BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Riginslinger
Date: 07 Nov 08 - 07:41 PM

The AP is reporting that Jane Harman is on his short list for Secretary of Homeland Security!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: robomatic
Date: 06 Nov 08 - 10:31 PM

In my non-statistical conversations with Jews I drew the conclusions that most Jews voted for Obama because he was a Democrat and a (relative) liberal, and for the fewer who voted against him it was the Rev. Wright issue, and possibly, for some, a fear that he might not be so ardent a supporter of Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Nov 08 - 09:39 PM

Thanks, C. Ham, for those fascinating articles. I suppose it boils down to the fact that the Jewish community places great value on education. Therefore, being well educated, they can easily recognize propaganda for what it is--and treat it accordingly.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: C. Ham
Date: 06 Nov 08 - 09:20 AM

2008 ELECTIONS/OP-ED

Why Jews voted for Obama

By Marc Stanley


DALLAS (JTA) -- This year, once again, the Jewish community overwhelmingly supported the Democratic nominee for president. With the election of Barack Obama, Jewish voters selected a candidate who, despite an unprecedented smear campaign, represents the values of our community.

This year, we also heard the all-too-familiar claims that the Republican nominee would receive a record amount of the Jewish vote. Again, however, this prediction came up woefully short.

In every election cycle for the past 36 years, Republicans offered "sky is falling" predictions that Jewish voters would give significant support to the Republican nominee. A typical claim was when President George W. Bush's campaign chairman, Marc Racicot, predicted in 2004 that Bush would garner between 30 and 35 percent of the Jewish vote. Despite the Republicans' history of failed forecasts of the Jewish vote prior to 2004, their delusional claims persisted.

In 2004, the media largely bought into the argument that Bush would receive a significant portion of the Jewish vote. A New Republic piece by Lawrence Kaplan titled "Kerry's Jewish Problem" typefied the media's fascination with the prospect that Sen. John Kerry would receive an unusually small portion of the Jewish vote. The media frenzy led many to give credence to Republican claims about the Jewish vote four years ago.

Despite the Republican theory about Jewish voters, results from Election Day 2004 showed the usual overwhelming Jewish support for Kerry. In fact, since 1972, when exit polls were first instituted, the Republican nominee has averaged only 27 percent of the Jewish vote. In recent elections, the Republican nominee has received even less, with Jewish support at 22 percent for Bush in 2004 and 19 percent in 2000, and 16 percent for Bob Dole in 1996. In 2006, the Jewish support of Democratic congressional candidates reached 87 percent.

Nonetheless, the media remained enticed by persistent Republican claims about the Jewish vote during this election cycle. The endless attempt by the media to report the "man bites dog story" led to news articles such as "Obama's Jewish Problem" (Politico, March 13, 2007) and "Obama's Struggle to Secure the Jewish Vote" (NBC, May 23, 2008). Again, this year's supporters of the Republican nominee and members of the media prematurely reported that John McCain would receive a dramatically increased percentage of Jewish support with Obama as the Democratic nominee.

In the early months of the election campaign, the polls projected Obama would receive about 60 percent of the Jewish community's support. Sensing an opportunity to capture a sizable number of Jewish voters, McCain supporters engaged in an unprecedented campaign in the Jewish community. This campaign not only included efforts to paint Obama as an anti-American Muslim, but it also implied that an Obama presidency could bring a second Holocaust. The campaign was widely criticized and outraged many in the Jewish communities they targeted.

As Election Day drew closer and the Jewish community learned more about the two candidates, polling showed that Obama's support in the Jewish community increased to between 70 and 74 percent. Ultimately the Jewish community supported the Democratic nominee in overwhelming numbers. According to exit polling from Tuesday's election, Obama received 78 percent of the Jewish vote – about 25 percent greater than Obama's percentage of total support nationally. That exceeded everyone's expectations.

There are two reasons for this performance. First, Jewish voters took a very close look at both candidates in the final 10 weeks of the campaign. Obama's performance in the debates belied the GOP narrative that he could not be trusted, while McCain's pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate undermined his Jewish support.

Second, Jewish Democrats -- the National Jewish Democratic Council, along with the Obama campaign and other independent efforts -- were better organized than ever.

Every four years, like a broken record, we are subjected to the refrain from Republicans that "this is gong to be the year the Jewish community votes Republican" -- but it never proves true. Somewhat prophetically, Ethan Porter of The New Republic got it right last week when he reported that "the fear that Jews might desert the Democratic Party comes up every four years" but "this theory might finally be put to bed."

Indeed, as it has for the last three decades, the theory that Jewish voters would significantly support the Republican nominee again has been discredited.

(Marc Stanley is the chairman of the National Jewish Democratic Council.)

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Nov 08 - 04:01 PM

Well, they didn't win over Joe Lieberman!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: C. Ham
Date: 05 Nov 08 - 02:56 PM

Here is the JYA story.


Jews looked past worries to embrace Obama

By Ron Kampeas

WASHINGTON (JTA) – For some Jewish voters, the strangeness of Barack Obama was like a recurring dream: unsettling and then settling in, and then, suddenly, revelatory.

