Israeli settlers denounce Obama in poster campaign across occupied West Bank

[Scurrilous]

<snip>

"Israeli settler bypass roads and checkpoint areas were plastered with large posters denouncing US President Barak Obama as a "Jew-hater" and anti-Semite.

Palestinian drivers were surprised to see Obama sporting a black-and-white kuffeieh in the style of former Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, with messages denouncing the American leader written in English and Hebrew.

Clearly indented for the West Bank settler drivers, the posters appear to be a response to Obama’s recent promise to Palestinians to have Israel halt settlement construction in the West Bank including East Jerusalem.

Locals reported seeing settlers post the signs early Friday morning when there was little traffic on the roads."

http://maannews.net/en/index.php?opr=ShowDetails&ID=38514

[Violet_Crumble]

1. Of course. If someone wants settlement activity to stop they MUST be an anti-Semite..

Dingbats. I bet if someone walked up to one of them and told them they were quite clearly a moron, something backed up by their IQ being smaller than their shoe-size, they'd denounce them as an anti-semite...

[shira]

2. not quite: EDITED

the perception (which I don't buy into, btw) is that Obama is playing favorites by pressuring Israel to make concessions without expecting anything in return from the Palestinian side. Israel makes concessions while Palestinians continue to fire rockets and send suicide bombers. If at the same time Obama was putting pressure on the PA to stop inciting violence through their media, and instead have the PA use its media for peaceful/tolerant future purposes, it's unlikely we'd see the same reaction by these people.

Of course, Jeremiah Wright doesn't help either.

Personally, I think Bibi must agree to a 2-state solution like the govt's before him, and I'm certain he will. As for settlements, the very least he can do (and get universal Israeli support) is agree to a 6-month total freeze which could be renewed based on PA actions against terror and the way the USA deals with Iran. I don't see any agreement on land-swaps happening within the next 6 months.

[Violet_Crumble]

3. I've got no idea what all that had to do with anything I said in my post...

I was talking about those settlers denouncing Obama as an anti-semite. You weren't. If you want to discuss the OP, that's fine, but if not, see ya later...

[shira]

4. read the 1st paragraph again....it explains the perception in Israel among these people

[Violet_Crumble]

5. The OP explained the perception of the settlers - they see Obama as a Jew-hater...

Oh, and these people are in the West Bank, not in Israel...

[shira]

6. and my 1st paragraph shows the context in which they believe him to be a jew hater

what's so difficult about this?

It's not that they are necessarily only against settlement freeze but that they have a problem with one-way concessions that appear like bullying.

Not all settlers are stark-raving lunatics. If they perceived that Obama was trying to sell a more balanced package (calling for PA actions as well as Israeli actions) the reaction from these same Jews might more likely be that Obama is naive, but not anti-semitic.

[Violet_Crumble]

7. So they call him a jew-hater because he opposes the settlements...

Which is what I said originally. You want to argue with me about something we disagree on, go for it. But to argue with me about something you appear to be in agreement with is just downright weird...

'One-way concessions'. Yeah, I guess the settlers and their extremist supporters would view Obama's zany idea that the US shouldn't show the one-sided favouritism it has in the past to be antisemitic...

As I said in my first post the settlers are a bunch of dingbats...

[shira]

8. that's quite a broadbrushing there, Violet

"As I said in my first post the settlers are a bunch of dingbats..."

============

replace "settlers" with "Palestinians" and some people would have a problem with that, right? More double-standards I guess.

And let me be PERFECTLY clear about where we differ on this....you'd like to make it appear as if "the settlers" are accusing Obama of being a jew-hater based solely on his position on settlements, but I have news for you Violet, EVERY past US president has had some problem with settlements, have exerted some pressure regarding settlements in the past.....but they HAVEN'T been called jew-haters by "the settlers".

I suspect if anyone here were to try to unfairly accuse Palestinians of being a bunch of dingbats in the manner you have done here regarding settlers, the pro-Palestinian-hypocritical-contingent here (PPHC) might have a problem with it.

