Kerry: Rantisi's killing was justified

[Euphen]

Apr. 18, 2004 19:39
Kerry: Rantisi's killing was justified
By JANINE ZACHARIA

US Senator John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, said on Sunday Israel's killing of Hamas leader Abdel-Aziz al-Rantissi was justified because Israel "has every right in the world to respond to any act of terror against it."

"Hamas is a terrorist, brutal organization," he told NBC's Meet the Press.

"It has had years to make up its mind to take part in a peaceful process. They refuse to ... and I support Israel's efforts to try to separate itself and to try to be secure."

...................

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1082260239638&p=1078397702269

[skooooo]

1. I don't think the headline matches..

..Kerry's statement.

[Zhade]

69. Jerusalem Post, what do you expect?

I mean, I'm no fan of Kerry, but to quote the Jerusalem Post on DU is like Free Republic quoting from CounterPunch!

Oddly enough, while rightwing sources are banned in LBN, I see the JP used in the I/P forum all the time - and the mods don't seem to care. Go figure. :shrug:

[Dagaz]

2. Glad to see Kerry take a stand

I think Russert thought he'd get a waffle but Kerry answered very directly.

[wtmusic]

3. Had Rantisi threatened Israel?

:shrug:

[Jim Sagle]

11. That was his whole life - threatening Israel.

[wtmusic]

15. Anything beyond Sharon's threats to Palestinians?

Got any specifics, or just idealogical blather?

[Jim Sagle]

21. He swore many blood oaths that Israel must be destroyed.

Do your own research on it.

[Zhade]

71. So put him on trial. Assassination is against international law.

Of course, with a fascist war criminal like Sharon in charge in Israel, no real surprise he'd ignore international law.

I'm sure the Israeli government will be as understanding when someone assassinates Sharon. </sarcasm>

[Jim Sagle]

85. It's not assassination, it's war - even if the lying UN won't admit it.

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jim Sagle]

102. Yes. Conformity is not required on every issue.

[Zhade]

103. No, of course not. But adherence to truth should be.

That you can call the UN a body of liars, well, that speaks more about your credibility than the UN's, I'm afraid.

[Jim Sagle]

105. My credibility with you will just have to suffer, then.

I call 'em as I see 'em.

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jim Sagle]

111. Just your opinion, nothing more.

[Zhade]

135. And most of your pro-Israel posts are based on your opinion, not fact.

NT!

[duhneece]

112. "...put him on trial"...

What happened to putting people under arrest, having a trial?

[demdave]

25. Try this

"The word cease-fire is not in our dictionary. ... Resistance will continue until we uproot them from our homeland." — Last June, as Egypt tried to work out a truce.

[wtmusic]

26. Curious

Nasser said the same thing, and I don't recall assassination being considered legitimate then.

[54anickel]

78. Funny, the word hudna was in his vocabulary this past January -

On January 26, 2004, senior Hamas leader Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi offered a 10-year hudna in return for complete withdrawal from all territories captured in the Six Day War, and the establishment of a state.". There had earlier been some talks within Hamas about doing this but this time, according to him, "the movement has taken a decision on this". Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin said recently the group could accept a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Rantissi stated that Hamas had come to the conclusion that it was "difficult to liberate all our land at this stage, so we accept a phased liberation." Rantissi said the truce could last 10 years, though "not more than 10 years." <2>

On March 22, 2004, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was assassinated in an Israeli missile strike. Following Yassin's death, Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi replaced him as the leader of Hamas. On March 28, he stated in a speech given at the Islamic University of Gaza City that "America declared war against God. Sharon declared war against God, and God declared war against America, Bush and Sharon."

On April 2, 2004, according to the Boston Globe, a United States federal judge in Providence, Rhode Island, finds Hamas guilty in a civil lawsuit resulting from the 1996 murder of Yaron Ungar and Efrat Ungar in Israel. Hamas is ordered to pay the family of Yaron and Efrat Ungar $116 million. The court has not yet ruled regarding the liability of the Palestinian Authority and the PLO.

On April 17, 2004, the successor to Sheikh Ahmed Yassin as the leader of Hamas, Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi, was also killed in an airstrike by the Israel Defense Forces, five hours after a fatal suicide bombing by Hamas. With the death of Rantissi, the top three Hamas leaders in Gaza have been killed since August 2003. As a result, Khaled Mashaal, overall leader of Hamas, who is based in Syria, said Hamas should not disclose the name of its next leader in Gaza.<3>

On April 18, 2004, Hamas secretly selected a new leader in the Gaza Strip fearing that he will be killed if his identity is known. (NYT)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas

Here's an interesting explanation of Hamas from 2000
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/978626.stm

[The Stranger]

116. Anyone have any Kach quotes handy?

Or do you not want to talk about that?

[The Stranger]

114. According to some, anyone who seeks to end the Occupation is trying

to destroy Israel.

