 |
The Two Faces of John McCain - McCain Was For Talking To Hamas Before He Was Against It!!! |  |
|
The Two Faces of John McCain - McCain Was For Talking To Hamas Before He Was Against It!!! | |
HOME | RICHARD
M. SCAIFE | DICK ARMEY | DAN BURTON
PAT ROBERTSON | ADOLPH COORS | JAMES DOBSON | TOM DELAY | CHRISTIAN RECONSTRUCTIONISTS
GEORGE
W. BUSH UNOFFICIAL PAGE
 |
Presented by the Religious Freedom Coalition of the Southeast |
 |
| Donate $20 or more and receive a professional 22 + page Horoscope. To Donate by Credit Card click on the Button Below Thank You for Whatever you can do. |
Exclusive Video: McCain Was For Talking To Hamas Before He Was Against It...
Two years ago, in an interview with James Rubin for Sky News, Sen. John McCain expressed a willingness to negotiate with the terrorist group Hamas -- the very group that McCain has been relentlessly using to smear Sen. Barack Obama over the last several weeks.
Rubin has written an op-ed in Friday's Washington Post about his exchange with McCain, and The Huffington Post has obtained exclusive video. Here's the key excerpt:
RUBIN: "Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have in the past, working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is now in charge?"
McCAIN: "They're the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so . . . but it's a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that."
Watch the video: Click HERE!
Sky News clip of McCain discussing why he would talk with Hamas. As Rubin adds:
Given that exchange, the new John McCain might say that Hamas should be rooting for the old John McCain to win the presidential election. The old John McCain, it appears, was ready to do business with a Hamas-led government, while both Clinton and Obama have said that Hamas must change its policies toward Israel and terrorism before it can have diplomatic relations with the United States.
Even if McCain had not favored doing business with Hamas two years ago, he had no business smearing Barack Obama. But given his stated position then, it is either the height of hypocrisy or a case of political amnesia for McCain to inject Hamas into the American election.
UPDATE: The McCain camp has released the following response:
"There should be no confusion, John McCain has always believed that serious engagement would require mandatory conditions and Hamas must change itself fundamentally - renounce violence, abandon its goal of eradicating Israel and accept a two state solution. John McCain's position is clear and has always been clear, the President of the United States should not unconditionally meet with leaders of Iran, Hamas or Hezbollah. Barack Obama has made his position equally clear, and has pledged to meet unconditionally with Iran's leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the leaders of other rogue regimes, which shows incredibly dangerous and weak judgment."
UPDATE II: Blogging on HuffPost, National Security Network's Max Bergmann digs up quotes from McCain saying he was in favor of conducting talks with Syria, despite acknowledging that Syria's government was "sponsoring and harboring terrorists." Click here for details.
McCain Was in Favor of Talks with Syria, Despite Saying they Were "Sponsoring and Harboring Terrorists"
After the invasion of Iraq there was much talk among conservatives about invading Syria. Then Secretary of State Colin Powell was heavily criticized for taking a trip to Syria to talk to its leadership. Newt Gingrich said, "The concept of the American secretary of state going to Damascus to meet with a terrorist-supporting, secret-police-wielding dictator is ludicrous."
What did John McCain have to say about the trip? Despite the fact that John McCain believed that Syria was a "state sponsor of terror," was "harboring terrorists," and were sending "Syrians in to fight Americans," he thought it was worth talking to them, saying that Powell's trip was "appropriate." (See below)
McCain is directly contradicting himself by attacking Senator Obama on his plan to confront Iran at the negotiating table. A pattern is emerging. While McCain claims to be a deep foreign policy thinker with positions carefully developed from his quarter century in Washington, the reality seems to be that his positions - when not outright crazy - are often knee-jerk and contradictory - often dictated by what his temperament is at that moment or influenced by how the political winds are moving.
Here are the transcripts:
McCain on Chris Matthews said on April 23, 2003: "We know the Syrians allowed, or sent Syrians in to fight Americans." But McCain said that:
"I think it's appropriate that Colin Powell is going there...
MATTHEWS: So you don't agree with Newt Gingrich dumping all over him? You don't agree with Newt Gingrich dumping on the Powell trip?
MCCAIN: You know, Dick -- Richard Armitage is Powell's deputy. And he's a wonderful guy. He served in Vietnam. And he's a really tough guy. And he was quoted someplace today that Newt Gingrich is out of therapy.
McCain added:
Colin Powell is going to
look Bashar aside in the eye and say, look, you know. You better clean up your act here.
It's a new day in the Middle East. And I think it's entirely appropriate to do that.
Five days earlier on the Today Show on April 18th, McCain said
the same thing. When asked how he would proceed with Syria - a country that he believed to
be a state-sponsor of terrorism - McCain said he would talk first.
LAUER: Let me ask you about Syria.
LAUER: They have denied possessing weapons of mass destruction, they've also denied harboring any senior members of the Iraqi leader. The US administration says they have evidence to the contrary. How would you proceed with that situation?
Mr. McCAIN: I think it's very appropriate that Colin Powell is going to Syria. I think we should put diplomatic and other pressures on them. It's also a time for Mr. Asad Bashar to realize that he should be more like his father was. I think he's too heavily influenced by a lot of the radical Islamic elements and--and militant groups.
LAUER: Do you think Syria meets the criteria set forth by the president in his post-9/11 address to Congress that they pose an imminent threat to the US in that they are either sponsoring or harboring terrorists?
Mr. McCAIN: I think they're--they're sponsoring and harboring terrorists. I think they have been occupying Lebanon, which should be free and independent for a long time, but I don't think that that means that we will now resort to the military action. We--we can apply a lot of pressure other than military--than the military action. So what I'm saying, we're a long way away from it.
LAUER: Under what circumstances--under what circumstances would you back military action?
Mr. McCAIN: When we've exhausted all other options. And we have a lot of options to--to exercise. And I'm glad Colin Powell's going there, but the Syrians have got to understand there's a new day in the Middle East.
There have
been visitors to this page
since January 1, 2008
|
For information
on all individuals and organizations listed in this website, or the name of a contact
person in your area that can give you further information on the Religious Freedom
Coalition of the Southeast, or the First Amendment Coalition, contact us at rfcse@hotmail.com . Let us hear from you! You may call also call us at 000-000-0000 If you access our voice mail, we will call you back collect if long distance. Or, you can write to us at: RFCSE, P.O. Box 672125, Marietta, GA 30006-0036 |
