OpEdNews Op Eds

Hillary, Religion, Mideast and Fort Hood

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H3 11/10/09

I totally condemn the killing of 13 innocent people in Fort Hood by their fellow army officer. This a criminal and unjustifiable act that has shocked us all. My deepest sympathy goes to the families of the dead and the wounded.

However, I can not help notice that the gunmen is of Palestinian origin and the recent setback to US Mideast policy when Hillary Clinton surprised every body except Netanyahu, that it is OK for Israelis to continue building settlements in occupied Palestinian land while the two parties continue negotiate removing existing settlements. Could the killer have been motivated by such statement?

This leads to what I can call Hillary's Approach to Resolving Disputes (HATRD). In simple words, if Hillary is walking in the street and she ran into two people punching each other, she will try to interfere to stop the fight. She will ask one to stop punching and the other to continue punching while they are talking. So in Hillary's new approach, one party will be talking and punching, the other party will be talking and receiving punches while Hillary is watching and mediating ? Major break through in political sciences.

I just wonder why the US officials have avoided and are avoiding any mention of the pre June 1967 war, Palestinian-Israeli borders and the two UN resolutions 242 and 338 related to the dispute. The US administration invaded Iraq for the mere reason of refusing to implement the UN resolutions, yet the same administration has been sheltering Israel from implementing UN resolutions for more than 40 years using its veto power at the Security Council. Is this the new world order the US is preaching? Isn't this blind US support to Israel is a clear US aggression against the Palestinians ?

Hillary has recently objected to a proposed UN resolution that intended to condemn defamation of religion. She based her concerns that this might affect the freedom of speech. Even though there is no fine line between the two, let us give Hillary the benefit of doubts. Why then this does not apply to the Holocaust? Why are people who talk about the Holocaust or debate it criminalized in America? Where is the freedom of speech Hillary preaching ?

 

Peace Loving Saudi Citizen

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Social Media's Collateral Damage

The Basel Committee and The Lamborghini

Starbucks, the American Pub

Where and When Does Freedom of Speech End ?

School of Dictatorship

The Forgotten Occupation Of Lebanon.

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
No comments