Quote:
Originally posted by sarettah@Sep 11 2003, 11:25 AM
It Grows !!! Now there is criticism from the House Dems over the fact that Dean says that the Isaraeli-Palestinian issue must be handled in an "even handed" manner.....
These idiots.... He is exactly right... If you want honest, open negotiations to occur, you can not be displaying a bias towards one side or another....
*****************************************
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/.../091008957.html
House Dems Criticize Dean's Israel Remarks
By NEDRA PICKLER
ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) -
Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean drew fire from House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi and several Jewish lawmakers on Wednesday over his remarks concerning Israel.
"This is not a time to be sending mixed messages," Dean's critics said in a letter circulated by Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., and signed by Pelosi and more than two dozen other Democratic House members who are supporting other candidates. "On the contrary, in these difficult times we must reaffirm our unyielding commitment to Israel's survival and raise our voices against all forms of terrorism and incitement."
Last week at a rally in Santa Fe, N.M., Dean said an "enormous number" of Israeli settlements must go to make progress in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. "It's not our place to take sides," he said.
....................................
During the debate Tuesday night, Dean defended himself by saying he and former President Bill Clinton held the same view on the issue - that the United States must have the trust of both sides to negotiate between the two countries. He repeated that argument during an appearance Wednesday on CNN's "Wolf Blitzer Reports."
"I believe the position that I take on Israel is exactly the position the United States has taken for 54 years," he said on the show. But he acknowledged that saying there should be an "evenhanded policy" toward the Israelis and the Palestinians may have been a poor choice of words.
|
I kind of agree with the criticism on this guy.. see why..
First - he is poorly phrasing his opinions. (at least in the quotes you brought forward)
Quote: Last week at a rally in Santa Fe, N.M., Dean said an "enormous number" of Israeli settlements must go to make progress in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. "It's not our place to take sides," he said.
How can stating that "Settlements must go" get along with his belief that "It's not our place to take sides,". After all - saying that is taking a very clear side - at least in that matter of settlements.
Second..
Quote: "I believe the position that I take on Israel is exactly the position the United States has taken for 54 years," he said on the show. But he acknowledged that saying there should be an "evenhanded policy" toward the Israelis and the Palestinians may have been a poor choice of words.
We just concluded a very thorough discussion about how the US approach to Israel WASN'T the same for the last 54 years - so what is this guy talking about???
Even if we give him the benefit of the doubt that he means the last 30 years - (or even the spirit of things where he means the US is for a democracy over dictatorship and that Israel is a better example for it than its neighbors) - even saying the current government has the same approach to Israel as the last is rediculous.
sarettah: I didn't see by what you posted, someone criticizing him for the "even handed" issue that clearly. I think the criticism is more about his approach and opinions.. I am all for "even handed" but...
...saying "even handed" is something very unclear. what does it mean? That fighting against Terror organization and disarming them should come along with disarming the Israeli army?
It requires much more than just using a 2 word "even handed" thingy. It requires a full scale "policy" and stated agenda to be clear about what one means when s/he say they have their belief about how to handle the situation.