[Freddie Stubbs]

134. Yes

About Suicide Bombers: "I congratulate them. They will teach the Jewish mothers in Haifa, Tel Aviv and everywhere that our blood is not cheap.

http://www.adl.org/%5Cisrael%5Crantisi_words.asp

[HereSince1628]

4. So, regardless of who gets elected

that president will support the killing of political leaders...

Just like the way we tried to get rid of pirates, so maybe this is a skull and bones connection.

[wasichu]

5. How is Israel part of a peacful process?

someone please tell me.

[wtmusic]

6. Is Kerry legitimizing assassination?

Someone please give me a reality check here.

[keithyboy]

17. Please God, give us another candidate!

Just can't bring myself to vote for Kerry.

[sampsonblk]

28. Me either!

There is no way I can vote for "Democrat" who supports the murder of Palestinians. That was WRONG and it was MURDER. No question about it.

I think John Kerry just lost a lot of votes. No one who supports Israel is going to suddenly jump to Kerry, but a lot of people who support international law are probably going to find another candidate. Put me in that number. No murder. No Bush. No Kerry.

[PaDUer]

100. With all these things coming out...

I wouldn't be surprised, if we make it to the convention, for someone else to step up.

[sampsonblk]

123. I Hope We Get another nominee

Bellefonte, PA here. I hope Kerry somehow gets dropped at or before the convention. This comment he made is a no-go for me. I'd rather vote for Nader and suffer for 4 years, than to vote for a man who thinks what Israel is doing to the Palestinians is in any way okay.

[Cassandra]

125. "No one who supports Israel is going to suddenly jump to Kerry" ??

Interesting assumption you have there; that anyone who supports Israel must be a Repuke. I'm a Democrat for 30 years, I'm pro-Israel as a Jewish homeland and I'm voting for Kerry. I would have preferred Dean but Kerry will do.
If you can't kill a leader of the terrorist opposition during a war, when can you? Shall we make nice with Bin Laden because you may think he's a nice spiritual leader of Al Quaeda. It might be useful to bring him to trial but he's already bragged about his guilt, so what kind of a circus would the trial be?
If you vote in such a way that allows Bush to stay in office, you are voting for murder.

[sampsonblk]

128. You got me wrong

I mean that Kerry doesn't gain any votes from supporters of Israel - if they were going to vote for Kerry before then they still will, and if they were planning to vote for Bush already, then they still will.

Question: If one guy sends a helicopter gunship to shoot the other guy (with other people in car, and with bystanders around) coming out of church, which is the terrorist?

War? What war? Where are Rantisi's tanks? Where's his air force? Where are his ships? This isn't a war. This is something else. Its been going on far too long, and history, in my view, will not be kind to the criminals or the ones who supprt their criminal activity.

[Ruby Romaine]

31. so vote for Bush!

[Kitsune]

53. Why vote for B*sh when you can vote for Kerry and get the same policies?nt

[Redleg]

139. Not that tired ol' b.s. again.

I had to jump in after seeing you again compare Bush and Kerry. There are a number of issues where the two disagree. Look at Kerry's voting record before you equate him to Bush.

[Malva Zebrina]

19. Yup--eom

[Ferretherder]

7. Yeah, OK. Maybe he DID deserve to die. However,...

...I'd like to see ONE SANE PERSON who would stand up and say that, at this time, it makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER to inflame an already volitile situation by assasinating the spiritual leader of the opposition movement. Christ almighty, do these guys just NOT FUCKIN' GET IT? Calm tensions in the region, provide REASONS and INCENTIVES for BOTH SIDES to give and take, stabilize the political and religious climate, and then try and bring the 'bad guys' to justice.

DO NOT SHOOT YOUR OWN NOSE OFF TO SPITE YOUR FACE!!!!!!

Hay-zeus frickin' CHRIST, man!


Note to Kerry (and yes, I'm votin' for him): Get a clue, dude!

Edit; to correct spelling

[Muddleoftheroad]

56. So it would be OK for Rantisi

To sit around and plot terror against Israel, but don't let Israelis inflame the tensions by stopping him.

Yeah, I get it.

[Zhade]

72. Sharon doesn't WANT peace. Anyone not blinded by ideology can see that.

He inflames the situation on purpose.

He's just doing what a good little war criminal does - bring death through terror while insisting he's advocating "peace".

I have no love for Hamas whatsoever, but this is clearly the wrong way to stabilize the situation. I'm convinced Sharon, and the Israeli government proper, wants it this way. After all, who founded Hamas in the first place?

[eablair3]

8. screw you, Kerry

the only thing that can be said that isn't all bad about this piece of shit Kerry is that he can't be any worse than Bush.

[David Dunham]

33. Kerry needs Jewish support and votes or he loses to Bush.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sampsonblk]

86. This can't be justified by politics.

1. He needs support from a lot of groups. Looks to me like he just picked one group over the other. Bad choice.

2. Even Abe Lincoln needed to play politics (with slavery). He said he didn't intend to outlaw it if he became prez. But he NEVER said it was "justified."

