Why hasn’t Hagel apologized for his comments about Jews?

the “let’s label everyone who’s even a mildly critical of israel an anti-semite” game has reached the self-parody stage.

sesquipedalian on January 7, 2013 at 5:24 PM

“Mildly” critical?

In 2002, when 457 Israelis were killed in terrorist attacks (the equivalent of more than 20,000 fatalities in the US or seven 9/11s), Hagel told Israel that IT “must take steps to show its commitment to peace” even though a mere 2 years earlier Prime Minister Ehud Barak had offered a state to Yasser Arafat at Camp David only to be rebuffed.

Hagel has said that both Israel and the US should negotiate with Hezbollah and Hamas, whose Charter calls for its TOTAL DESTRUCTION.

If a nominee for Secretary of HHS had said “Let the blacks pay for it” or “Let the Hispanics pay for it,” we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

But, “Let the Jews pay for it”? Meh.

Talk about self-parody.

BTW, don’t hang out with any “militant homosexuals.” Chuck Hagel doesn’t like them. I’m sure that he and Ahmadinejad can agree on that.

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 5:33 PM

Well, that was a waste of keystrokes.

OldEnglish on January 7, 2013 at 5:17 PM

Yep.

Correction: Knesset, not Parliament.

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 5:39 PM

based on your anecdotes, would you say that hagel is an anti-semite?

sesquipedalian on January 7, 2013 at 5:50 PM

I don’t know the man, personally, but what I will say is that I am suspicious enough of his previous comments on Jews to call him “anti-semitic”…just as I call him “anti-gay”.

Make no mistake, I oppose him not simply because of what he has said about Jews in the past, but also because of what he said previously about homosexuals, along with his displays of naïveté when it comes to Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. Look, Hamas’ own Founding Charter states:

‘Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.

[Peace] initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement… Those conferences are no more than a means to appoint the infidels as arbitrators in the lands of Islam… There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility.

Egypt was, to a great extent, removed from the circle of struggle [against Zionism] through the treacherous Camp David Agreement. The Zionists are trying to draw other Arab countries into similar agreements in order to bring them outside the circle of struggle.

…Leaving the circle of struggle against Zionism is high treason,
and cursed be he who perpetrates such an act.

The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: ‘O Moslem, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.’

The enemies have been scheming for a long time … and have accumulated huge and influential material wealth. With their money, they took control of the world media… With their money they stirred revolutions in various parts of the globe … They stood behind the French Revolution, the Communist Revolution and most of the revolutions we hear about… With their money they formed secret organizations – such as the Freemasons, Rotary Clubs and the Lions – which are spreading around the world, in order to destroy societies and carry out Zionist interests… They stood behind World War I … and formed the League of Nations through which they could rule the world. They were behind World War II, through which they made huge financial gains … There is no war going on anywhere without them having their finger in it.

Zionism scheming has no end, and after Palestine, they will covet expansion from the Nile to the Euphrates River. When they have finished digesting the area on which they have laid their hand, they will look forward to more expansion. Their scheme has been laid out in the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion.’

The HAMAS regards itself the spearhead and the vanguard of the circle of struggle against World Zionism … Islamic groups all over the Arab world should also do the same, since they are best equipped for their future role in the fight against the warmongering Jews.”

I have a big problem with that kind of bigotry…and anyone, who believes that we should negotiate with them. They are terrorist organisations. They, Hamas and Hezbollah, also have this “cute” salute. It might look familiar to you.

There are myriad reasons why I oppose Hagel. His statements on Jews and Israel are merely a few of them.

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 6:14 PM

…and all those myriad reasons spring from a single source: that he allied himself with your mortal enemy.

Weird. I support SSM, opposed DADT, and believe that DOMA is unconstitutional. I’ve never been accused of having “Teh Gheys” as my “mortal enemy.”

Drama queen, much?

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 6:49 PM

this rule seems a bit weird. why should we exclude perfectly rational options?

sesquipedalian on January 7, 2013 at 7:02 PM

Are you claiming that either the Hamas Charter or The Protocols of the Elders of Zion of “perfectly rational”??? Really???

BTW, before I am accused of being “outside the mainstream,” the Washington Post agrees with me:

FORMER SENATOR Chuck Hagel, whom President Obama is reportedly considering for defense secretary, is a Republican who would offer a veneer of bipartisanship to the national security team. He would not, however, move it toward the center, which is the usual role of such opposite-party nominees. On the contrary: Mr. Hagel’s stated positions on critical issues, ranging from defense spending to Iran, fall well to the left of those pursued by Mr. Obama during his first term — and place him near the fringe of the Senate that would be asked to confirm him.

“Chuck Hagel is not the right choice for defense secretary.”

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 7:18 PM

The first AJC encounter with Sen. Hagel I recall was when we sought his support, in 1999, for a Senate letter to then Russian President Boris Yeltsin urging action against rising anti-Semitism. We were unsuccessful. On June 20, 1999, we published the letter as a full-page ad in The New York Times with 99 Senate signatories. Only Sen. Hagel’s name was absent.

Our concern then has only grown since, as we have witnessed his stance on a range of core U.S. national security priorities.

What is striking is that the opposition to him today is being labeled as “neocon,” when a number of his documented positions, in fact, have been contrary to the Obama Administration’s to date — on Iran sanctions, on a credible military option against Iran, on Hezbollah as a terrorist group, on the special nature of the US-Israel relationship, etc.

Against that backdrop, what message would the President be sending if he opted to go ahead with such a nomination?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2012/12/19/more-trouble-for-hagel/

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 8:29 PM