Posted on 02/19/2008 11:45:49 AM PST by SJackson
I have received some interesting hate mail following my post on Rashid Khalidi. A writer for the New Republic, John Judis, wrote:
So Obama expressed general sympathy for the Palestinians? Thats really shocking. I dont know what your religious or social background is, but I dont appreciate people appealing to the prejudices of my people.
Judis seems to have a reading comprehension problem. My issue is not whether Senator Obama has sympathy for Palestinians. I am sympathetic toward Palestinians. I think they have had a raw deal and that Israel has treated them in an abominable fashion.
My point is on how Baracks relationship with Rashid Khalidi will likely be used to tar him as someone not willing to defend Israel. Remember, we are talking US politics and no national level politician can afford to be perceived as someone who will abandon our special relationship with Israel. Why do you think Republicans and Democrats make an annual pilgrimage to the American Israeli Political Action Committee convention in Washington? Even Obama understands this. And please, I am not saying we should have (or not have) a special relationship with Israel. I am simply pointing out the reality.
Which brings me to Rashid Khalidi. Who is he?
I received the following defense of Dr. Khalidi from Joel Stern (not sure if student or faculty), who has a Columbia University email account. Mr. Stern writes:
1) Rashid Khalidi is not and never has been a PLO activist. He was an adviser to the Palestinian delegation in Madrid in 1991. In case you are unaware, Israel, at that time, refused to speak directly to the PLO. The way the conference proceeded was by the US and Israel selecting the Palestinian delegation (not from the PLO), and, in turn, the PLO would OK or object to the delegate. Khalidi was chosen because he is from a prominent Palestinian family from Jerusalem and is a renown scholar of the Middle East. Moreover, contrary to your assertion, Rashid Khalidi has been extremely critical of the PLO. You would know this if you bothered to do what a responsible person would do: namely, read his work before forming an opinion about it. In the concluding chapter of his latest book, The Iron Cage, he submits a scathing critique of the PLO and its handling of the Oslo Peace Process.2) Rashid Khalidi did not help broker Ahmadinejads appearance at Columbia. (It was also not in the summer but in the Fall; classes had already commenced at Columbia). The professor who was responsible for that was Richard Bulliet, an expert on Iran, who had old contacts with Irans mission to the UN. Again, if you were responsible, you would have read Columbias newspaper that explained how it all occurred.
3) Again, Khalidi has never been a part of the PLO. Where you got this information is a mystery but you seem to have no real concern for the facts. As for anti-Israel rhetoric and the destruction of Israel, you seem to be either ill-informed or willfully ignorant. I understand you were making hypothetical hyperbolic statements that Republicans might likely use in a smear campaign. This may very well turn out to be true. However, to uncritically make these statements with a complete disregard of the facts is a shameless smear campaign on Khalidi. From reading what you wrote, it is obvious that you have not read a page of any of Khalidis books or articles. I suggest you do your homework before you turn it in next time, for the sake of intellectual honesty and journalistic integrity. I hope this message clarifies some of your factual shortcomings and I hope it encourages you to look deeper into topics you write about instead of just lazily writing irresponsible articles.
Mr. Stern is wrong in insisting Dr. Khalidi is not an activist and has never been part of the PLO. Dr. Khalidi was a director of the official PLO press agency WAFA in Beirut from 1976 to 1982. During this time the US State Department considered the PLO a terrorist organization and the PLO was involved with terrorist attacks. WAFA was not an independent, unaffiliated news organization. While it is true that the PLO has moderated over time and moved in the mainstream of Palestinian politics, that is not the point. What we are talking about is perception. Dr. Khalidi, notwithstanding his current work, cannot pretend he was some outsider with no ties to the policies and practices of the PLO in the late 70s. That point will be seized on by Republican strategists. I am not saying this is right or fair, but it is reality. So deal with it.
I am not questioning nor challenging Dr. Khalidis academic credentials. He is a real professor and has written real books. But he is not some neutral observer. He served on the PLO guidance committee at the Madrid peace conference. It does not matter that he was critical of the PLOs handling of the Oslo peace process. He was still part of the PLO side and the Republican political strategists will focus on that fact.
And Khalidi has direct ties to Obama. These are not imagined. Before getting his job at Columbia University Rashid Khalidi was a Middle East professor at the University of Chicago, where he befriended none other than US presidential candidate Barack Hussein Obama. In 2000 Khalidi held a successful fundraiser for Barack. I am not saying or inferring or suggesting that Obama did anything wrong in letting Khalidi hold a fund raiser. But I am willing to bet that it will become an issue in the general election. Barack also played a role in getting funding for Khalidis Arab American Action Network during his tenure on the board of the Woods Fund. That is another unexplored black hole.