[Freddie Stubbs]

124. Perhaps actually believes that it was justified

It is within the realm of possibility that John Kerry is what he is, rather that what you would like to believe he is.

[sampsonblk]

126. I have no illusions

about what John Kerry is. None at all. That's why I supported Wes Clark.

[Ruby Romaine]

34. There's no difference between Gore & Bush! Right! and Kerry & Bush!

(sarcasm)

[tedzbear]

9. But Israel's military has become a"terrorist, brutal organization."

Gosh, all I had to do is read the paper this last year to know THAT. Two wrongs don't make a right. This situation has descended into complete insanity.

[lostnfound]

10. Did the bystanders deserve to die, too?

Last year's attempt on his life killed a mother and a 5 year old
girl.

Maybe this year there was less atrocious 'collateral damage', but this is not the way civilized people obtain justice.

[Jim Sagle]

12. No, they do it by bombing cafes and discos.

:puke:

[bobbyboucher]

36. Well, if the US had not seen to it that Isreal

had overwhelming military force compared to just about anyone in the region, then maybe they wouldn't resort to the only thing left, terrorism.

[lostnfound]

75. Yes, otherwise there would be symmetric war

Palestine would shoot missiles and drop bombs, Israel would shoot missiles and drop bombs. The bright side is that perhaps it would have lasted 50 years.

[Zhade]

74. A five-year-old girl and her mother bombed cafes and discos?

Justify the deaths of innocents at your own peril. Such apathy to injustice will come back to haunt you.

[lostnfound]

76. First puke ever. Cool. Not sure what prompted that, unless

you disagree that the deaths of innocent bystanders matter.

[Jim Sagle]

88. Of course they matter. They matter even more when it's by design.

[tedzbear]

96. What's the difference?

Both of them are by design. One because they choose to kill innocent people(car bombs), and the other because they know they will kill innocent people and they don't care (collateral damage).

[Jim Sagle]

99. How do you know they don't care?

I read that in the case of Rantisi they carefully waited for a clean shot.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jim Sagle]

13. Kerry RAWWWWWWWWWKSSSSSSSS!!!!!!

[Robbien]

14. Isn't is strange that

a low-count poster who has not posted here for months decides to come here to DU and post an article that is known to be a wedge issue for Democratic voters?

I am not taking the bait and will hit the hide button.

[wtmusic]

16. Feel free to hide

but the issue won't, whether it's a wedge or not.

[savistocate]

67. Exactly

Those who have trappped themselves in sick immovable rock hate__Sagle-like-sickness iiiiiincapable of unwilllling to break free of it..have come to neeed and feed on it.

I intend to print most of the thread mail it to Kerry and Mrs Kerry. Not once but weekly for the duration. Feeling weak ineffectual..but all I can do.

The disgust I'll feel voting for the only Democrat we've got. At least
Dean said or asked why can't we just be "even-handed". And got near strung up for it by that faction of the absolute blinded.

Christian values and true democracy are so at risk of total extinction in America.

[demdave]

27. Kill the messenger mentality.

If Kerry said it, it is news. I don't care if Bush posted the article.

[number6]

18. "Rantisi's killing was justified"

did Kerry actually say that ?

[Malva Zebrina]

22. killing is now justified even though it is killing without sufficient

portent or logic or justice

Our system is broken. Kerry is just a little less evil than Bush.

Kerry would endorse the Likud party and it's unrestrained genocide because it "has to defend itself" and the world goes on with the US being the chief destroyer of liberty or democracy for all, even though it tries to pass that off as it's true intent. Kerry also voted for the invasion of Iraq. He gave the evil and stupid man, Bush a blank check and now is left with the un option of criticizing how exactly Bush used that blank check.

Some might buy it in good faith and in desperate hope. I do not.

I have little faith that Kerry knows what he is talking about here. It seems to me he is cautiously playing a game--and not inclined to take a courageous stand but prefers to wax "safe".

We do not NEED that particular stance in our next president. WE NEED and we DESERVE better.

We do not , unfortunately have much of a choice. It is either Bush the stupid or Kerry the go along to get along, "safe" in all he says, candidate.

Meanwhile being safe, means that many of us who are following, do not have a clue as to what his plans or policies are.

That is because he has not been honest with us.

And that, to me, is similar to what Bush has done.