[Violet_Crumble]

9. It's not at all...

The settlers aren't a national, religious or ethnic group, though it is amusing to see someone who quite happily broadbrushes Palestinian society by calling it *evil* is so sensitive when it comes to settlers who put up posters calling Obama an antisemite. Tough shit if you don't like it - those settlers are fucking dingbats...

If you have news for me, could you at least make it factual. That crap about past US presidents (oh yeah, those dingbats already call Jimmy Carter an antisemite) is just that, crap. Unlike in the past, with the exception of Papa Bush, this time the Obama administration is exerting real pressure, which explains the whinyarse accusations of antisemitism thrown at Obama...

Oh, btw. Last line. Creating acronyms is my baby. Stop being so derivitive and get yr own routine instead of stealing my ideas...

[shira]

11. Reagan, Clinton, Carter. on settlements...

http://www.sacbee.com/846/story/1937900.html

so you're wrong again. And Carter was not called an anti-semite by Jews in the 1970's. Neither were Reagan or Clinton.

As for "evil" societies.....let's see hardliners take over your country, incite intolerance and hatred, act violently against women and minorities, take away your civil rights, preach nothing but war, etc.. and then when asked for an opinion, when no hope of change is expected, we'll see whether you believe you're living in an evil society.

I suspect you'd agree that the society you live in is "evil" if it were taken over and run that way by generic RW hatemongering racists hellbent on polluting your society with their fanaticism.

[Violet_Crumble]

16. No, I wasn't wrong that Obama has gotten tougher than the others...

Nor did I say that Carter was called an antisemite in the 70's.

Well, thanks for proving my point about yr hyperoversensitivity towards extremist settler dingbats when you see them being called what they are, and yr complete about turn when it comes to Palestinians where broadbrushing them is just fine. Then again, I'm pretty sure you don't have any clue about what broadbrushing and society actually mean given yr last sentence. Then again, I could pretend to be equally ignorant about their definitions and start using that last line as justification to start calling Israeli society *evil* and wait for the hypocritical head explosions to start ;)

[shira]

19. Obama's no tougher so far than Bush 1 and Clinton

and I'm not broadbrushing Pal'ns, although I know it means a lot to you to try to paint me that way. That's what you do, after all. :eyes:

I realize their leadership does NOT speak for the majority of women and children, moderates and minorities who'd rather live a bit more decently under more moderate, less religious-fanatical rule.

[Violet_Crumble]

25. Maybe not Papa Bush, but definately more than the others...

Yr first sentence isn't making sense. What do I do? Call the settlers who label Obama an antisemite dingbats?

As I said you have no comprehension of what a society is, nor are you interested in understanding it. A society is the entire population, not the leadership. Hence, yr pathetic insistance that Palestinian society is *evil* also applies and makes Israeli society an *evil* society.

[Ken Burch]

34. Carter's UN ambassador, was unjustly accused of antisemitism in the 70's

Just because he supported Palestinian self-determination. Rev. Young was never an antisemite and never deserved to be called one.

Are you ever going to admit that the Israeli government(whether Likud, national unity or Labor) was wrong to spend the entire 1967-1994 period demonizing anyone who ever called for negotiations with the PLO?

[shira]

39. from 1967 to the late 1980's, the PLO was very adamant about destroying Israel

kinda hard to play nice with people across the table from you who want to dominate you at best, or annhilate you entirely at worst.

[Ken Burch]

46. In that same period, Palestinians could've said all of the above about the Israeli government

And as Rabin said, before the people on your side of Israeli politics killed him, you make peace with your enemies, not your friends.

[shira]

59. yeah, right.......they can say anything they want not rooted in reality

and if you think I'm on the side of Rabin's murderer (political side or whatever), it's no wonder you have such delusional views.

[Sezu]

13. Broadbrushing is just fine with her as long as SHE

gets to do it. Don't waste yer time.

