Obama: 'Settlements' vs. Pal. Terror (UPDATED)

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
_________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release September 4, 2009

Statement by the Press Secretary on Israeli Settlements

We regret the reports of Israel's plans to approve additional settlement construction. Continued settlement activity is inconsistent with Israel's commitment under the Roadmap.

As the President has said before, the United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued settlement expansion and we urge that it stop. We are working to create a climate in which negotiations can take place, and such actions make it harder to create such a climate.

We do appreciate Israel's stated intent to place limits on settlement activity and will continue to discuss this with the Israelis as these limitations are defined.

The U.S. commitment to Israel’s security is and will remain unshakeable. We believe it can best be achieved through comprehensive peace in the region, including a two-state solution with a Palestinian state living side by side in peace with Israel.

That is the ultimate goal to which the President is deeply and personally committed.

Our objective remains to resume meaningful negotiations as soon as possible in pursuit of this goal. We are working with all parties – Israelis, Palestinians, and Arab states -- on the steps they must take to achieve that objective.

The 'legitimacy'?

Is that worse than illegal?

When was the last time the White House condemned terror by Pals. which is also an "inconsistent commitment under the Roadmap"?

January 23, 2009:

He [Obama] asked for Saudi support for efforts to stop weapons smuggling into Gaza and expressed interest in continuing counter-terrorism cooperation.

and

April 9, 2009:

SUBJECT: Waiver and Certification of Statutory Provisions Regarding the Palestine Liberation Organization Office

Pursuant to the authority and conditions contained in Section 7034(b) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2009 (Div. H, Public Law 111 8), I hereby determine and certify that it is important to the national security interests of the United States to waive the provisions of Section 1003 of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1987, Public Law 100-204.

This waiver shall be effective for a period of 6 months. You are hereby authorized and directed to transmit this determination to the Congress and to publish it in the Federal Register.

BARACK OBAMA

Not a very good record, eh?

Moral relativism? Preference for terror over Jewish residency in areas of their national patrimony, I'd say.

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

UPDATE

Looking around I found this example of Obama's thinking from May 2008:

Is Obama naïve enough to think that an extremist ideological organization like Hezbollah can be mollified with a less corrupt patronage system and some electoral reform? Does he really believe that Hezbollah is a normal social welfare agency seeking more government services for its followers?

...so I spoke with Obama Tuesday to ask him what he meant by all this. Right off the bat he reaffirmed that Hezbollah is “not a legitimate political party.” Instead, “It’s a destabilizing organization by any common-sense standard. This wouldn’t happen without the support of Iran and
Syria.”

...The U.S. needs a foreign policy that “looks at the root causes of
problems and dangers.” Obama compared Hezbollah to Hamas. Both need to be compelled to understand that “they’re going down a blind alley with violence that weakens their legitimate claims.” He knows these movements aren’t going away anytime soon (“Those missiles aren’t going to dissolve”), but “if they decide to shift, we’re going to recognize that. That’s an evolution that should be recognized.”

...he continued: “There are rarely purely ideological movements out there. We can encourage actors to think in practical and not ideological terms. We can strengthen those elements that are making practical calculations.” Obama doesn’t broadcast moral disgust when talking about terror groups, but he said that in some ways he’d be tougher than the Bush administration...