I don't want a man like that as my next president, however, Kerry is marginally better than Bush. I and many like me, are being forced to vote for this. We will, because we hate Bush. But there is little faith in Kerry also

[Ruby Romaine]

30. No he did not! look at the transcript from MTP!

[progressivebydesign]

20. I'm sorry Kerry. WHAT peaceful process would that be???

I'd much rather see Kerry ripping on Bush for the fact that the peace process has been totally destroyed by Bush. I was kinda hoping for a LEADER this time... someone who would take this opportunity to PUSH for a peaceful solution. The Israelis feel that everything they do is right, killing and assasinating. The Palestinians feel everything they do is right. Killing. Depends upon what side of the barbed wire you're on, doesn't it? And don't the people rebelling against the occupiers in Iraq feel the same? And don't the troops over there feel just as strongly about THEIR side? Killing is killing. Doesn't matter who does it. Both sides of both conflicts are inflicting death upon innocent people, and not-so innocent people. Death is death. War is war. What the FUCK happened to DIPLOMACY??????????

[kera]

73. well you

seem to overlook the simple solution: end occupation and mass murder

the butcher old fat pig and the likud are the occupier , oppressor and murderer and Palestinian have the right to fight for back although at far far less disadvantage -

[bedtimeforbonzo]

23. Kerry doesn't give a damn about the slaughter of Palestinians

any more than shrub does.

[CabalBuster]

38. He obviously doesn't care about the Muslim-American vote in the U.S.

That could help him win in key states such as Michigan and Florida. In my opinion, he is committing a grave mistake in dissing the Muslim vote. As a Muslim, when I hear Kerry say things like those and completely ignore the plight of the Palestinians, while legitimizing illegal land grabbing and assassinations by Israel, I can only dread what the next four years are going to bring to us. I am now very solid against voting for Kerry. I will either stay home or vote Nader.

[Ruby Romaine]

41. And Bush loves Muslims! that's why he liberated Iraq!

so you want Bush!

Do you think I agree w/everything a candidate says?
no-
but you have to go w/the person who is better for the country.
Has Bush been good for us?
Do you want 4 more years of this?

[daleo]

24. The ANC was considered a terrorist organization for most of my life

And Nelson Mandela was considered a terrorist. Then it seems like I woke up one day and the ANC was the government and Mandela was a humanitarian role model for billions, including most Americans and other westerners. And blacks and whites have managed to live together in the new South Africa, although it is still far from perfect.

I suspect one day the same thing will happen in the middle east.

[Zhade]

79. Did the ANC target innocent civilians?

I ask this in all honesty - I don't know the answer.

Hamas does targets innocent Israelis, and I wish they wouldn't. Their legitimate struggle against occupation, continued land and resources theft, and the targeting of innocent Palestinians by the IDF and illegal squatters ("settlers") in the OT is damaged by their tactic of killing civilians.

The IDF and the squatters are legitimate targets for resistance under international law, and I shed no tears for their deaths, but to target civilians in Israel is also wrong. And it's bad for the movement, since the rest of the world condemns it every bit as much as the Israeli government's killing of Palestinian civilians.

Hamas should also realize that Israel - however wrongfully founded on others' land - is not going anywhere. The Palestinian people made a huge compromise by giving up 78% of their land, and Hamas (like the Israeli government) ignores this sacrifice made for peace by calling for the destruction of Israel.

Considering that, much like the U.S. originally "founded" Osama bin Laden's group, the Israeli government founded Hamas as an "answer" to the PLO (what answer were they giving, one wonders), perhaps this is intentional.

[daleo]

95. They were accused of it

They even admitted to it on occasion, from my reading. However, I understand they went to considerable lengths to avoid it, when at all possible. I agree that random killing of civilians is immoral and a bad tactic to boot.

I think if the U.S. was more even handed in this issue, the parties would negotiate, just as they ended up doing in South Africa once it was clear the the end of the cold war meant that whites there could no longer count on the support of the U.S. and U.K. When that day happens, it will probably seem as sudden and surprising as it did in South Africa. Endless war and strife is not a realistic long term policy for either side. The logic of peace will eventually prevail, I hope.

[Ruby Romaine]

29. Read the MTP transcript where did Kerry say "Yes kill Rantissi" ?

Do you expect Kerry to say he supports Hamas?

A vote against Kerry is a vote for Bush (Armageddon/Rapture)



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4772030/
MR. RUSSERT: Israel assassinated Hamas leader Rantisi. Do you support that assassination?

SEN. KERRY: I believe Israel has every right in the world to respond to any act of terror against it. Hamas is a terrorist, brutal organization. It has had years to make up its mind to take part in a peaceful process. They refuse to. Arafat refuses to. And I support Israel's efforts to try to separate itself and to try to be secure. The moment Hamas says, "We've given up violence, we're prepared to negotiate," I am absolutely confident they will find an Israel that is thirsty to have that negotiation.

[Euphen]

40. He made it very clear that he supports the assasination

when he said that "Israel has every right in the world to respond to any act of terror against it." Of course I don't expect him to say he supports Hamas - nor would I want him to - but he should have condemned the assasination as criminal and provocative.

[Ruby Romaine]

45. Don't you see how the world is going to hell since Bush was installed?

The first thing is to get rid of him, it will help things on so many fronts-
world conflicts,
economy,
environment etc...

there isn't just one issue that should determine if you should support a candidate.

