What a bunch of political posturing.

re: #1 freetoken

I do think the language was over-the-top and counterproductive. But the point is well taken.

See the other LGF Pages post about the JPost article. Seems the PA Fatah in the West Bank is concerned about Hamas, too. This has nothing to do with better conditions for Palestinians, and everything to do with supporting a terrorist group (Hamas). Obama really should know better.

re: #1 freetoken

What a bunch of political posturing.

And if the rockets were falling in TX, and we declared a blockade on Mexico, how would we like other nations saying the Mexicans deserve their condolences for anyone injured or killed trying to run the blockade, while falsely presenting themselves as peace activists.

Yep...political posturing to remind the President by this comment on his own comments, that sovereign nations have a right to defend themselves and to deny that is to give credence to any group who also decides to attack any other sovereign nation. On top of that, the President does not have his facts right, when even here on LGF, it has been reported clearly that:
1) there wasn't any significant "humanitarian aid" on the boarded vessel, and;
2) the "peace activists" planned the very confrontation and;
3) the "peace activists" felt the urge to use "disproportionate force" and in fact tried to gut an Israeli commando they had dragged below decks and had been beating him, after he was disarmed and;
4) there is plenty of aid going to Gaza, courtesy of the compassionate people with in the Israeli government trying to prevent a shortage of necessities and;
5) the Gazans have a reasonable life style, despite the MSM propaganda who would lead you to believe they are dying faster than Africans in Somalia.

Good on you for letting your ideology get in the way of well researched facts, to include reports out of Turkey, and the "peace activists" own videos of the violence they committed in the name of "peace."

Where's your reference to the Geneva Convention protocols for the treatment of POWs? That's not really a stretch these days, as the liberal cry is how we need to treat the unauthorized combatants under those rules as uniformed military members of an established state. Why do you not raise your voice and demand the "peace activists" employ those rules? Shouldn't the uniformed members of the military of a recognized nation be afforded such rights?

Fact: It's always dangerous to set a precedent, for you never know when you will have to live by it.

If Castro and Chavez join in the attacks and violence on our southern border states, we may find ourselves in the position of the Israelis and won't it be interesting if we have the Human Rights Council berating us for defending our nation using those methods codified in International Law and the Laws of Armed Conflict? Wold you still refer to the speech as political posturing by a senior politician from a nation like England or France is their leader(s) we reminded who is the attacked and who are the attackers?