Obama is too pro-Israel
By Ami Eden on Jun 17, 2008 in Barack Obama, Featured, Presidential Race |
Malik Obama, a Kenyan and the Muslim half-brother of the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, says the Illinois will be good for the Jews.
And, following Barack Obama’s speech to AIPAC, other Arab voices are starting to agree (with regret).
Muammar Gadhafi didn’t like the speech — he says it shows “that he either ignores international politics and did not study the Middle East conflict or that it is a campaign lie.”
Nadia Hijab, a senior fellow in the D.C. office of the Institute for Palestine Studies, has a column in the Nation complaining about Obama’s AIPAC pitch and his tendency to steer “clear of the American Jewish left and center.”
George Bisharat, a professor of law at Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, argues in the San Francisco Chronicle that Obama “whiffed in his first major foreign policy speech as the Democratic candidate” by spouting pro-Israel orthodoxies.
James Zogby liked parts of the speech and still thinks Obama is better than John McCain, but he has some qualms.
And, as noted earlier, Hamas seems to have soured on Obama.
Moshiach Obama is now too pro-Israel? Wasn’t it a couple weeks ago, he wasn’t? What’ll it be next week?
Skip | Jun 17, 2008 | Reply
Of course with Obama everything is a lie. He says one to to AIPAC one day and the next he says he misspoke. I think we have to relie on his position when he was in the Illinois senate and at that time he definitely was pro-Palestinian.
pg | Jun 17, 2008 | Reply
As a Canadian Muslim. I am one person who is both pro-Palestine as well as pro-Israel and I don’t see a contradiction, though I do recognise this is a difficult position to understand if one is an Israeli or a Palestinian.
This is why I suppport Senator Obama and feel his position is based on principle, not tribal or religious loyalties.
Israel has the right to exist within safe secure borders as a state with clear Jewish characterstics and as a home for Jews and without the threat of annihilation that no other country on earth faces.
However, at the same time, Israel must end its occupation of Palestinian territories and not fall for the trap laid our by Hamas and the Iranians.
I believe that without the creation of a soveriegn, secure and independent Palestine, Israel will not find the peace it desires and rightly deserves.
Now, go flame me. I deserve it
Tarek Fatah | Jun 18, 2008 | Reply
Israelis and Palestinians who seek peaceful coexistance and justice should have no problem with Tarek Fatah’s position. I believe that I speak for the vast majority of Israelis and Jews in saying, when the Palestinians and the Arab world adopts Tarek Fatah’s perspective, there will be instant peace. I hope we don’t have to wait for the messiah.
jn | Jun 18, 2008 | Reply
Obama is not pro-Israel. His pastor, Jeremiah Wright, published a guest column that included a blood libel that accused Israel of developing an “ethnic bomb” to kill Arabs and Negroes. Wright himself wrote “state” of Israel, as in “so-called State of Israel.” His church has close ties with the Sabeel Ecuminical Liberation Theology Center, whose official publications call Israel’s creation in 1948 the “nakba” or catastrophe.
Re: “And, as noted earlier, Hamas seems to have soured on Obama.” Of course Hamas has soured (publicly) on Obama. Hamas knows that its open endorsement of Obama will cost him votes, and it is smart enough to keep its mouth shut until after the election. Remember that Yassir Arafat said in English what he wanted the infidels to believe, and in Arabic what his real agenda happened to be.
Bill Levinson | Jun 18, 2008 | Reply
Bill, are Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright the same person? Do they share a brain?
If the answer to those questions is no — which it is obviously — why do you persist in your insistence that Barack Obama should be held accountable for the views of Jeremiah Wright?
How about this: I’m going to hold you accountable for the views of the JDL and Meir Kahane, seeing how you’re a top contributor to the Jews Against Obama forum on the JDL’s website. And seeing as how Kahane Chai is a terrorist organization, I’m just going to start calling you a terrorist all the time even if it’s not true. Because if it’s okay for you to keep insisting on guilt by association even when it’s not true that you believe the same things as Meir Kahane or people who would commit acts of terror in his name, it doesn’t matter because what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
BILL LEVINSON IS A JEWISH TERRORIST AND SHOULD BE PROSECUTED FOR AIDING AND ABETTING ACTS OF TERRORISM ON U.S. & ISRAELI SOIL AGAINST ENEMIES OF THE KAHANE CHAI TERROR ORGANIZATION.