[Muddleoftheroad]

58. So those 50+ years of I/P conflict before then

Were also his responsibility?

Come on, this war is 55 years old since the creation of the state of Israel and really predates that.

[Classical_Liberal]

109. How is the world of hell going away if Kerry believes the same

things?

[Zhade]

80. "Arafat refuses to." Dear God, did he actually SAY that?

Does he even realize how flat-out wrong that statement is? Does he not remember that the b*sh administration sidelined Arafat?

[David Dunham]

32. Guys: Kerry needs Jewish support to win FL and NJ or he'll lose.

He can't criticize Israel.

[dfong63]

44. are there no Jewish voters who are horrified by Israel's crimes?

[Freddie Stubbs]

115. Most voters don't consider killing a terrorist a crime

Regardless of the religion.

[peacetalksforall]

61. There must be Israel supporters in this country who make distinctions

between Israeli leaders and policies. Following Israeli leaders blindly is as bad as blindly loving Bush.

How many times can Kerry disappoint and call it wrong, imo.?

[Freddie Stubbs]

118. Perhaps many of the Israel supporters in this country agree

with killing terrorists.

[The Stranger]

129. Which terrorists? Israeli terrorists or Palestinian terrorists?

Or both?

[Freddie Stubbs]

133. Hamas

They are the ones purposely targeting civilian non-combatants.

[The Stranger]

138. Dropping bombs in apartment complexes is purposely targeting civilian

non-combatants.

[Freddie Stubbs]

141. The terrorists were simply using those people as human shields

Yet the suicide bombers get on busses full of civilains looking to kill anyone unlike to be there. No military targets. No government officials. Just civilians.

[The Stranger]

142. Being at home is not "using people as human shields." Dropping a bomb

weighing 2,000 lbs. on a highly-densely populated apartment complex in a slum where other people are living at home ("being human shields," perhaps?) is TARGETTING CIVILIANS.

It is also murder.

[Freddie Stubbs]

143. He was purposefully living in such a place assuming that the Israelis

would not come after him there. During a war the enemy's leadership is usually fair game.

[The Stranger]

144. Got you there.

If it were war, then the Geneva Conventions would apply, making the bombing of civlians illegal. There are others who have spent months trying to dispel the notion that it is war for this very reason.

As far as "purposefully living in a such a place," that is where he (whichever "he" is being talked about) apparently lives -- in a refugee camp. How else would one live where they are confined as a result of racist laws, "accidentally"?

[Freddie Stubbs]

145. Refugee camp?

I thought that it was an apartment complex.

[The Stranger]

148. Then you admit the Geneva Conventions would apply.

Now you're talking about war crimes.

[Freddie Stubbs]

149. Not when you are dealing with terrorists

[The Stranger]

150. Again, Israeli terrorists or Palestinian terrorists?

[Freddie Stubbs]

151. The Palestinians are the only terrorists in this conflict

[The Stranger]

152. Again, dropping bombs into apartment complexes is purposely targeting

civilians and is terrorist.

So, again, Israeli terrorists or Palestinian terrorists?

[Freddie Stubbs]

153. Not when there are terrorists in the building

[Classical_Liberal]

110. Kerry is to the right of Bill Clinton

This is just dumb. Most Jews don't support the settlers.

[Ruby Romaine]

35. this came from the Jerusalem Post a RW paper that loves Bush!

[Freddie Stubbs]

121. Is Democracy Now also a RW news source that loves Bush?

World Community, Except for the US, Condemns Israeli’s Assassination of Top Hamas Leader

For the second time in just over a month, Israeli forces assassinated the leader of the Palestinian group Hamas. Killed on Saturday was Abdel Aziz al-Rantisi who took power last month following the killing of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. The Bush administration - as well as Sen. John Kerry - backed Israel's right to defend herself, but the UN and EU condemned the killing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Israel has sparked massive international outcry following its assassination this weekend of the new Hamas leader Abdel Aziz al-Rantisi in Gaza. His car was hit by rockets fired from an Israeli military helicopter. The United Nations, the European Union and several nations called the killing a clear violation of international law. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan labeled it an extrajudicial killing. Far from condemning the killing, the White House issued its standard statement calling for restraint on all sides.

Meanwhile, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry appeared on NBC's Meet the Press on Sunday and appeared to support the assassination. In reaction to the news of Rantisi's killing, Kerry said, "I believe Israel has every right in the world to respond to any act of terror against it. Hamas is a terrorist, brutal organization. It has had ten years to make up its mind to take part in a peaceful process. They refuse to. Arafat refuses to. And I support Israel's efforts to try and separate itself and try to be secure."

Kerry also came out in support of President Bush‚s endorsement last week of Israel's plan to keep illegal settlements and Bush‚s assertion that Palestinian refugees should not be allowed the right of return. Kerry said he completely supports Bush on these issues. Bush made the statements in a press conference last week with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

more: http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/19/155258

[Octafish]

37. Kerry said Israel has a right to defend itself from terrorist orgs.

Kerry did not say "Rantisi's killing was justified."

