Tuesday, February 7, 2012

EU Welcomes Hamas, Feckless Obama Administration Hedges


US: Palestinian deal 'internal' matter

United States remains on sidelines over deal signed between Hamas, Fatah to end long-running discord between rival Palestinian movements. Says it is an internal affair

An internal matter? This is just so typical of the Obama administration. Like the progressive-left more generally, the Obama administration cannot find it within itself to stand up to the rise of radical Islam, even as the European Union welcomes them with open arms.

The European Union offered qualified support Monday, saying it considered Palestinian reconciliation and elections as important steps toward an eventual Israeli-Palestinian peace deal.

So, the EU thinks that it's necessary to bring a Jihadi group, with an historical provenance that goes to Nazi Germany, into the negotiations with Jews? Oh, that makes terrific sense.

Meanwhile the Obama administration has nothing whatsoever to say beyond the facile and worthless observation that it is an "internal" Palestinian matter. Actually, I am not so certain that it is merely an internal Palestinian matter. If the Palestinians wish to be represented, at least in part, by modern day Nazis, this should be of interest to Jewish people everywhere.

Part of the problem that we have, clearly, is that the Obama administration does not consider radical Islam a problem for if they do so then they would oppose a Hamas-Fatah unity government.

But they don't.



  1. This would be the same Europe which happily turned over its Jews to the Nazis. Nothing really changes does it?

  2. BTW Doodad2 is my new ID for Disqus due to problems getting it to auto recognize the old "Doodad."

  3. Europe believes it is currying favor so as to escape the imperialism of the Islamists, but its leaders are taking it toward the abyss.

  4. I don't understand why it is so difficult for so many westerners, particularly western progressives, to understand that when large groups of politically associated peoples claim to want you dead that it means that maybe, just maybe, they are not friends or partners?

  5. As I see it, it's because they are scared and hope it will reduce the threat, and also because they do not want to be seen as bigoted, even as the other side has no compunction against bigotry. As such, there is a huge blind spot created. There is also the bias against our own culture that we are free to express, unlike what would happen if we were elsewhere.

  6. Precisely.

    And this brings us back to the central problem which is the tension between universal human rights and the multicultural ideal.

    If that truly is the central dilemma then it also shows that the progressive movement has failed to address, or even acknowledge, that tension.

    When I first brought this issue up at Firefly Dreaming I took a little grief from someone who thought that I was attacking multiculturalism whereas, in reality, I was simply noticing something that struck me as fairly obvious but that no one else seemed to notice.

    Now, the more I look, the bigger this thing seems to get.

    How can one stand for universal human rights if one will not stand up for gay rights in the Arab and Muslim world?

    How can one stand up for multiculturalism if one also believes that western notions of civil liberties should be the world over?