Hypocrisy Much?
April 24, 2008 8:58 pm UncategorizedSo, crazy former president Carter goes down and meets with those Hamas peeps. Specifically, he met with the big chief, Khaled Mashaal. Now, we all know that Jimmy Carter has wild ideas that include things like “peace” and other crazy notions. That’s why he won one of them there Nobel prizes for it.
Not only does he meet with the Hamas leader, but he pretty much does what no one else has been able to do and no one else probably thought would ever happen: he got the leader to agree to recognize Isreal’s right to be in the Middle East so long as they went back to their original borders.
Now, here’s a group that has previously sworn to never recognize Isreal and profess a deep interest in seeing them purged from the region completely. Carter goes down there, and he’s got them actually thinking about recognizing Isreal. Hey, maybe their demands are too much for Isreal to swallow, maybe not, but it’s a little thing that most of us sane people would call “progress”.
So, how does Israel’s UN ambassador react to it? He calls Jimmy Carter a bigot. Specifically, he didn’t much care for Carter shaking Khaled Mashaal’s hand.
Hey, if calling someone a bigot for hearing what another person has to say and shaking hand isn’t hypocrisy, I don’t know what is. If there was a hypocrisy award, I think he’d be a front runner.
Anyway, congrats to him. Most of us try to at least hide our hypocrisy a little bit. He’s wearing his on his chest.
April 25th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Who’s a hypocrite?
April 27th, 2008 at 1:27 am
Took me a while to figure that one out too…
I think that Dan is referring to President Jimmy Carter as being the hypocrite for shaking hands and attempting to create a dialog with Hamas.
This is done in a semi tongue and cheek way… No, not his tongue and your cheek Ann… More like Dan’s tongue in his own cheek… Golly, you are a literal little lady today…
The Israeli delegate to the United Nations called Carter a bigot because he shook hands with a group that has previously swore to destroy the entire country and population of Israel by any means possible.
I believe that he was called a bigot because of the “Them or us!” mentality that I found predominating the Israeli culture. If you are not 100% behind them, you are obviously against them, and therefor biased against them… And that goes with both sides of that conflict.
I applaud President Carter for his courage and commitment to the peace process (and also his Habitat for Humanity activities.) And I hope he continues in his efforts… The world is a better place when people try.
April 27th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Thanks so much, Michael, that was nicely put. But you really didn’t need to explain it to me, even if I am a little current-events challenged.
All I was saying was Dan had some dubious grammar in his article, with some slightly ambiguous pronoun antecedents. I know what he meant, I’m just saying…
Perhaps I should just stop talking since I don’t really have anything useful to contribute.
April 27th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
OK, I lied. I still don’t have anything useful to contribute, but I would like to invite you to read my most recent blog entry on Reader Travels so you can see what I think about certain Israelis: http://www.readertravels.com/2008/04/a-little-poetic-flirtation/
April 29th, 2008 at 9:14 am
All the words in these comments make my eyes hurt. Can we try to use a few less words please? We are about to enter a recession and you people are spending words like they are free or something.
May 1st, 2008 at 9:21 am
But I get paid by the syllable!
Ann, sorry if I came off badly on the comment. I had just been in a conversation with a couple of friends of mine about the Israeli situation, and talking to a Jordanian, Saudi and Israeli, with added comments from a couple of Americans… Well, I might have been a little used to explaining over and over and over…
(And I do read your blog too…)
May 4th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Bless your heart, Michael, you only came off badly after you apologized for coming off badly. It’s a deadly trap, I know.;-)
I think I was saying that Dan came off badly, what with his pronoun-antecedent confusion and all.
Then again, I’m sure he’ll say the length of this conversation has greatly exceeded his interest in it.
May 4th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
I would reply, but the length of this conversation has greatly exceeded my interest in it.