations!

They love being mistaken for terrorists by their neighbors and turned in to the FBI as suspicious characters!

Yep, on planet OH RIGHT SURE, Arabs are lining up to vote for George W.!

Here on planet EARTH, John Kerry is the only hope for an honest broker.

[Gyre]

5. Idiot!

Sorry. But this isn't right. Only time Kerry scores is when he's morally correct and echoes American sentiment. He was losing it when his position on Iraq was "I would've done the same thing, but better". This particular stated position is in opposition to the world concensus and justice. Hence, it's a loser for him. Nobody believes that sending Israel these superbombs is going to make anybody safer. Israel isn't going to strike Iran w/ them because they wouldn't have an airforce left by the time they were done; so what's the point?

Why does Kerry keep enabling the bad decisions of bushco when he could score points with his base and the electorate by going the other way?

Gyre

[PCIntern]

7. no argument with your premise about

them not hitting Iran (I guess), but what makes you think that there wouldn't be an air force left?

[hansolsen]

14. Yes, yes, yes. Well said. Bump. N/T

[buff2]

8. ~~~Yawn~~~

Yeah,Kerry can't do anything right. He's the dumbass while bu$h is the world's SAVIOR. This shit is getting old.....real old. :puke:

[GregW]

9. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..................

:boring:

[Jim Sagle]

10. Chickenshit bullshit.

[Eloriel]

11. I'm more than a little tired of the excuse

"Israel's right to defend herself," which is used to justify every bullying, illegal and immoral act by Israel.

And the Wall is itself grotesquely immoral.

[Freddie Stubbs]

12. Even Howard Dean supported the wall

You won't find many mainstream Democratic officeholders opposing this.

[hansolsen]

16. Dean favored an "even handed" approach to the I/P conflict. That

resulted in the Israeli lobby dropping a ten ton safe on his head.

[Freddie Stubbs]

26. Apperently he thought that supporting the wall was "even handed"

:shrug:

[hansolsen]

28. The wall may make sense if built on the orginal borders established by

the U.N mandate establishing the state of Israel. The problem with the current wall is that it extends well into the West Bank, in effect creating defacto occupation of the Holy Lands and other territory deemed desirable by Israeli Zionists. And the wall wouldn't be necessary at all if a peaceful resolution of the I/P conflict can be negotiated.

This expansion beyond the original U.N mandate will lead to endless war and does not have my support. I believe it will end up getting a million Americans killed someday, unless cooler heads prevail. Howard Dean was a cooler head.

[hansolsen]

15. Zionist plans to occupy the "Holy Lands" will get a million Americans

killed some day, left unchecked.

It is a deep disappointment to me that Dem leaders are not willing to face this issue squarely and stop pandering to the Israeli lobby.

[IA_Seth]

25. Thank You!!

I agree whole heartedly.

I do not understand how a progressive candidate can side with the brutality of an illegal occupation.

These types of comments coming from Kerry make my stomach roll.

[malachi]

17. Kerry flip on West Bank wall may cost votes, some say

Then again, some say it won't hurt. I hate this kind of lazy bullshit jounalism. This sort of thing could be said about any decision that a politician makes regarding anything without factual support to their premise. It happens all the time. Will they now print a story sayung that "JK's decision won't cost, some say."

[SidDithers]

18. Headline writers all have their heads up their collective asses...

some say.

Well, I say, anyway.

Sid

[leesa]

19. It's the notorious "Some Say" Who is this guy? KKKarl?

It won't affect him. In fact, he has increased his Jewish voter support since.

[IA_Seth]

27. Its not the jewish vote its affecting....

It is the largely disenfranchised Arab vote that he is hurting.

And those of us that see that the situation in Israel is anything but an expression of American ideals.

[The Chronicler]

20. I support Israel and the wall (nm)

[shawn703]

21. How would it cost him votes?

Granted, Arab-Americans may not be happy with a president who is going to maintain the status-quo, but would they really be happier with a president who might have them in internment camps if he is reelected?

[NorthernSpy]

22. so AIPAC can host an espionage ring -- and they STILL get pandered to!?!

Just once, I'd like to witness an American administration in the act of putting our well-being ahead of the interests of Israel. Just once. Just for the sheer novelty of it.

We have GOT to have strict public financing of elections. It's our only hope. Working class Americans haven't got a prayer otherwise, because there's no freaking way that we can ever afford to buy enough influence in Washington to make the government care more about our lives than it does about some foreign power.


Mary

(fixed typo)

[Thankgodforthissite]

23. IS ANYBODY AWAKE??????????

Lets look at what is happening here: first we had a mole for the Israeli govt. being reported a month ago - then the story mysteriously disappears, any input from anyone?

Last week it is reported the CIA "war games" has the bombing of Iranian nuke site as un-winnable due to the "escalation" which translates to all out war in the middle east
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040919/nysu011_1.html

Then yesterday this report comes up:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/09/23/iran.israel.bomb.ap/index.html

I don't know if the story disappearing and our government selling 300 million in bombs are related, but its scary. Now Kerry and Bush are both pro Israel and teetering on anti-Palestine, which may or may not be a problem except when our government backs any part of that country, then we are also backing the Israeli military. If you are not aware their military is as aggressive, reckless, and destructive as any in the world.

I would love for someone to start a thread (since I can't) talking about what "our alliance" with Israel and what will we do WHEN Israel starts bombing Iranian nuclear sites and creates utter chaos in the Middle East - yes, worse than it is now.

Our "political" relationship is OK w/ this country but somebody has to reign in the reckless behavior of that military. The days of bombing a country into submission is over, as terrorism seems to tip the scale back against the larger military in such a confrontation.

Is anybody else connecting dots.......................................

[newyawker99]

29. Hi ThankGodforthissite!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Darranar]

24. It will. n/t