The Unbearable Lightness of Hillary [New]
Your humble correspondent is perplexed at the priorities of his government.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, ever stalwart proponent of one of the most bizarre human rights agendas one can imagine, has bravely taken on the mantle of global cheerleader for the right of Saudi women to drive Mercedes Benz’. Being an American feminist, I can only bow before her courageous outpouring in support of those oppressed women. But that’s where the praise fades to black, to the sound of an Israeli navy bullhorn announcing it’s pending attack on an American vessel and it’s occupants.
“We’ve made clear [to the Saudi government] our views that women everywhere, including women in the kingdom, have the right to make decisions about their lives and their futures,” Clinton said. “They have the right to contribute to society and provide for their children and their families, and mobility such as provided by the freedom to drive provides access to economic opportunity, including jobs, which does fuel growth and stability.”
Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20072983-503544.html#ixzz1QJkceICt
Tis a pity, then, that these same considerations do not apply to Gazan women seeking to care for their own children. Indeed, it doesn’t even apply to Americans who seek nothing more than to extend those rights to their fellow human beings. The trick, it seems, lies in how one parses the Clintonian usage of “human beings” and whether or not certain people fall into that category. Via Mondoweiss and others, we’re finding that the current regime is rather picky about who gets to enjoy that label. Because in the case of the delightfully irony-enhanced name MV Audacity of Hope, we find those hearty travelers don’t quite pass muster with the administration’s usage.
“And we think that it’s not helpful for there to be flotillas that try to provoke actions by entering into Israeli waters and creating a situation in which the Israelis have the right to defend themselves,” Clinton said.
Not helpful. Trying to provoke. The Israelis apparently enjoy the right to defend themselves from unarmed peaceniks bearing a cargo of dangerous foods and medicines. This, of course, is the standard issue boilerplate “Blame The Soon-To-Be Victims.” But it gets worse.
The security environment within Gaza, including its border with Egypt and its seacoast, is dangerous and volatile. U.S. citizens are advised against traveling to Gaza by any means, including via sea. Previous attempts to enter Gaza by sea have been stopped by Israeli naval vessels and resulted in the injury, death, arrest, and deportation of U.S. citizens. U.S. citizens participating in any effort to reach Gaza by sea should understand that they may face arrest, prosecution, and deportation by the Government of Israel… On May 31, 2010, nine people were killed, including one U.S. citizen, in such an attempt.
…
We have made clear through the past year that groups and individuals who seek to break Israel’s maritime blockade of Gaza are taking irresponsible and provocative actions that entail a risk to their safety.
(emphasis is Think Progress’)
Putting together these two sets of remarks, it’s pretty clear Hillary Clinton hates Americans. Or something. In any case, she’s perfectly fine with the IDF violating the rights of such “threats” as 87-year old Holocaust survivor Hedy Epstein, even if that includes murder. She is a threat, you see. A threat to what, Empress Clinton will not say.
Not to be left out of this orgy of moral bankruptcy, even the White House has to get in on the act.
The Obama administration is stepping up pressure on activists planning to challenge Israel’s sea blockade of the Gaza Strip, warning that they will face action from Israeli authorities and that American participants may also be violating U.S. law.
The U.S. State Department said Friday that attempts to break the blockade are “irresponsible and provocative” and that Israel has well-established means of delivering assistance to the Palestinian residents of Gaza. It noted that the territory is run by the militant Hamas group, a U.S. designated foreign terrorist organization, and that Americans providing support to it are subject to fines and jail.
(emphasis mine)
So to sum up:
- Saudi women seeking to enjoy the pleasures of mall traffic (they’re not allowed to work or even speak, for the most part, are they?) = Double-Plus Good.
- Americans risking their lives in opposition to ethnic cleansing = Bad, Bad, Bad.
What the brave souls of the MV Audacity Of Hope fail to realize is this: In order to qualify as a Humanitarian Mission, they have to lob cruise missiles at Tripoli. According to Barack Obama’s own statements, disgorging thousands of tons of ordnance on another country does not qualify as “hostilities” or “war.” Indeed, it’s all very, very Humanitarian!
So if they are not murdered by the IDF, they may also face prison terms in the US. This is how the US Government treats it’s own law-abiding citizens.
I can’t wait to see how the Obamatrons spin this one.

What Do You Think?
4 Responses to 'The Unbearable Lightness of Hillary'
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.


Tim [New]
Saturday, 25 Jun, 2011 at 3:56 pm
You forgot his Nobel Peace Prize. That adds a certain spice to the proceedings of the past few years. This and other acts kept hidden, like using the US Embassy in Spain to squelch any legal investigation into torture performed by Messrs. Bush, Cheney, Addington, on down. It’s tough to get that Peace Prize and run an empire.
Saturday, 25 Jun, 2011 at 4:41 pm
Well, that was an unfortunate oversight on my part. The Peace Prize is especially silly, now that he can say with a straight face that dropping lots of Freedom Bombs(tm) isn’t actually war or hostilities. It’s merely “muscular humanitarianism.”
Tune in next week, when we’ll learn that water is not in fact wet. Also, Suspicion Breeds Confidence.
Next time one of these nimrods gets up and talks about their duty to protect American lives, I do believe I’ll lose my lunch.
Tim [New]
Saturday, 25 Jun, 2011 at 6:29 pm
If there’s justice, the Nobel Committee will take their prize back. Wonder if that’s ever happened?
Sunday, 26 Jun, 2011 at 10:05 am
I don’t believe that’s happened. I mean, Henry Kissinger got to keep his and he murdered millions of people, depending on how many Vietnamese we care to tally for the Nixon Administration. Operation Condor, all that stuff…. I’m pretty sure he still has his.
Of course, it would still be nice to see “Give the Prize back, Barry” at his speeches.