[Ruby Romaine]

39. You are correct, it was taken out of context by the Jerusalem Post!

[dfong63]

42. Kerry didn't say it wasn't justified, either.

Kerry was asked point-blank whether the killing was justified. a "yes" or "no" answer was called for. instead Kerry dodged the question, but not artfully. he's trying hard to lose my vote.

[Octafish]

90. Ya think so? He's talking "self-preservation."

Whether the case involves a nation or an individual, people and countries have a right to defend themselves. Rather than get into a discussion about how difficult it is to discern who's side is on who's or who's done what to whom with the BFEE turd Russert, Kerry decided to get to the root of the matter.

For the record: I don't agree with everything Kerry said. However, from what I understand, Kerry doesn't like what Israel does to innocent people any more than you or me. Regardless, a Kerry Presidency would be a marked improvement over the unelected sociopathic moron, even were it possible for Adlai Stevenson serve as his Secretary of State.

[Euphen]

43. He might as well have.

He said it in response to the question, "Do you support that assasination." It's obvious what he meant.

[Ruby Romaine]

46. If bush wins, we'll have his rapture, it won't matter.

[Euphen]

48. You seem to have kind of a one-track mind. n/t

[Ruby Romaine]

51. Yes I do-Bush must go!!!! Bush Must Be Defeated!!!

If people don't vote for Kerry, Bush will stay in power!
It's fine to want Bush out, but you need to have a viable alternative.
Sorry, Nader helped Bush last time & he'll do it again.

[Euphen]

54. Does that mean we should give Kerry a free ride? n/t

[Ruby Romaine]

63. No, but if we get rid of Bush the world could be a better place!

Bush says he's "got a war mind" therefore he wants war.

Ever notice how Bush smiles & smirks whenever he says "kill"?
He's been a uniter by uniting the world against the US.
Why can't we agree to get rid of Bush and then perhaps the world situation will improve?

The republicans love hearing that DUers are against Kerry.

[makhno]

94. There's no way out

Looking past the two party system, you have to realize that this situation is exactly what the reactionary forces in the country want. Look at the choice this year - a far-right Republican or a center-right Democrat! What do you think our choice is going to be four or eight years from November? An acknowledged fascist on the one hand and a far-right Democrat on the other?

This is why so many of us find the situation where we are almost obligated to vote for Kerry so disturbing. I can't shake the feeling that we've somehow been masterfully played into selecting ever more right-wing leaders, with each successive Democratic president only slightly less conservative than the Republican preceding him.

Not that I have a solution, short of hoping for the best.

bm

[Octafish]

91. So what? JK answered how he wanted, not how turd Russert wanted.

Nothing would have made the BFEE turd Russert happier than to have John Kerry make out like he's no friend of Israel. Gee. Do you think that would've made Karl Rove happy?

BTW: A hearty welcome to DU, Euphen!

"Ask not what turd Russert can do to your candidate,
but what you can do to turd Russert!"

[Ruby Romaine]

47. Question-Is the world better off under Bush?

Are you better off than you were before Bush?
I sure am not & don't want to see his ugly mug!

Would this have happened under Clinton?

You are playing into Bush's plan, he wants the whole world including the Muslim world to hate us
and he wants a terra attack so he can call off the election.

[peacetalksforall]

49. I've been waiting for his rationalization for voting for the war...

now this...

I don't have a leader. I don't have a candidate.

Did he talk about peace?

Looks like he's going to go the old Senator way - yes to Israel about everything.

God help us.

[54anickel]

52. Agreed, but he's the only chance to get rid of Shrub. I am hoping that

should Kerry win that Dems do not blindly support and adore him the way freepers do Shrub. There is just too much at stake these days for citizens to blindly follow and defend "their guy".

I am hoping that the grass-roots type organizations that have sprung up continue to be that voice from the wilderness. We need to keep close tabs on what is happening in OUR country.

[kera]

77. but how about

the voting machines ?

[54anickel]

82. Huh? Sorry but not seeing how that fits in. Want to enlighten me on your

thoughts?

[kera]

89. it was just a thougt in connection with

the the posters determination to vote for kerry

[Isere]

55. And God help us if folks like you stay home

I have the feeling that some of the DU crowd is just looking for a reason to turn up their noses and say "Oh, I can't vote for Kerry because of XYZ"

Get real!!!! Kerry isn't perfect.

But he's NOT Bush. Folks, the house is on fire! We need to get rid of Bush. This isn't a time to pout and stand on ceremony if the Democratic candidate doesn't meet all of our expectations.

Sheeeesh.

[peacetalksforall]

64. No, I won't stay home, but I'll march to the voting booth with

my feet dragging and a heavy heart.

I watch. I listen. I wait to be persuaded so that I can forgive his vote.

