I think the point is to, in fact, keep the Gaza situation at the forefront of any attention, particularly given the MSM's one-sided presentation of the situation. I would argue that keeping it in the present addresses the larger idea of the US's actions worldwide and how they (and Israel) continually violate international and domestic law all the while crowing about spreading democracy.

Further, regardless of one's personal view of the situation, it seems almost cruel, and certainly neglectful, to not comment on the tragedy in Gaza because it takes away from domestic issues. Doesn't this attitude only work to further the obsessive US centric view that has dominated the past 8 years? Resulting in a crude interpretation of, "who cares if there is genocide occurring, let's talk about me"? Particularly given that our current actions and blind loyalty to Israel are in fact endangering our future? It would seem to me that pointing out that fact should be done every hour on the hour.

Seems on my reading to NOT support the recent Congressional Resolution. The first sentence is calling for an end to ALL the violence, and near the end calls for an end to the blockade. The last part calls for active American diplomacy to resolve the conflict.

We support Congressional action that endorses these aims.

Of the 5 aims mentioned, the Congressional resolution addresses 2...the rockets and weapons smuggling....so it would suggest to me they don't fully support it, and tried to say it in a tactful way.

Of the 5 aims mentioned, the Congressional resolution addresses 2...the rockets and weapons smuggling....so it would suggest to me they don't fully support it, and tried to say it in a tactful way.

I agree. But why not just say: "We don't support this because it lacks vital elements"? I'm very hesitant to criticize them -- they really have stepped way out into the fire and deserve support. But I just didn't get that statement.

Benjamin Cardin, Maryland Democrat, 1/7/2009:

I wholeheartedly agree with President-elect Obama who defined the problem very clearly:

If somebody was sending rockets into my house, where my family slept at night I'm going to do everything in my power to stop that.

The recent military action in Gaza is in direct response to numerous rocket and mortar attacks from militants in the Hamas-controlled Gaza, which have killed and injured Israeli citizens and currently paralyzes the southern regions of Israel.

-snip-

Hamas poses a critical challenge to the regional peace process. Labeled as a terrorist organization but holding seats in the Palestinian Government and acting as the controlling authority in Gaza, the organization's leaders encourage violence and cling to the belief that Israel itself should be destroyed. Questions remain as to whether or not the organization should even be included in peace negotiations, but the fact remains that the threat Hamas poses to Israel is an obstacle to any negotiation efforts.

-snip-

Any such cease-fire must include Hamas' ending its rocket and mortar attacks, recognize its neighbor's right to exist, renounce violence, and honor all past agreements in order to move toward a two-state solution based on mutual peace and security.

- Benjamin Cardin, United States Senator

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2009_record&page=S154&position=all

Johnny Isakson, Georgia Republican, 1/6/2009:

Also, I went to Sderot, the Israeli settlement outside Gaza, that since mid year last year has received 1, 2, 3, 10, 15 missile attacks, random attacks coming out of Gaza dropping on this Israeli settlement for no reason at all but the absolute ability or desire to terrorize the Israeli people and destroy that settlement.

What Israel has done by moving into Gaza is a major military operation. In some reports that you see on television or you read about in the papers, you would think it was unprovoked and unnecessary. The opposite is true. It has been provoked for 15 months by Hamas in Gaza. The Israelis have finally drawn a line in the sand and they have moved in to try to protect the best interests of their citizens.

-snip-

As a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, I take very seriously my responsibility to look upon every nation in this world as a nation we should respect, as a nation we should dialogue with, and as a nation we should work with. But we cannot and we must not turn our head away from a nation that is causing terror to be invoked against innocent people such as Iran is doing against Israel through the Palestinians in Gaza.

-snip-

But as long as Hamas is unwilling to enter into a meaningful peace, a meaningful effort to stop the terror, one that can be trusted and verified, then Israel is doing precisely what it should be doing in the best interests of its people.

- "Johnny" Isakson, United States Senator

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2009_record&page=S20&position=all

Jon Kyl, Arizona Republican, 1/6/2009:

We believe as well that a similar resolution would be voted on in the House of Representatives to express the will of the House. So then the whole world--and certainly the administration--would know of this body's strong support for the State of Israel and our support for the actions Israel is taking right now. We hope that vote can occur before this week is out. I wish to commend Senator Lieberman for his considerable leadership on this issue.

-snip-

Israel conducts its military operations to spare innocent life.

-snip-

For the Palestinian people, death has become an industry ..... This is why they have formed human shields of the women, the children, the elderly, and the mujahedeen, in order to challenge the Zionist bombing machine.

-snip-

I point to the press statement of the Security Council on December 28 which, among other things, said the parties should "stop immediately all military activities." This is dangerous moral equivalency. Only one party to the violence carries out "military activities." The other party--Hamas--terrorizes and murders innocent people. That is why the only Security Council resolution that could be acceptable in this situation--and I say this with the understanding that the Security Council is meeting as we meet here today--is one that affirms Israel's right to defend itself and calls on Hamas to immediately stop its terrorist activity.

- Jon Kyl, United States Senator

Joseph Lieberman, Connecticut Registered Democrat, 1/6/2009:

Secretary of State Rice has gone there to speak on behalf of the United States, which indicates the importance of these deliberations.

-snip-

I also say in a larger context that there is a lot of speculation about why Hamas broke the cease-fire and initiated the rocket fire against Israel deeper into Israel than they have ever done before. I do think, as Senator Kyl suggested, that the answer to that question probably comes as much or more from Tehran than it does from Gaza City and Hamas; that Hamas has become an agent of the Iranian Government. It is trained and supplied by the Iranians and secondarily by the Syrians. Therefore, there is a larger conflict being played out.

-snip-

I want to say that a precipitous cease-fire simply for the sake of a cease-fire will allow Hamas to claim a victory. A victory for Hamas is not simply a victory for Hamas; it is a victory for Iran. And a defeat for Hamas, which is in reach if we allow the Israeli action to continue, is a defeat for Iran and a victory for the United States and for the forces of democracy as against terrorism and for the forces of moderation and the rule of law in the Islamic world as against fanaticism and violence.

- Joseph Lieberman, United States Senator

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2009_record&page=S23&position=all

Is a national Party you belong to represented here? If so, I'm sure its powerbrokers appreciate your continued membership, and its implicit, unquestioning support for your Party leadership's "principles" and actions.