Frank N. Bean | Jun 18, 2008 | Reply
Mr. Bean,
(1) Re: “why do you persist in your insistence that Barack Obama should be held accountable for the views of Jeremiah Wright?” If you are running for public office, and you consort openly with racists and haters while accepting their endorsements, you give them credibility. NJDC complained, and rightly so, that Ron Paul refused to reject the support of the Stormfront White Nationalist Community. Same principle.
(2) Re: “I’m just going to start calling you a terrorist all the time even if it’s not true.” I suggest that you Google on the phrase “libel per se,” and remember that you are not really anonymous on the Internet; you can be tracked down with a court order via server logs and so on. As a side note, though, Barack Obama’s church published a guest piece from a genuine Hamas member (Marzook), and Hamas IS a terrorist organization.
(3) “Guilt by association” means saying, for example, “So-and-so was in the same room with a Communist, or the same club with a Communist, so he is a Communist.” Obama posed arm in arm with Al Sharpton while endorsing him, and he accepted endorsements from not only Wright but also Pfleger and MoveOn.org. If we use the McCarthy analogy, that’s no longer just being in the same room or club with a Communist. It’s the equivalent of praising Communists and accepting the Communist Party’s endorsement.
Bill Levinson | Jun 20, 2008 | Reply
1) That you could put Stormfront and Jeremiah Wright in the same category bespeaks how completely out of touch with reality you are. Wright, who grew up in America before Blacks had full civil rights and who served his country in the U.S. Army, is angered by America’s treatment of Blacks and other minorities, while Stormfront advocates stripping minorities of their rights. How are the two even comparable?
2) Well Bill, you keep libeling Obama by saying he’s surreptitiously an anti-Semite and anti-Zionist by tarring him through his association to Jeremiah Wright and Al Sharpton. If that’s all it takes in your book to substantiate your claims, you’re a terrorist because you contribute to a forum on a Jewish terrorist organization’s website.
3) OMG look! George Bush and Al Sharpton together! OMG look! George Bush welcomed Al Sharpton to the White House and said it was “good to see him!” OMG OMG! Bush is an anti-Semite and an anti-Zionist and he hates white people and Jesus!!!
At what point are you going to accept the fact that Al Sharpton is an important leader in this country regardless of the fact that he’s made mistakes in his life for which he’s not proud?
Is your Kahanist friend Dov Hikind’s insistence that Sharpton is not an anti-Semite not good enough for you?
Here’s an idea Bill: Try hammering Obama on the issues instead of constantly attacking him with your worthless smears.
Frank N. Bean | Jun 24, 2008 | Reply
Re: “Wright, who grew up in America before Blacks had full civil rights and who served his country in the U.S. Army, is angered by America’s treatment of Blacks and other minorities, while Stormfront advocates stripping minorities of their rights. How are the two even comparable?”
Neither Wright’s legtimate grievances (segregation) nor Stormfront’s (affirmative action race preferences) excuse for an instant their racism and bigotry. Do you think I should hold Wright to a lower standard than I hold white people?
Re: “Well Bill, you keep libeling Obama by saying he’s surreptitiously an anti-Semite and anti-Zionist by tarring him through his association to Jeremiah Wright and Al Sharpton.”
It is not libelous to argue that Obama is an enabler of racists and anti-Semites, nor is it (automatically) libelous for you to lie about me being an Islamophobe. There is a clear-cut difference between name calling and a false accusation of a crime (like being a terrorist or trading directly with Iran in contravention of U.S. law). The latter is automatically libel, and you might want to look up the definitions before you get into real trouble one day.
This also applies, by the way, to the individual who claims to have done cocaine with Obama in 1999 or whatever–he had better be able to prove it if Obama goes after him. Maybe Obama thinks he is just a little piece of attention-seeking trash who is not enough trouble to be worth suing. On the other hand, when a little flea bites too many times, the time comes to swat it.
Unlike the National Jewish Democratic Council, I don’t have double standards, and the fact that Bush invited someone like Sharpton to the White House hardly raises him in my estimation. If your party had put up a decent candidate in 2004, we would probably not be talking about Bush (or Obama) right now.
Re: “Here’s an idea Bill: Try hammering Obama on the issues instead of constantly attacking him with your worthless smears.”
That is exactly the advice I give misguided allies who propagate urban legends about Obama. You have yet to demonstrate that anything I have said about Obama is false.
Bill Levinson | Jun 24, 2008 | Reply