Obama's gaffe on Al Arabiya

[LittleBlue]

And so what I told him is start by listening, because all too often the United States starts by dictating -- in the past on some of these issues -- and we don't always know all the factors that are involved. So let's listen. He's going to be speaking to all the major parties involved. And he will then report back to me. From there we will formulate a specific response.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/26/obama-al-arabiya-intervie_n_161127.html


He said he is sending Mitchell to talk with all major players, because we don't always know all the factors. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but Hamas is the majority party elected by the Palestinian people. I don't see how we're talking with all the major players if we're leaving out the Palestinian's majority representative body.

It would be like Russia negotiating with the U.S. by talking exclusively to Republicans while excluding Democrats, and then claiming they had "talked to all the major parties".

Either Obama is going to talk to Hamas, or we're going to (ironically) do as he says we should not do: "tell the Palestinians what's best for them"

[elleng]

1. This doesn't suggest he won't be talking to Hamas,

as I see it.

[LittleBlue]

2. That's what I'm asking. Has he said anything about talking to Hamas?

The last article I saw said he was not considering sending Mitchell to talk with Hamas.

Props if he does.

[elleng]

10. Don't know what he's said,

but sure hope that he does.

[dbmk]

26. Yet you are willing to call it a gaffe in your subject header?

[tekisui]

33. Hamas and Fatah are talking to each other right now.

Hopefully, Hamas and Fatah will reconcile their differences and wpeack with unity. Hamas is not the majority party for all of Palestine. Fatah is the majority party, still, in the West Bank. Hamas talked in the Cairo truce deal. Hamas is involved, it is unavoidable to have peace talks without engaging Hamas.

You are really stretching to produce a gaffe, where there is none.

[sandnsea]

3. Hamas doesn't rule all Palestinians

And he has said they will be engaged if they meet some basic criteria.

[LittleBlue]

5. Basic criteria?

I thought that

1) being elected as the majority party and
2) publicly saying Mitchell "would speak with all major parties"

would be sufficient criteria to make this a no-brainer.

I can disconnect my brain like the fundies did during the Bush years, which is probably the only way to accept this kind of double-speak.

If I'm mistaken, of course just post a link and I'll take a licking for it. :)

[VADem11]

7. The basic criteria

as defined by Obama: "we should not be dealing with them until they recognize Israel, renounce terrorism, and abide by previous agreements."

[sandnsea]

11. Thanks

I couldn't remember the exact details and didn't feel like googling.

[leftynyc]

35. Do you really think

that a majority of Americans - even make that a significant minority - want him to speak to hamas and give them legitimacy? They are listed as a terrorist organization. He can find out what they want from the Egyptians.

[VADem11]

4. Obama's position

is already well documented. He's said multiple times that he won't speak to Hamas unless they meet certain criteria. Is it the right position? I'm not sure but we do know what Obama has said.

[LittleBlue]

6. So he just lied in the interview?

Great! Now I too can drink party KoolAid and feel informed, just like the neocons under Bush. :(

[KittyWampus]

8. How about changing your thread title. There was no gaffe. Just you making it up.

[LittleBlue]

9. Well, he did just say something (apparently) in direct conflict with his official policy

Seems like a gaffe to me.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

29. How about: LittleBlue's gaffe on Democratic Underground?

[my2sense]

12. Title is misleading n/t

[IndianaGreen]

13. Obama has a good understanding of the issues, according to transcript

Q I want to ask you about the broader Muslim world, but let me -- one final thing about the Palestinian-Israeli theater. There are many Palestinians and Israelis who are very frustrated now with the current conditions and they are losing hope, they are disillusioned, and they believe that time is running out on the two-state solution because -- mainly because of the settlement activities in Palestinian-occupied territories. Will it still be possible to see a Palestinian state -- and you know the contours of it -- within the first Obama administration?

THE PRESIDENT: I think it is possible for us to see a Palestinian state -- I'm not going to put a time frame on it -- that is contiguous, that allows freedom of movement for its people, that allows for trade with other countries, that allows the creation of businesses and commerce so that people have a better life.

And, look, I think anybody who has studied the region recognizes that the situation for the ordinary Palestinian in many cases has not improved. And the bottom line in all these talks and all these conversations is, is a child in the Palestinian Territories going to be better off? Do they have a future for themselves? And is the child in Israel going to feel confident about his or her safety and security? And if we can keep our focus on making their lives better and look forward, and not simply think about all the conflicts and tragedies of the past, then I think that we have an opportunity to make real progress.

But it is not going to be easy, and that's why we've got George Mitchell going there. This is somebody with extraordinary patience as well as extraordinary skill, and that's what's going to be necessary.

<snip>

Now, my job is to communicate the fact that the United States has a stake in the well-being of the Muslim world, that the language we use has to be a language of respect. I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries.

Q The largest one.

THE PRESIDENT: The largest one, Indonesia. And so what I want to communicate is the fact that in all my travels throughout the Muslim world, what I've come to understand is that regardless of your faith -- and America is a country of Muslims, Jews, Christians, non-believers -- regardless of your faith, people all have certain common hopes and common dreams.

