Any one who doesn’t think the last twenty years of
dealing with the lying duplicitis murdering palestinians
is a waste of time doesn’t deserve to be read.
It’s time to start fresh.
They won’t get past part one is what my guess is. I bet Perry’s thinking the same thing.
Perry’s comments sound the most rational out of pretty much everyone I’ve heard except maybe Cain.
Seeing how the U.S. is flat broke, with deep, epic escalating problems of it's own, how about they handle their own GD issues without being baby sat by the incompetent in D.C. at tax payer expense.
Perry is stuck in a time warp.
No, Perry isn't stuck on stupid like moronic liberals who believe what the Palestinians say, instead of what they do.
Perry is stuck in a time warp. Hes describing a situation that existed in the 1980s, not really today. (Some people might argue about some of that, but we will explain below.)
Oh. So SOME people MIGHT argue about some part or another of Perry's statement but, what the hell, we'll just go ahead and call it a newbie mistake anyways.
But, please, by all means, explain below.
The article ends with a sneer because the Perry campaign won't return this guy's phone calls. Another good move by the Perry campaign.
Yes, apparently it is the author who is misinformed. The PLO never officially amended their charter, and Arafat’s letters of promise were just that.
Perry’s statement seems to imply that there is a right to a Palestinian state.
That is insane!
Jordan was founded as the Palestinian state, and its way bigger than Israel.
Did Jimmah Carter wright Perry’s taking points?
Not seeing anything but reality in Perry’s comments on this issue. If someone does, It’s not Perry with the problem. And I say that as someone whose not a big fan.
The writer has a point. Perry was likely prepped with them needing to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state—but the details didn’t take any better than they did in biochem.
But there are a dozen better reasons to bash Perry, this is nothing.
Kessler's reporting played a role in two foreign policy controversies during the presidency of George W. Bush. He was called to testify in the trial of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, in which he was questioned about a 2003 telephone conversation with Libby in which the name of Valerie Plame, a CIA operative, might have been discussed. (Libby recalled they had discussed Plame; Kessler said they did not.) Meanwhile, a 2004 telephone conversation between Kessler and Steve J. Rosen, a senior official at American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), was at the core of the AIPAC leaking case. The federal government recorded the call and made it the centerpiece of its 2005 indictment of Rosen and an alleged co-conspirator; the charges were dropped in 2009.
Nope. Perry is not stuck in a time warp. He is extremely pro-Israel.
He means it. I support it. All else is silliness. Without #1 there is no reason for further discussion.
1. Recognize Israel’s right to exist.
2. Denounce Terror
3. Deal directly with Israel.
“Perry is stuck in a time warp. Hes describing a situation that existed in the 1980s, not really today.”
Precisely. Under Obama, all of those requirements have been abolished. The requirements today are: (1) Israel must eliminate all settlements on the West Bank and Golan, (2) Israel must recognize Palestine’s right to exist, (3) Israel must renounce terrorism.
Yeah, I was wondering if Rick Perry thought there are “50” states or “57” states.
Piss on the mainstream media. They suck. They are in the tank, eager to fellate Hussein EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK.
It doesn't have to be. Tell the Silica Amish that we will give Israel as many weapons as it takes to make the whole region Kosher, and we hope you don't like it.
The old saying is that a man is entitled to his own opinions but not his on facts. this insuffable moonbats take his own slanted opinions about things, calls them ‘facts’ and puts a ‘fact checker’ hat on to declare Perry ‘wrong’ or ‘liar’ when in fact he’s got a different - and wrong - opinion about the PLO and palestinian leadership.
The keys words Perry used were:
“. They have to denounce terrorism in both word AND DEED.”
Palestinians have given words at different times but their DEEDS make clear that they do NOT recognize Israel’s right to exist and continue (at least Hamas continues) to attack Israeli people and communities.
Apparently this ‘fact checker thinks that because there were some times between 1993 and today when Palestinians and Israelis talked that somehow Perry is ‘out of step’ for pointing out that RIGHT NOW the Palestinians are acting in a state of war with the israelis.
A WashPost comment on it.
Umm . . . Mr. “Fact Checker”. . . LOL! If they don’t live up to their pledge, doesn’t that render the pledge null and void. I know it’s a difficult concept for people like you, but words stated without the intent to follow through on them are simply propaganda—LIES.
Perry’s statement is the most concise and correct I’ve seen on the issue. Until the Palestinians stop their terrorist attacks—that includes missiles—and renounce terrorism as a legitimate tactic (you are aware that Hamas is a designated terrorist organization, aren’t you?) AND MEAN IT, (you did see that caveat there, “in word AND DEED”) there will be no peace and no state for the Arabs who now call themselves “Palestinians.”
As long as Hamas remains dedicated to the destruction of Israel and is supported by other terrorist sponsoring nations like Iran, there will be no Palestinian state and no peace agreement.
I give your article Three Pinocchios . . . not bad for the WaPo being the liberal rag it is.