[Violet_Crumble]

18. Calling those settlers dingbats isn't broadbrushing...

As for telling that poster not to waste its time, it's no waste of time for it, seeing as how it insists on replying to my posts even after being told by me more than once that I don't waste my time on its posts given its history of abusiveness and the habit of insisting it knows what I believe and that I'm a liar for saying I think otherwise...

[shira]

20. so if I'm a waste of time for you, don't post to me anymore

as for me posting in response to you, I know it bothers you greatly when your views are are not only challenged but solidly refuted.....which is really the reason you do not reply substantively to my posts. Folks like yourself with questionable motives tend to be that way.

your views are dangerous.....they need to be refuted and exposed for the hateful propaganda that they are.

[Violet_Crumble]

22. I reply to everyone who replies to my posts, including you....

Reply to me and I'll do what I want. Leave me alone and all's good and I can spend my time talking to people who are genuine and share my left-wing views, which after all is why I'm at DU. Anyway, yr not resurrecting all that shit again about I don't like my views challenged? Do you have the world's shortest attention spane or just don't bother reading what I've said to you more than once in the past? The reason I don't waste my time with yr pathetic attempts to drag me into participating in yr 'discussions' is because yr abusive, yr dishonest, and you deliberately twist what I and others say and turn it into something we didn't say. Do I need to include it in my sig line as a permanent reminder to you or something?


As for my views. Yes, I'm sure extremist nutjobs would find the views of myself and others who support a two-state solution, oppose the occupation and the settlements, and believe that both Israelis and Palestinians deserve to live in peace in two viable and independent states with their human rights protected to be extremely dangerous and subversive...

[shira]

24. not buying it, Violet....you don't respond b/c many of your views are unsupportable

and expose your NON-progressive hard-leftwing views on I/P.

As for abuse, you're the one dishing out 90% of it in our postings to each other.

[Violet_Crumble]

26. I don't really give a shit what you buy, but I do know what I think better than you do...

Thanks for giving yet another example of how you invent what people think and say. If you were genuinelly interested in learning the views of others instead of slapping them with extremist labels without reading anything they have to say, then you wouldn't be in the troll basket and ignored for the most part...

btw, support for a two-state solution is only 'non-progressive hard-lefwing' to extremist types. Thanks :)

[shira]

27. so explain yourself

and as for 2-states....if it includes right of return and 1967 borders, we all know that's an extreme position NOT based on UNRES242 and that it would essentially result in 3 Pal'n states due to demographics.

[Violet_Crumble]

28. My posts are freely available. Go and read them...

Not that they'll pass through that filter of yrs where you take in what someone says and turns it into something they didn't say...

[shira]

30. no you haven't......never once have you shown outrage at the way Hamas uses

Pal'n children as weapons of mass destruction. Never once have you been 'critical' of human rights orgs, the UN, or media for not doing or saying a thing about this. EVERYONE knows Hamas and Hizbullah will resort to using civilians once again for propaganda purposes in their next military confrontation against Israel, but I see no outrage from this.

I can only assume you're FINE with human rights orgs, the UN, media, etc.... doing/saying NOTHING about this and therefore GUARANTEEING that Arab civilian suffering is MAXIMIZED and is EXTENDED much farther into the future. Only people who LOATHE and do not give a rat's ass about Paln's could be fine with this.

Human rights to you is nothing more than a political weapon....you don't give a shit about anyone's human rights.

Prove me wrong.

[Violet_Crumble]

35. Yes I have. Go and read through the archives and stop being so fucking lazy

I've criticised Hamas and any organisation or govt who commits human rights violations against civilians. Have I matched yr overheated and very hysterical 'outrage' when you only focus on human rights violations if they're committed by Palestinians and not Israel? Nope, coz I think yr one of the most idiotic and unbalanced people to ever post in this forum, and considering some of the people who've been here, that's a real accomplishment.