And my job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives. My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy. We sometimes make mistakes. We have not been perfect. But if you look at the track record, as you say, America was not born as a colonial power, and that the same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago, there's no reason why we can't restore that. And that I think is going to be an important task.

But ultimately, people are going to judge me not by my words but by my actions and my administration's actions. And I think that what you will see over the next several years is that I'm not going to agree with everything that some Muslim leader may say, or what's on a television station in the Arab world -- but I think that what you'll see is somebody who is listening, who is respectful, and who is trying to promote the interests not just of the United States, but also ordinary people who right now are suffering from poverty and a lack of opportunity. I want to make sure that I'm speaking to them, as well.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/26/obama-al-arabiya-intervie_n_161127.html

We voted for change, this is change!

[FrenchieCat]

14. You like, IndianaGreen?

Cause I do.

[IndianaGreen]

15. I like it a lot!

This is what I hoped for, but thought we weren't going to really get, just more of the same bankrupt policies.

[LittleBlue]

16. I thought the same with almost everything he said in that interview

That one just shocked me, since Obama said it with a straight face, and the interviewer didn't ask the obvious follow-up question I asked.

It went so smoothly, I thought that perhaps he had reversed his earlier prohibition on talking with Hamas.

[ellie]

40. Nice!

[ecstatic]

45. epic ____ (fill in the blank) nt

[BlooInBloo]

17. Bullshit misleading title. Presumably another crazyforum escapee...

DU needs to hire more crazyforum guards.

[FrenchieCat]

18. Agreed....between Cave and Gaffe.....it almost seem like folks are in-waiting

for a fall, and getting impatient in the process. What they don't get is that Barack Obama makes few mistakes. I suspect some are gonna make shit up, as this thread examplifies.

[Undercurrent]

24. Agreed.

This was no "gaffe", and the well played move on the family planning provision in the stimulus package was no "cave".

[WinkyDink]

19. Interesting analogy of yours, comparing Democrats to Hamas.

[thewiseguy]

20. So what was the gaffe again?

:eyes:

[FrenchieCat]

21. Just seeing the word in a headline, makes some "giddy".........

so they post it, regardless as to whether it is true.

[LittleBlue]

25. I didn't want to say "lie"

Does he think we're as dumb as the intellectual midgets on the right, and that we'll swallow slogans like the fundies?

There is no reconciling that statement with his prior statements ruling out discussion with Hamas and Syria, two major players.

[sampsonblk]

22. Its not a gaffe, but if we are not talking to Hamas, then this is a sham

I disagree that its a gaffe. But we do have to talk to Hamas. I don't like it, but that's the way it stands right now.

Either Obama is going to talk to Hamas, or we're going to (ironically) do as he says we should not do: "tell the Palestinians what's best for them"

Those conditions that other posters have mentioned are deal killers. As Obama has said, you can't wait till people agree with you before you decide to talk to them. The disagreements are a good enough reason to talk in the first place.

[bridgit]

23. Obama already said he'd talk to Hamas, but if Hamas continues to be less a major player

and more a major irritant in Gaza, then I'm able to see a point-certain in time where Obama takes that into consideration, and then marginalizes Hamas into a position they little thought possible...on the outside looking in. Otherwise, all the other major Palestinian Authority players are elsewhere, the West Bank, etc. Hamas isn't the only game in that region, they only think they are.

[lamp_shade]

27. GAFFE???

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

28. What gaffe?

[Thrill]

30. What Gaffe?

[Life Long Dem]

31. Your title is a shoot and ask questions later mentality, and does not support Obama.

This could depend on whether Hamas involves itself. And as Obama has said, this is determined by whether Hamas renounces terrorism.


Maybe DU should have a Freeper alert button?

[BeyondGeography]

32. Reads more like LittleBlue's gaffe on DU

[Peacetrain]

34. What gaffe are you talking about?

[peoli]

36. Playoffs?!

[PVnRT]

37. Are you kidding me?

Don't talk about playoffs. Playoffs?

[Renew Deal]

38. I don't think it's a gaffe.

We cannot pretend that Hamas does not exist.

[democrattotheend]

39. I think he will have Mitchell and other envoys talk to Hamas

But will not personally meet with Hamas at the presidential level. The need to have contacts with Hamas at some level is not that controversial...even McCain had called for that at one point.

[Bragi]

41. NYT article makes the intent clear

It reads: "Mr. Mitchell will make a stop in the West Bank, a State Department spokesman said, though he will not venture into Gaza or meet with Hamas officials."

So there is apparently no danger that Mitchell will meet with enemies of Israel whose support is needed, just with friends who already support Israel.

I see no real change from the Bush approach evident yet, other than that Obama has appointed an envoy to go travel around and promote Israel's interests, while Bush didn't bother with this.

- B

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

42. Gaffe...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[ieoeja]

43. So you favor a three state solution?

Because Hamas won a majority in Gaza, but not in Gaza and the West Bank combined. The old Palestinian Authority won that. And since it was a Palestinian wide election, that meant Hamas lost.

In Gaza they solved that problem by simply killing all the Palestinian Authority officials.

[LittleBlue]

44. Sadly, you have no idea what you're talking about

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_legislative_election,_2006

They won the majority in both West Bank, Gaza, and Jerusalem.

You have received the Bush KoolAid. Drink, good neocon.