It is a common fact that Russia’s ” position on Hamas is different from that of the United States and Western Europe,” (source) at least it is what Putin said, speaking back then at the annual news conference in the Kremlin in 2006. Knowing that Putin owns Russia there is no reason do doubt that what Putin thinks is what Russia does. So, knowing that “the Russian Foreign Ministry has never regarded Hamas as a terrorist organization. ” (source) it was not a big surprise that Russians are thinking that Hamas is entitled for Russian help . Why ? Because!!!
Officially it is because these Russians are thinking that “the ‘divide and conquer policy’ is not helping to solve the conflict,” ( source )
But is it not precisely what Russia is doing ? Dividing and conquering ? Supporting terrorists in order to sell more weapons ??? Russia without war is like France without fashion . So Russians are trying to support ANY war, especially if it is any chance to kill Jews ( historically it is a very honorable activity in Russia) and to make a damage to the USA (Putin needs an enemy to maintain his dictatorship after all)
According to Russian officials they still “ recognize President Abbas and the government he has formed,” but in the same time they ” cannot ignore the fact that more than half of the seats in the legitimately elected parliament belong to Hamas.”(source)
So what? According to Russians by winning the elections Hamas got a mandate to kill Fattah?
In any way , since when Russians are so respectful to a parliament ? Russians successfully did shoot its own parliament using tanks in 1994. Today they did reverse their sympathy and they are essentially legitimizing the killing of a presidents’ people by parliament ?
Russians really have a very twisted logic : according to Russia blog ( see the source at http://www.russiablog.org/2006/02/why_putin_invites_hamas_to_mos.php ) “The Russian part of the global war that touches everyone, including Americans, never gets reported in any depth. Maybe that’s why the Westerners have a difficult time understanding why Putin has invited Hamas leaders to Moscow.”
So, help me understand, the presumable failure of Americans to recognize the input of Russians in the war on terror did force Russians ….to support terror? Very creative !!!
But you just wait, the guy just claimed that Russia owns ….”the North Pole – and all its gas, oil, and diamonds” read it !!!
Believe me it is just a beginning!!! We will see very soon how Hamas and Russia together will rule the world !!!
Filed under Abbas, Fattah, Hamas, Israel, middle east, news, North Pole, politic, Putin, Russia, United States, Western Europe
If it is not a metaphor of intellectual impotence of Muslim terrorism then what it is?
It is not enough to these morons from Hamas to recruit Mickey Mouse to reinforce their weakening power ( obviously they were incapable to invent anything, so they just doomed to destroy other peoples’ inventions) so, they … killed the poor creature !!!
“In the final skit, “Farfour” was killed by an actor posing as an Israeli official trying to buy Farfour’s land. At one point, the mouse called the Israeli a “terrorist” read this shit if you want to
If it is not no a total intellectual degradation ,then what is that ??
“”Farfour was martyred while defending his land,” said Sara, the teen presenter. He was killed “by the killers of children,” she added.”
read this shit again if you wnat to
I do not know about Israelis being killers of children but what I know now is that Hamas is definitely is a killer of the stolen Mickey Mouse.
What is the most amusing in all this surrealistic story is that in the same time “Khaled Meshaal, the political head of the Islamic resistance movement Hamas, has said that dialogue is the only solution to the current Palestinian crisis.” read this shit
Hey , come on ,,,,, you just killed the Mickey Mouse and you want a peace? Negotiate your peace with Tom and Jerry!!!
Summarizing my overview of blog postings dedicated to Coulter versus Edwards incident I would like to offer my conclusions:
1. a set up arranged by Mathews. This guy ambushed Coulter with Edwards waiting on the side to be unleashed on Coulter .
2. when candidate on the USA president’s position (or his wife a would be first lady ) asking a voter to stop personal attacks it looks strange. it is like person who is running for an office is reprimanding a voter for not being nice with a candidate .
It reminds me of Stalin style personal cult when nobody can do anything but express admiration to person of a leader.
I think that people like Coulter making more harm that good in the voting process. Our society is polarized enough to not exacerbate this polarization. But in the same time it is obvious to me that
1. similar to Coulter figures on the left are not getting the same amount of concern as she does, in opposite they are cheered by the same people who are blaming Coulter
2. Coulter has a right to do what she does
3. Coulter was set up, so in this sense Elisabeth was not asking her to stop the personal attacks but Elisabeth committed conspiracy with Mathews, arranged a Springer style circus with ambush attack which shows Elisabeth’s moral weakness
4. Funniest thing is that all over left blogs Coulter getting a barrage of the most possible vulgar and the lowest possible profane language in Coulter’s address and in the same time Coulter is blamed for being vulgar, which is pure hipocracy on the left bloggers account.
Me personally I think that “idea” of two Americas is a hate speech on much bigger scale I comparison with anything coulter did. When poor are learning how to hate rich and one America is set against another America for the sake of getting the power for Edwards.
in the light of fairness doctrine it shows how democrats will treat fairness in the issues of a free speech.
If this bill would not be killed, then the USA would be doomed to do by this bill with its own illegals the opposite to what Mexicans themselves are doing with their illegals .
The point is that what the USA is doomed to do by this bill with its own illigals is opposite to what Mexicans themselves are doing with their illigals . Read the Memo From Mexico, By Allan Wall titled the “More Hypocrisy: How Mexico Handles Its Own Illegal Immigration”
Read this :
“the Mexican government mistreats ‘indocumentados’ that cross its territory, it keeps them in jails, in overcrowded conditions, many times without food, without medical attention and overall, violating their human rights.”