Now, if yr interested in my opinions, which you clearly aren't, go and do a search in the archives before making a fool of yrself again...

[shira]

36. I've tried and can't find anything.

i've searched archives and I haven't found you once admonishing Hamas or the PLO for the way they use Palestinian women and children in combat roles, use them as human shields, brainwash them to be pathological martyrs, or to be intolerant, hateful and anti-semitic, or how Hamas/PLO intimidates or kills "collaborators" for helping Israel thwart terror attacks against its citizens (which you say you're against), or how Hamas/PLO intimidates or kills true moderate Palestinians who really want peace and tolerance but come across as too "zionist". Or how Palestinian leadership has failed, since Oslo began, to house all impoverished and suffering refugees that they rule.

Can't find any criticism like that.

In fact, I haven't found anything like that from some of your closest allies here who normally have a lot to say about Palestinian human rights - but only when it's Israel violating them.

I think Palestinians should at the very least expect their supporters to stand up for their human rights against their oppressive leadership. "Pro-Palestinian" silence in these matters is nothing but outright betrayal, and quite loathesome actually. It appears Palestinian supporters are actually "pro Palestinian LEADERSHIP" and not so much "pro Palestinian". Why else give Hamas/PLO a virtual green light to continue their abuse, and not stand up for Palestinians?

BTW, I never see this kind of criticism against Hamas/PLO on any of the "progressive" I/P peace sites either (like Mondoweiss, EI, Counterpunch, Juan Cole,... etc).

[Violet_Crumble]

43. That's coz yr looking for yr own hysterical and bizarre posts, not mine...

What bit of this didn't you digest? 'Have I matched yr overheated and very hysterical 'outrage' when you only focus on human rights violations if they're committed by Palestinians and not Israel? Nope, coz I think yr one of the most idiotic and unbalanced people to ever post in this forum, and considering some of the people who've been here, that's a real accomplishment.'

Now, I've said many times in this forum that I oppose human rights violations against BOTH Palestinians and Israelis and unlike you I don't give one side a pass if they've committed them. Don't believe me? You can always check with Lithos, who can confirm my stance on the conflict. btw, while you seem to be very narrow-minded in focus, there's a whole lot more when it comes to people's views on the conflicts than yr ongoing obsession with ranting about human rights violations against Palestinians carried out by Palestinians.

[shira]

45. i'm looking for your "balanced" approach and cannot find it here, sorry.

I can only assume that:

a) you don't believe any of those particular "hysterical" actions I mentioned are really being perpetrated
b) you don't care

Is there another option?

------------

As for me, I'm against ANYTHING Israel does that goes overboard with respect to Palestinian rights and well beyond Israel's legit defensive concerns. It does NOT make me proud to be a zionist when Israel is not only 'perceived' as a brutal oppressor but actually IS playing the role of brutal oppressor. When individual IDF soldiers and settlers do illegal things against Palestinians, I'm for Israel smacking down hard on the perpetrators (no excuses). I'm against Israel when it goes overboard with torture, human shields, the barrier going illegitimately into Pal'n territory, not dealing adequately with new illegal settlements/outposts, not being as fair as possible with Israeli Arabs, etc...).

I have no problem with legitimate criticism of Israel, but unlike many here I don't get overheated, idiotic, and hysterical about it.

Unlike many here, I realize there is a very well organized demonization campaign against Israel, and I have learned not to take every single ridiculous allegation against Israel at face value. I've learned that most allegations against Israel, the IDF, settlers, etc.. are untenable and based on half-truths, lies, or myths. I know that as imperfect as Israel is, there is no other country in the world that would act better in a similar conflict.

When there is SO MUCH demonization leveled against a liberal state like Israel by its harshest critics and SO LITTLE criticism against Israel's very regressive enemies in that region (whose actions are at least 10x worse by any reasonable standard) that adds up to anti-semitism for me....and I find it very difficult to "join in" and pile on with people who get their rocks off demonizing Israel. It's no secret that I find Israel's harshest critics to be every bit as hateful and uncaring as Islamophobic morons at JihadWatch and Jew haters at Stormfront.

