Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
MORE PRO-ISRAEL THAN ISRAEL?
When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Syria in April of 2007, President Bush attacked her. "They are state sponsors of terrorism, of both Hezbollah and Hamas, and they support Palestinian terrorism," the White House said. "People should take a stop back and think about the message it sends and the message it sends to our allies."
Israel, however, doesn't seem as bothered by Syria's support for Hamas and Hezbollah as America is. The two countries have been talking for months and report having made significant progress.
This begs the question: If Israel is okay talking with countries that support terrorism against Israel, why isn't America okay talking with countries that support terrorism against Israel? See Gershom Gorenberg's last piece for more.
--Jordan Michael Smith
COMMENTS (7)
"People should take a stop back and think about the message it sends and the message it sends to our allies."
Is the message "No one in the executive branch is interested in negotiation. If they don't want to talk to Canada - let alone the American people - after all, don't expect them to talk to anyone else."
Was I right? Is this a new TAPPED contest? Have I won something? When you will send it? Can I get something else instead? Why can't I just take cash instead?
I'll send you my paypal info.
Posted by: V.O.R. | May 21, 2008 2:12 PM
"This begs the question: If Israel is okay talking with countries that support terrorism against Israel, why isn't America okay talking with countries that support terrorism against Israel?"
No. It doesn't beg any question (i.e., assume the conclusion it is supposedly an argument for.) It raises a question.
(Brought to you by my quixotic crusade to save the only short way of saying "beg the question" that doesn't involve the use of Latin. (Petitio Principii.)
Posted by: hilzoy | May 21, 2008 3:50 PM
Because AIPAC and their Zionist fellow travelers say that American politicians cannot!
Posted by: Binny | May 21, 2008 5:24 PM
Never forget that Speaker Pelosi was part of a House delegation on that trip to Damascus -- a *bi-partisan* delegation, whose R-party members were never criticized by POTUS.
The White House knew they were going (State Department approved the trip), said nothing until the House members were in Syria, and then fired a shot at Rep. Pelosi.
Posted by: JB | May 21, 2008 9:48 PM
Was Bush calling the Israelis who were talking to Syria "appeasers"?
The Israeli left doesn't agree with him, and he is way more vindictive than people give him credit for.
Plus, according to Mother Jones, he knew that the talks were taking place when he called whoever "appeasers": http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/05/8310_syriana_as_jeru.html
Posted by: Owen | May 21, 2008 11:40 PM
hilzoy,
I logged into the comments in order to write the post that I found you already had (I'd already gotten my reference from the Columbia Guide to Standard Written English and everything). Thanks for fighting the good fight. It's just another reminder of why I couldn't do without Obsidian Wings.
--a comrade
Posted by: professordarkheart | May 21, 2008 11:58 PM
Because Israelis don't buy into the millenialist fantasies of the Christian Right that influence the neocons?
Posted by: OriGuy | May 22, 2008 2:09 PM