CONGRESSMAN DINGELL REFUSES TO “TAKE SIDES” AGAINST HEZBOLLAH
As of this morning, a Google search found this nowhere in the press. Dingell did, however, say “Now, I condemn Hezbollah as does everybody else, for the violence.” This, after he refused to take sides. (Republican Jewish Coalition) By Howard Dean’s definition, Dingell may be an anti-Semite. From the AP story: Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean on Wednesday called Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki an "anti-Semite" for failing to denounce Hezbollah for its attacks against Israel. (AP) It was Dingell who told Larry King a few weeks ago “I think Israel overreacted.” (CNN)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Dingell was not for or against, before he was for and against
Congressman John Dingell’s recent refusal to “take sides” against Hezbollah is unfortunately consistent with his voting record, which includes voting against a House resolution condemning their attacks. Although Mr. Dingell claims that his critics have taken his comments out of context, the fact is that when asked, “You’re not against Hezbollah?” Dingell answered, “No;” an observation that underscored his earlier comments of not being "not for or against Hezbollah."
No matter how or in what context the Congressman now wants to position his statements, they remain extremely troubling. After responding “no” when asked if he is against Hezbollah, Dingell continued that he was “against violence” and “condemn[s] Hezbollah as does everybody else, for the violence.” Vague denunciations of “the violence,” though, do not excuse his refusal to be counted as an opponent of Hezbollah.
While refusing to denounce Hezbollah, the Congressman insists that he is a steadfast friend of Israel. Once again backtracking from his Sunday comments of "not being for or against Israel" he wrote Tuesday "that during my 50 years in Congress, I have proudly supported more than $300 billion dollars in aid for the State of Israel."
Hezbollah, the organization that Mr. Dingell refuses to denounce is responsible for the deaths of over 300 Americans. In 1983, a Hezbollah suicide bomber killed 241 American servicemen who were in Beirut on a peacekeeping mission. In 2002, Hezbollah’s Secretary-General said, “If they [Jews] all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide.” He has also remarked, “There is no solution to the conflict in this region except with the disappearance of Israel.”
And this is the organization that the Congressman insists we must bring to the bargaining table for dialogue and compromise, with the United States acting in the role of an impartial mediator? Apparently, at least according to his most recent proclamations, Mr. Dingell now agrees that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization. But if it is, then how can he believe that there is no moral difference between the actions of a democratic nation and those of an international terrorist organization? Does he truly think it is in the interest of the United States to act as a neutral “honest broker” between Israel, which Dingell insists is our steadfast ally, and Hezbollah, which has killed hundreds of Israelis and Americans in terrorist attacks?
John Dingell called his critics an “unprincipled congregation of liars.” It’s dismaying that he would lash out in such a way in response to criticism, especially when his own statements have been are so contradictory and confusing.
The Congressman’s defense of his extraordinary comments is inadequate. He owes us a better explanation.
F. Vincent Vernuccio
Vernuccio for Congress
Candidate – Michigan 15th Congressional District
www.vernuccioforcongress.com
Post a Comment