------------

Regardless of my 'motivation' to keep some focus on the way Hamas and the PLO treat Palestinians, can we at least agree that MORE focus and attention to their crimes against Palestinians can ONLY lead to better conditions for Palestinians?

The UN and human rights orgs are paying very little attention to the crimes I mentioned in my last post. I believe if they did, they would in SOME way, at least, force Hamas and the PLO to ease up within their territory and make life better (and less miserable) for Palestinians. This would HELP pave the way for REAL peace. Happier and more liberated Palestinians has NEVER been the goal of Pal'n leadership, but it SHOULD be. They should care more, or at best be FORCED or ENCOURAGED to care more for Palestinians. They want Palestinians miserable so that they can blame Israel and keep this conflict going on.

It's not as if Israel's neighbors are Belgium, Mali, or Switzerland. If that were the case, a majority of Jews worldwide would immediately call for all settlers to abandon every last inch of pre- June 5, 1967 land. There wouldn't be any calls for a demilitarized state. The occupation would have ended long ago. No matter what Israel's staunchest hardline rightwingers would demand, they would be outvoted and marginalized.

Israel is not dealing with such neighbors, however. Arab regional leadership has been and still remains the biggest obstacle to peace. They've used Palestinian refugees as their political pawns since even before 1948 (like al-Hussayni killing off all moderate Pal'ns in his day) and mistreat other non-refugee Palestinians similarly (in ways I've mentioned countless times). With leadership that treats their own people like shit, is it any wonder they don't want peace with their mortal enemy Israel?

Deal more with internal Arab human rights and the likelihood for peace increases. Ignore it or don't deal with it, then expect no change. Why should Arab leadership change if it can keep getting away with it? If Arab leadership is allowed to KEEP Palestinians miserable, then don't act surprised to find Palestinian misery maximized and extended far into the future.

What's idiotic and unbalanced about this?

[Violet_Crumble]

51. Stop whinging to me about yr own blindness. There's nothing I can do about it n/t

[shira]

52. if you have voiced outrage or concern over ANY of the issues I've brought up, then simply show

one example.

Or make it even more simple and voice concern NOW over those particular issues I raised.

If you think ANY of those particular issues are really NOT happening, then say so.

[Violet_Crumble]

53. You really don't take hints too well, do you?

Is there some reason you can't ask Lithos to confirm what my views on the I/P conflict is? Or do you label him a liar too? I told you what to do if yr truly interested in finding out what my views are, but you clearly aren't interested...

I've stated my views on the I/P conflict in posts that you've replied to in the past, yet yr totally blind fanaticism has led to me reading posts from you saying that I think the total opposite of what I've said. It doesn't matter what I say, because as you've proven in this thread and others is that even when I correct you on my views (eg yr idiotic insistance that I'm a far-left antizionist) you still insist that I'm lying and yr right. As for what issues you've raised, do you think I actually read through the dribble you've posted in this subthread? Once you got all revved up on yr obsession I didn't bother reading any further.

I've told you many times now that I have no desire to engage in discussion with you, given yr trollish behaviour and what I feel is a fair bit of dishonesty and maliciousness. That yr still intent on acting as though I treat you the same as a poster who's constructive and is interested in others views (and there's some on both 'sides' in this forum, yr not one of them) is really pathetic, Shira. You need to look at yr own behaviour and do something to improve it, and then you won't have problems trying to get people to take you seriously...

[shira]

55. fine.....it's not just you, however....I don't see any of those particular concerns I raised

mentioned by others here who have similar views to you...or on any "progressive peace" sites linked here like Mondoweiss, EI, CounterPunch, Juan Cole, etc.

Note I'm referring specifically to those particular charges against Hamas/PLO that I've brought up repeatedly on these forums - not any vague or general accusations (like the Hamas/Fatah battles, conspirators, honor killings, etc).