I keep reading that he is really studying and designing solutions to some of our problems.

In the meantime...

I cannot tolerate leaders who pander to blocs of voters whose policies are devastating or crippling to other blocs of people who need someone battling for them. My intolerance includes leaders who don't speak the peace language and condone more killing.

[tedzbear]

97. It won't matter anyway with these new electronic voting machines...

...Bush will win thanks to a minor, undetectable software glitch. He will shrug and say, "You got no paper trail, you got no proof." Then he'll laugh all the way to the White House.

[Ruby Romaine]

59. from Kerry's web page-

Kerry's statement on Bush/Iraq/WMD-

“He misled the American people in his own State of the Union Address about Saddam’s nuclear program and WMD’s, and refused – and continues to refuse – to level with the American people about the cost of the war. Simply put, this President didn't tell the truth about the war from the beginning. And our country is paying the price.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0319.html

[nolabels]

60. Everybody under the sun has been linking *'s Iraq policy with this

Why should everybody that resides in the US ignore it.
Two peas in a pod

http://www.antiwar.com/
http://www.sundayherald.com/41410

Death set to ignite tinderbox in Iraq
By Torcuil Crichton

Iraq was last night poised on the edge of a full-scale religious uprising as the assassination of Hamas leader Abdel-Aziz al-Rantissi fed oxygen to the tinderbox siege of the holy cities of Najaf and Falujah.

Hundreds of foreign fighters, including Palestinians, have already poured into Iraq, the new front line in the battle against the “infidels”, making the peaceful resolution of the siege of the Shiite holy city of Najaf a near impossibility.

Just as crowds of Hamas supporters gathered outside Gaza City’s Shifa hospital vowing revenge after the killing, so too would the foreign fighters within the walls of Najaf stiffen their resolve against what will be seen as the latest attack on the Arab world.

Last night supporters of the wanted Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr said talks with the US troops encircling the holy city of Najaf had collapsed and that an attack was imminent.

On the US side Colonel Dana Pittard, head of the 3rd Brigade Task Force that has assembled outside the besieged city, was told yesterday that al-Sadr’s militiamen were not in full control of what is an explosive situation.

Phil Kosnett, head of the beleagured Coalition Provisional Authority, based in the city, said a peaceful resolution looked unlikely.

“There are gunmen and thugs and many of them have come to town to take advantage of the situation. Al-Sadr does not have total control over all the gunmen who are running around the streets of Najaf,” said Kosnett. “If al-Sadr could be trusted to a peaceful resolution of the crisis that would be one thing. Now it is very difficult to say what is going to happen.
(snip)

[54anickel]

84. Gee, doesn't someone in authority think it might be a good idea for the

troops to stand down on this one? Pack it up and head back to Baghdad, or whereever they were based. Hasn't anyone over there heard the expression of "pick your battles wisely"?

There is no one in control of the "anti-US" sentiment and fighters now, certainly many are out of the control of al-Sadr at this point.

[nolabels]

92. Well really if you look at it , just so predictable

If you had a choice and had to pick fight some surrogates or the real thing after you found several of your family members had been killed or murdered, your house was destroyed and this thing you called your country was being liquidated from forces on the other side of the globe. What would think about doing?

[54anickel]

119. I may have been unclear in my post. I meant that the US should pick

their battles wisely. To storm this city, with so many different groups of opposition under no central control seems foolish and will only beget more violence and anti-US sentiment.

[nolabels]

127. * co has, he has chosen the war on (or of) terra to gut the Constitution

The *co doesn't have too many choices it would seem. Ramp it up or quit, because what they are doing now if failing ever more. The killing of people is now just a secondary concern, next to winning the political war.

After reading this story today it all makes a lot more sense.

http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=4182

Stop the blood bath against the Iraqi people and the destruction of Iraqi towns
by Munir Chalabi, Iraqi activist working with Occupation Watch
April 17, 2004

All indications show that what is going on in Iraq is a pre-planned attack from the coalition armies on Falluja, Sadr City, Shuhla, Adhamia, Kufa and other towns and cities in the centre and to the south, and was not a reaction to the mutilation of the four American security guards in Falluja or the speech of Mr. Maqtada Sadr, in which he stated his support for Hezbollah and Hamas.
(snip)

[54anickel]

132. Thanks for the link. I guess it explains why the US won't back down, this

IS a battle they picked and even instigated.
Very sad indeed.

[Nlighten1]

50. This completely ignores the fact that...

it takes two to tango. Israel is hardly innocent and Kerry is sucking up to them just like Bush. I only hope after the election, if he wins, he tells Israel to go and fuck themselves.

[tedzbear]

98. Don't count on it.

There's always the next election.

