An appropriate subtitle for this diary is: May God help us all.
When Sarah Palin was interviewed by Charlie Gibson about Israel the other night, to some she gave a “scary” response. She said that she supported Israel’s prerogative to attack Iran, and under Gibson’s further questioning, said that the U.S. has no right to “second guess” Israel’s decision (to attack Iran). Chris Matthews on Hardball seemed so angry about her responses that he asked whether it was in the national interest. Then additional questions surfaced as to whether Palin’s remarks had been scripted by AIPAC representatives. As everyone knows, John McCain has been shadowed by the Neocon, Joe Lieberman throughout his campaign, and has in the past expressed views that Iran’s nuclear developments may deserve a military action. That is precisely what AIPAC, right wing Zionist organizations, and various proIsrael Neoconservatives have been urging.
This review of the Palin remarks appeared on the British blog: War Without End. But its source was actually Philip Weiss’ blog, MondoWeiss.
Matthews Suggests AIPAC Scripted Palin’s Rote Answer on Israel is how the issue was expressed by Philip Weiss.
The details:
Sarah Palin gave a scary answer to Charlie Gibson on Israel, saying she supported Israel’s prerogative to attack Iran, and under his questioning said in a rote way, three times, that the U.S. has no right to “second guess” Israel’s decision. Chris Matthews seemed angry about this tonight on Hardball, questioning whether it was in the national interest. Then asked whether AIPAC had drafted her answer. Pat Buchanan pointed out that the answer goes against even Bush’s foreign policy and that McCain is in the thrall of Randy Scheunemann, a neoconservative and former “agent” for Georgia. Earlier Todd Harris, a Republican operative, told Matthews he felt it would be a good thing if Netanyahu (the right wing Likudnik) becomes prime minister of Israel.
Scary Republicans. If Harris is against the two-state solution, why is he given a platform on MSNBC? Or why isn’t he called out? Though praise the lord, Matthews, who knows about the Israel lobby, is finally pointing fingers. When will he talk about Palin’s special meeting with AIPAC in St. Paul the day before she was nominated?
Sarah Palin Would Allow Israel To Drag Us Into War With Iran
In her interview last night with Charles Gibson, Sarah Palin clearly showed that she would not oppose Israel if it decided to attack Iran, and thereby drag the United States into yet another war . . . even a likely World War III.
Here are the exact words, as reported by Fox News:
GIBSON: Let me turn to Iran. Do you consider a nuclear Iran to be an existential threat to Israel?
PALIN: I believe that under the leadership of Ahmadinejad, nuclear weapons in the hands of his government are extremely dangerous to everyone on this globe, yes.
GIBSON: So, what should we do about a nuclear Iran?
PALIN: We have got to make sure these weapons of mass destruction, that nuclear weapons are not given to those hands of Ahmadinejad, not that he would use them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them. So we have got to put the pressure on Iran.
GIBSON: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and need to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?
PALIN: Well, first, we are friends of Israel, and I don’t think that we should second guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves, and for their security.
GIBSON: So if we didn’t second guess it and if they decided they needed to do it, because Iran was an existential threat, we would be cooperative or agree with that?
PALIN: I don’t think we can second guess what Israel has to do to secure its nation.
GIBSON: So if it felt necessary, if it felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right?
PALIN: We cannot second guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself.
“We cannot second guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself.”
NOTE: She gave the same answer three times to three slightly different versions of the question, without actually agreeing to the precise words which were asked. By avoiding the exact question, she was able to reframe the question and provide a less chilling, more reasonable sounding answer.
But sadly, the truth is that she would allow — without “second guessing” — Israel to drag us into a likely World War III, without even trying to stop it.
What she should have said is, “No.”
We are the United States of America. The state of Israel is basically our child, because we created it in 1948 and we have kept it alive since then. Without us, Israel would not exist as a Jewish state today. Because of this, we are morally responsible for everything Israel ever does wrong in the world. Sometimes it seems like having a juvenile delinquent child. We cannot permit our delinquent child to attack a country and start a war without first receiving our explicit consent. An attack by Israel is an attack by the United States, and it would surely justify any warlike response against us that Iran and its friends might want to launch.
May God help us all.
What is perhaps worse is that the Iranian prime minister recently expressed views about the core problem with Israel (the expunged Mike Wallace interview), Israel’s colonialism of Palestinian land, that are compatible with Jimmy Carter’s views concerning Palestinian human rights, freedom, and self-determination.
What is there to say but to repeat: May God help us all.
Thanks to Martini at Booman Tribune for tuning me into this material.