I give Seth Freedman credit as I have occasionally seen such admissions and his condemnation of those particular Hamas/PLO actions in his CiF articles.

[Violet_Crumble]

56. Is there some reason you can't contact Lithos to confirm my views?

Lithos has known me for years and knows what my POV is, and I've told you more than once that's what you could do if you were genuinelly interested in confirming what my stance on the conflict is. It's very clear that yr real interest is in getting all creepy and hounding me. So, no offence intended here, but fuck off and leave me alone, you creepy idiot...

[shira]

58. fine, I just did

and kindly leave me alone too if you're capable.

[Violet_Crumble]

61. Glad to see the penny finally dropped...

And I have been leaving you alone. I don't read or reply to yr posts unless yr popping up replying to one of mine. It's been like that for a long while now...

[cali]

40. No.

The settlers doing this shit aren't merely dingbats. They're crazy, ugly bigots.

[Violet_Crumble]

44. Yr right. I stand corrected :) n/t

[Donald Ian Rankin]

10. More balanced would be more pro-Palestinian, not more pro-Israel

US policy is still biased against the Palestinians, just less so than previously.

:-At best, the US promotes the notion of moral equivalency between occupier and occupied; more usually, it presents Israel as the wronged party.
:-Massive sanctions are in place against the Palestinians; Israel receives more cooperation and aid than almost any other nation.
:-Obama's pressure for a settlement freeze - which is to say, he's not asking Israel to *give* anything at all; he's just asking it to stop *taking* even more that it's already taken - hasn't gone beyond the verbal, and there is no sign of it doing so.

Not all settlers are stark raving lunatics (although pretty much all the politically active ones are), but all of them are, ipse facto, criminals, and condemning them is in no way, shape or form anti-semitic or evidence of anti-semitism.

[shira]

12. well, you're the one saying Israel has no right to defend itself from terror attacks

and you think that's a moderate position that should be taken seriously.

:eyes:

What's extreme is expecting Israel to act unilaterally, again, after giving the PA more autonomy / loosening occupation from 1995-2002, after offering peace at CD/Taba only to have it reciprocated with Intifada 2, the Gaza 2005 withdrawal, etc... and Israel should gladly accept that any future actions they take in the interest of peace should be met with more terror and attacks.

That's your idea of balance.

:eyes:

But then again, maybe you have no problem with Israel continuing to risk its security and move towards peace while Hamas/PLO continue to incite children to hatred, using them as shields, human rights orgs, UN, media ignoring all that....more war and hate, etc.

[Sezu]

14. "Balance," for some here is Israel give up

EVERYTHING everyone asks for. Yeah, that's the new balance.

[Violet_Crumble]

17. Yeah, it must really suck watching Israel being treated fairly for a change...

Being asked to support a two-state solution and to stop the expansion of settlements is truly *evil*, I guess...

[Sezu]

21. When Jordan controlled the West Bank is the

only time it was Jew free. Now Palestinians and their supporters want to see it Jew free AGAIN. Fuck them.

[Violet_Crumble]

23. Nah, nothing bigoted about you, Sezu...

Palestinians hate Jews. And anyone who supports a two-state solution and a fair resolution to this conflict where both Israelis and Palestinians live in peace hate Jews. Can't get much clearer than that.

[ShadesOfGrey]

48. Holy Crap! Just stop!

I've got to delurk to ask you a question Shira. Your blind Israel support makes me wonder who you are. Why is it okay for Israel to have the right to defend itself but it's not okay for the palistinians to have those same rights?

Are you a US citizen? If so, are you also an Israeli? If the US declared war on Israel, which country would you be loyal to?

[cali]

38. balanced? for the love of reason. Obama has been balanced. There have been NO

one way demands from Obama. The settlers doing this shit are disgusting bigoted pigs. And crazy to boot. fuck them.

[breakaleg]

31. Every other leader has played favorites for years. I guess as long as Israel is the

perceived favorite, it's not an issue.