Mauricio Farath, another CNDH official, reported that in some Mexican states, Central Americans “go to the municipal jails, where they stay for days and weeks. In some small rooms there are dozens of them and they do not separate the men and the women.” [CNDH: Aquí se criminaliza a los ilegales, Victor Ballinas Enviado, December 21st, 2005]
And so on, and etc.
So Mexican are demanding that the USA would leave Mexico wishes and themselves would be free to ignore the rules they want to impose on the USA?
Hypocrisy of Elisabeth Edwards and Chris Mathews is beyond imaginable.
Edwards is running for office and as a politician who is running he has
- obligations to play by the rules
- no expectations that voters who do not like him will be nice to him.
If Elisabeth Edwards already today is trying to shut opponents up, can you imagine what she would do if she would be a first lady? ( fortunately it is obviously not going to happen)
“On MSNBC, Elizabeth Edwards asked Coulter to stop making personal attacks, saying “it lowers our political dialogue precisely at the time that we need to raise it.”(ABC News)
Why Coulter has to restrain herself in any way?
Coulter is a voter and your husband is going to be a president. Coulter is definitely not your constituency but it gives you no right to use Chris Mathews’s ambush to shut up your opponent. This is not Venezuela and not Russia. Wake up Elisabeth, this is the USA and this is the election time. You came into running voluntarily so stop complaining. Are you trying to cry your way to the White House? If so, Coulter is right. If not. then shut up and at least pretend that you are serious about this campaign.
Me personally I think that “idea” of two Americas is a hate speech when poor are learning how to hate rich and one America is set against another America for the sake of getting the power for Edwards
Coulter is a private person who has no obligations whatsoever to be polite . It may be wrong what she is saying but it is many times more wrong to shut her up by would be first lady. Coulter has rights to say what she said . Period. You do not like it? Deal with that or quit your campaign , but do not lecture a voter on how to react to your candidacy.
I knew that Chris Mathews is a very narrow minded sleazy partisan demagogue. But what he did is beneath even this guy. To invite Coulter to unleash Elisabeth Edwards waiting on a side? Besides that is it ridiculous, it is unethical. Unlike Coulter who as a private person is not limited by any rules other than constitution, this guy consider himself a professional political journalist. To pull stunt like that shows him for who he is indeed- a partisan clown
Carter’s position on the takeover by HAMAS in Gaza is obviously immoral because he praises killing of political opponents (Hamas did kill Fattah people, did it?). Besides, it is grossly illogical as well.
“Bush administration’s refusal to accept Hamas‘ 2006 election victory was ‘criminal’.”
Why is that Bush did refuse to accept Hamas’ 2006 election victory? He never did!
He made his choice to not collaborate with Hamas but he never refuse to accept Hamas‘ 2006 election victory. Nobody in the White House ever denied legitimacy of Hamas’ 2006 election victory. But it was Palestinians who elected Hamas. Palestinian voters have no power over White House decision making. May be Mr. Carter could be excellent Palestinian president, but so far Bush is the president of USA and he can choose with whom to collaborate and with whom to not collaborate. For Mr. Carter commitment of Hamas to destroy Israel is not an obstacle to collaboration, which is quite strange for such a peaceful person. For Bush it is an obstacle. Let us presume that a party committed to destroy France would win in German election. Would USA collaborate with such government ? I doubt it. So why Jews have to be inferior to Germans? Blunted anti-Semitism and liberal demagoguery are mixed in Carter head in very strange mixture. He failed to differentiate not collaborating with blood thirsty terrorists with refusing to accept the fact of Hamas‘ 2006 election victory. Hamas did win election , nobody denies that. But it imposes no obligation on USA to collaborate with party denying right to exists to state created by UN just because it wins its country election. Palestinians voted for Hamas and it means everything for Palestinians and nothing for anybody else.
“Carter said Hamas, besides winning a fair and democratic mandate that should have entitled it to lead the Palestinian government, had proven itself to be far more organized in its political and military showdowns with Abbas’ moderate Fatah movement.” Source :
“Winning a fair and Democratic mandate…that should have entitled HAMAS to lead the Palestinian government.” Abbas did win his election as well, as far as I understand winning election by Hamas gave Hamas only the majority of parliament, but did not override the power of the President, who won his “fair and Democratic” elections. Do Democrats in US by winning 2006 elections and getting majority in parliament got the right for military coup as Hamas did? What kind of logic is that ? How a politician ( even with such bad reputation, proven plagiarist and supporter of all anti American forces in the world dictatorship including open dictatorships as Cuba ) could justify killing of political opponents ? And this guy once won Peace Nobel Price? Hamas looted Garter’s partner for Nobel peace Arafat and stole his medal. Is that the sign of discipline of Hamas which so impressed Mr. Carter? Hamas did loot everything it could, is that in eyes of Carter a sign of discipline? Source
Let us say Hamas is as disciplined as Carter see it. So what ? Many gangs around the world are highly disciplined and proficient in what they do, does that make them morally right? Since when USA chooses to collaborate not with the most righteous but with most disciplined force? Colombian narco-cartels are very disciplined too. Are they appealing to Mr. Carter as potential political partners?