[CabalBuster]

57. Kerry just lost the Muslim/Arab vote and will regret it in November

And it's why Nader will likely draw even more votes this election from the energized Muslim community, which feels betrayed by the Bush administration for the Patriot Act and the Iraq war, both of which Nader opposed.
He garnered nearly one-fifth of the Muslim vote in 2000, according to exit polls by the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR. That's more than double the share for Al Gore, who miffed Muslim leaders for failing to address their concerns about secret evidence in deportation hearings. Bush met with Muslim leaders during the last campaign to at least pay lip service to their concerns, and walked away with 72 percent of the Muslim vote.

Even if Nader doesn't draw more than 1-2% of the national vote, it's not how he does nationally, it's how he does in certain key states. And he could take significant portions of the Arab-American vote in the key battlegrounds of Ohio, Michigan, Pa and Fla.

See this recent Zogby poll that says Nader gets 20% of the Arab American vote in four key states (and if you read the details (pdf), it's 26% in Pa and Mich. More of the votes come from Kerry than Bush, which could end up tipping a close state.

A very stupid and risky move by Kerry. He will live to regret it.

http://www.zogby.com/Soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=7858

[Freddie Stubbs]

131. That is IF Nader is on the ballot

He hasn't been having much success so far.

[davhill]

62. Lets get Kerry Elected First

Then we can work on purging the Democratic party of Neo-Cons.

[CabalBuster]

65. I'm not holding my breath for Kerry, his already sold his soul to the PNAC

[RaRa]

66. Aren't they at war?

I'm not saying Isreal was wise in doing this, nor am I a supporter. But, it seems to me (I am open to explanations countering; not attacks; on the error of my reasoning)that both Isreal and the Palestinians have every right to kill the leaders of each side. They are at war, and the leaders are fair game. I know that civilians were killed here, as they are with Palestinian attacks and perhaps this would be one argument against this attack. I would like peoples' opinions on this - not on which side is on the right in general. Rather - who can or can't each side kill in this all out war?

[loathesomeshrub]

81. Not a balanced fight - Goliath has become Israel and David the Palestinia

Yes it would be a fair fight if the Palestinians had helicopters, and fighter planes, and tanks. They have nothing except despair, poverty, refugee camps, and only explosives and their lives to fight with. They see no hope left, and only a powerful pair of countries allied against them in every way. The Israelis can kill every Hamas leader they appoint; that won't save any Israeli lives, because the rage is building and won't be stopped.
I hate what Kerry did today - I wish this had come up before the primaries. We have no choice though. He must win. But we will get to choose again in 4 more years. I wish we had the luxury of voting our conscience - but we don't. He is the lesser of 2 evils, although he can be really stupid sometimes, and say some really dumbass things.

[peacetalksforall]

68. This moring, WJ on C-Span had a good near hour long interview

with the ME expert, Ross, from the Bush 1 and Clinton admin.

He now has a think tank and has been sought by Kerry for advice.

All Kerry had to do was take one idea he had to have received from Ross and use it to provide hope or a fact or a hint of positive outlook. All Kerry had to do was talk of peace.

Instead, he gave a divider statement.

Really stupid for my taste.

I just don't think that supporters of Israel in this country will be persuaded that the position he took was necessary. Everyone knows that Hamas is a horror of death, but we have death on both sides of the street over there, don't we? I seem to notice that people who are fighting tanks, missiles, the most modern of technology, including spy systems...and who don't have the technology or funding, fight with their bodies.

The only out is a desire for peace, not killing rhetoric.

[nolabels]

147. A simple hands off policy?

Nah, got to appear tough to get the flag-n-pickup truck vote

[leesa]

83. Israel is a brutal terrorist organization. And we are their slaves

apparently.

[goforit]

87. So we don't arrest people and place them on trial.....we just KILL????

Our new justice system at its best,
eh?

So whom ever WE Think committed the crime
doesn't get a trial,
They just are murdered in broad day light.

[Emillereid]

93. I think this may be the final straw --

this guy is making it impossible for me to support him. I certainly won't work for him.

[Egalitarian]

104. Justified killing = Oxymoron

[PsychoDad]

107. Other than maybe abortion,

Is there any position that Kerry disagrees with bushler on?

Seriously?

[nonkultur]

113. Mandatory Community Service

To get a high school diploma.

[CabalBuster]

117. No, he doesn't, he has stated clearly that he critizes the "way"

George Bush does things, not the principle or the goals behind it.

[Freddie Stubbs]

122. Taxes

[Freddie Stubbs]

136. Gun control

[Freddie Stubbs]

137. Amending the Constitution to ban gay marriages

[Teaser]

120. There is a difference between Justified...

...and prudent.

[Cassandra]

130. And killing Rantissi was justified...

and getting into a backslapping session with Bush was not prudent.

[Larkspur]

140. So if Hamas assasinates Sharon will Kerry say that Hamas had

a right to defend itself from the brutal apartheid and terrorist acts by Israel against Palestinians? I mean this is Kerry the nuance King. He's gotta keep his options open.

[pjordan24]

146. I have to agree with Kerry.....

This is the only way to get terrorists attention.