And here is a shocking developmentDr. Khalidi has some strong opinions. During an appearance on Al-Jazeera (note, I also have appeared on Al-Jazeera, so that does not mean one is a reflexive anti-Semite) Khalidi said the following about the Washington Institute:
By God, I say that the participation of the sons or daughters of the Arabs in the plans and affairs of this institute is a huge error, this Israeli institute in Washington, an institute founded by AIPAC, the Zionist lobby, and that hosts tens of Israelis every year. The presence of an Arab or two each year cant disguise the nature of this institute as the most important center of Zionist interests in Washington for at least a decade. I very much regret the participation of Arab officials and non-officials and academics in the activities of this institute, because in fact if you look at the output of this institute, its directed against the Palestinians, against the Arabs, and against the Muslims in general. Its products describe the Palestinians as terrorists, and in fact its basic function is to spread lies and falsehoods about the Arab world, of course under an academic, scholarly veneer. Basically, this is the most important Zionist propaganda tool in the United States.
You may agree with Dr. Khalidis point of view. You may disagree. I agree with his basic point but that has nothing to do with the reality of politics. While Obama has made efforts to cultivate support among Jewish Americans, the attention that will inevitably be focused on his relationship with Khalidi will create some uncomfortable moments to say the least.
Then there is the public record. Despite Mr. Sterns insistence that Dr. Khalidi is a mere academic, a conservative academic site offers an alternative point of view. According to Campus Watch:
A glance at Khalidis work shows why this is a step in the wrong direction for Columbia University. His writings and statements routinely cross the line from education into a political advocacy that is not just extremist but often factually wrong. Four examples:On American foreign policy. Following Saddams 1990 invasion of Kuwait, Khalidi called the widespread resistance to this act of aggression an idiots consensus and called on his colleagues to combat it.[i] . . . .
Khalidi asserts that the U.S. government has yet to support the independence of Arab Palestine,[iii] despite open endorsement by President George W. Bush of a Palestinian state[iv], and nearly $1 billion in direct U.S. aid to the West Bank and Gaza since 1993.[v]
And beware anyone who disagrees with Khalidi! He throws reckless accusations out against them, such as calling Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz a fanatical, extreme right-wing Zionist.[vi]
On Palestinian violence. Khalidi glorifies anti-Israel violence as contributing to political enlightenment[vii] and unsurprisingly admires those who carry it out. His loyalty to Palestinian terrorist groups run so deep that he actually dedicated his 1986 valentine to the PLO, Under Siege, to those who gave their lives . . . in defense of the cause of Palestine and independence of Lebanon.[viii] The book whitewashes PLO violence against Israelis and Lebanese, as well as the Syrian occupation.
On media coverage. When Palestinian violence garners unfavorable publicity, Khalidis response it to blame the messenger, not the murderers. Thus, in response to Palestinians lynched two off-duty Israeli officers on October 12, 2000, Khalidi did not critique the perpetrators of this crime, but railed against the prostitute and cynical media that dared to show Palestinians triumphantly displaying bloodied hands after the killings. In like spirit, he faults not those Palestinians who erupted in joyous street celebrations at the murders of 3,000 Americans on 9/11, but the media for having the temerity to report these occurrences.[ix]
On Israel as a U.S. ally. In Khalidis fevered imagination, Israel is not a democratic ally but an apartheid system in creation and a destructive racist state. In his efforts to indict the Jewish state, Khalidi is quite prepared to make up accusations, such as his claim that Israels army has awful weapons of mass destruction (many supplied by the U.S.) that it has used in cities, villages and refugee camps.[x] This is a plain lie. That so few Americans agree with his bizarre reading of Israels democracy as a menacing enemy state causes him to dismiss them as brainwashed.[xi]
Remember, the point is not what U.S. policy should be toward Israel or Palestine. Instead, the question is the nature of the relationship between Barack Obama and Rashid Khalidi and how that can be exploited to the disadvantage of Obama and the Democrats in the general election. Fully explore the relationship now. Get the comments out on the table. Defuse the bomb before it goes off.
I dont know how much more clearly I can make this point. Nonetheless, I am sure I will be accused of fomenting hatred of Arabs, Palestinians, and Obama. Cest la vie
www.DiscoverTheNetwork.org |
Date: 2/19/2008 2:43:27 PM |
|
|
RASHID KHALIDI |
|
|
So many narratives...
No doubt Larry Johnson will get figuratively lynched for that disparaging attack on 'blackness'. Couldn't happen to a more deserving guy...
No doubt I will get figuratively lynched for using the term 'lynched'...
Not only does Barack Obama's church of 20 years support Hamas and Hezbollah but Barack Obama also has a long close friendship and financial association with suspected former PLO operative and Israel hater Rashid Khalidi.
Last night Sean Hannity dared to report Barack and Michelle Obama's radical associate and friend:
On Palestinian violence. Khalidi glorifies anti-Israel violence as contributing to political enlightenment[vii] and unsurprisingly admires those who carry it out. His loyalty to Palestinian terrorist groups run so deep that he actually dedicated his 1986 valentine to the PLO, Under Siege, to those who gave their lives . . . in defense of the cause of Palestine and independence of Lebanon.[viii] The book whitewashes PLO violence against Israelis and Lebanese, as well as the Syrian occupation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.