“No nation should accept rockets being fired into its borders,” President Obama has said, John Kerry has said the same. What did they mean? That both sides should carry on firing rockets across their respective borders at each other because it is unacceptable for only one to do it? Or should they be seeking or receiving all the help the world can give to actually sit down and talk to each other. How about an accompanying statement such as.... No nation should accept decades of an occupying force that determines discriminating land laws and allows its own citizens to settle on the land, accept being blockaded indefinitely and ground down to dust, be prevented from allowing refugees and their descendants to return for decades (and other injustices ad infinitum)... A little deeper with the balance of your messages Kerry and Obama and there may be a point in listening..... How about: No electorate in a country which has the means and the power to change this situation, enforce international law and UN decisions, should vote for anyone who isnt prepared to commit themselves 1,000% to changing this situation, a situation that not only creates conditions of gross inhumanity on the ground in the Middle East but also infects relationships and stimulates violence that crosses religious and national divides world-wide. Thanks mr O and mr K but it really isnt OK! (The term OK comes from WWI situation reports - meaning zero killed).
Posted on: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 17:30:58 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015