[Ken Burch]

33. Obama expected the Arabs to recognize Israel and make peace with it

And did so at the same time he became the first American president to publicly admit that the Palestinian struggle is based on legitimate grievances. Isn't what he asked enough?

It wouldn't have been legitimate to demand that the Arabs recognize Israel BEFORE a Palestinian state was created.

[shira]

37. if Pal'n leadership wants peace, why not accept Israel as a Jewish State?

if they have no plans to take Israel over via RoR or by conquest and truly wish to live in peace within their own state, why should it bother them that Israel is the Jewish homeland?

[Ken Burch]

47. It's enough to recognize Israel. They don't have to use the exact words Bibi demands

It would be enough to say "we recognize that it's there and we accept that".

[shira]

60. I don't mind if they wait until a settlement is reached to recognize Israel as a Jewish State, but..

...they should if they're truly interested in peace and have no intentions of destroying Israel. Israel has been the recognized Jewish homeland (starting back from the Balfour and League of Nations days) for a great deal of time. The USA and all other liberal democracies recognize Israel as the Jewish homeland. Once they have their state, Palestinians should too.

[Ken Burch]

62. So, wouldn't it be enough to say "we recognize that Israel exists and that it will keep existing?

Why be so obsessed with an exact set of words if words that made peace had the effect you wanted?

To Palestinians, the Israeli insistence on the "J word" will always read as "you want us to admit you were right to did what you did to us".

Simply stating that they'd recognize Israel and live with it in peace should be suffecient.

[shira]

63. Israel will recognize the Palestinian state as whatever it is, Arab in nationality with Islam as its

state religion. No big deal there. It means Israel has zero aspirations to ever reclaim such territory. The problem has ALWAYS been Arab reluctance to ever accept Israel as the national homeland for Jews, and STILL is.

"you want us to admit you were right to do what you did to us"

that says it all. :eyes:

[azurnoir]

15. More on the settler

(CNN) -- Many Jewish settlers in the West Bank believe the land was promised to them in the Bible by God.
U.S. President Barack Obama has called for a freeze on all building in Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

By that rationale, the thoughts of the U.S. president or even their own leaders means little.

But there is concern among settlers that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may buckle under pressure from President Obama's new U.S. administration and freeze the expansion of any settlements in the West Bank or what they refer to by its biblical name, Judea and Samaria.

So far Netanyahu has spoken of his support for the "natural growth" of existing settlements -- putting clear water between himself and the U.S. president. Netanyahu is scheduled to make a major speech on the peace process on Sunday.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/12/israel.settlers/index.html

[IndianaGreen]

29. Obama won't defend my rights as LGBT American, so why should I defend him against the settlers

even though I oppose the settlements.

You are on your own, Obama.

[Sezu]

32. He needs to get his own house in order before he

presumes to make moral choices for other countries. Hopefully he will come to his senses in regard to LGBT rights.

[cali]

42. bwahahahaha.

yeah, the U.S. should just keep paying Israel the big bucks but have no say about the illegal settlements that it helps fund. Now that's some fucked up logic.

[Sezu]

57. Fucked up logic is suggesting that the US

believes it is funding illegal settlements with it's bucks. Congress, who gets to decide, would likely think you are flakey with that idea.

[cali]

41. sigh. why should you support him on this? Because it's the right thing to do.

[ShadesOfGrey]

49. Seriously? Two wrongs make a right?

Personally, I'll support him when he's right and speak out when he's wrong. You've gotta admit, he's a tad better than a prez who was ALWAYS on the wrong side. Remember Bush?

[Violet_Crumble]

54. Because it's the right thing to do...

I'm really disappointed that you think that way...

[geek tragedy]

64. Support the cause, not the man. n/t

[ShadesOfGrey]

50. Sorry settlers, Israel is not a US state and US citizens resent...

shelling out OUR bucks to you as if you were one.

Here's to growing up and being on your own - CHEERS!