Ari Wallach described breaking through to elderly Jews in Florida who had resisted voting for the son of the man from Kenya, the tall black man with the middle name "Hussein."

"It wasn't only his policy on Israel and Iran, on health care," said Wallach, whose Jewsvote.org led the "Great Shlep," an effort to prod young adults to get their Jewish grandparents in Florida to vote for Obama. "His biography feels so Jewish, it feels like an Ellis Island archetype. People felt more comfortable when I talked about where he came from, it resonated so deeply—surprisingly among older Jews."

For months, polls showed Obama languishing at about 60 percent of the Jewish vote, a critical chunk short of the 75 percent or so Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) garnered in 2004. But exit polls from the Tuesday election showed Obama matching those results, garnering about 78 percent of the Jewish vote against 22 percent for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), his Republican rival.

Wallach credited the campaign's late-campaign blitz of Jewish communities, joined by groups like his own, for converting the candidate from stranger to standard bearer for a Jewish ethos.

"It resonated much more than I thought it was going through in these parts of the Jewish community," he said.

It was an uphill battle, starting with rumors that Obama was a hidden Muslim, that he wasn't a genuine, born American. The subterranean campaign soon burst through semi-legitimate and then legitimate forums; Obama was not a Muslim, these conservatives and Republicans said, but he might have been raised a Muslim and later had radical associations.

The Republican Jewish Coalition ran ads coupling critiques on Obama's dovish policies with guilt-by-association jabs at his former pastor who embraced Third World liberation theology, at associates at the University of Chicago and during his early political career who had radical pasts, at advisers who had once delivered sharp critiques of Israel and the pro-Israel community. The negative campaign glossed over Obama's deep ties in the Chicago Jewish community and how he has picked a pre-eminently pro-Israel foreign policy team.

Matt Brooks, the RJC's executive director, said the ads raised legitimate questions about Obama's judgment, and had an effect: Obama was outpolling Kerry among Jews by only about 2 percent, he said, whereas he was doing much better than Kerry had among other constituencies, including Catholics, blacks and Hispanics.

"This is a huge political tsunami that has hit Republicans across the board," Brooks said, referring to the economic crisis that helped precipitate Obama's blowout win on Tuesday.

"It's a testament to McCain that we've done as strongly as we have to hold onto our support," he said, noting that Obama's Jewish results lagged slightly behind showings for Al Gore in 2000, and for Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996.

Brooks said he stood by his group's ad campaign. "There's no reason for regrets," he said. "We had an important and meaningful debate in the community."

Democrats said the overwhelming Jewish rejection of the campaign made them proud.

"I'm ecstatic by the outcome and the confidence the Jewish community showed Obama in the teeth of some of the nastiest campaigning I've ever seen," said Ira Forman, the executive director of the National Jewish Democratic Council. "People got a chance in the last three months to see Barack Obama and the idea that they should be afraid or frightened didn't wash."

Key to the effort were waves of Jewish surrogates—chief among them U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler (D-Fla.)—who blanketed Jewish communities in swing states in the campaign's final weeks. Wexler had been on board with the Obama campaign from the outset. A number of other surrogates who had been loyal to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) added weight to the campaign once she conceded the primaries race over the summer.

"I've never seen a presidential campaign so well-organized in the Jewish community," Forman said, referring to the Obama outreach effort.

"I really think it's the triumph of hope over fear, of possibility over pessimism," said Rabbi Dayle Friedman, a Philadelphia-area rabbi who served as a co-chair of the national Rabbis for Obama.

"My mother-in-law is a Holocaust survivor in her 80s and she said to me this morning, 'He's a good man, I believe in what he said.' "

Friedman, whose rabbinic focus is serving Jewish senior citizens, spent much of her time reaching out to seniors, who were courted heavily, particularly in swing states, by both campaigns.

"Somehow, the integrity and the urgency of the possibility of this candidate spoke to people way more powerfully than all the nasty scare tactics that were thrown at him," she said.

Echoing the view of many of Obama's most ardent supporters, Friedman called the process of the campaign "just as transformative, if not more, than the results, the millions of volunteers that included so many Jews, old and young, who were so passionately engaged."

It remains to be seen whether the concerns Brooks and the RJC pushed forward will eventuate. In his acceptance speech, Obama once again coupled diplomatic outreach with a tough take-all-comers posture.

"A new dawn of American leadership is at hand," he said. "To those who would tear the world down, we will defeat you; to those who seek peace and security, we support you."

J-Street, the liberal pro-Israel lobby that led a campaign to get Jewish newspapers to reject the RJC ads, said it was vindicated.

"Tonight, American Jews resoundingly rejected the two-year, multimillion dollar campaign of baseless smears and fear waged against him by the right wing of our community," J-Street's director, Jeremy Ben-Ami, said in a statement. "Surrogates and right-wing political operatives in our community stopped at nothing in their efforts to sway Jewish voters against Obama. With exit polls showing Barack Obama's share of the Jewish vote equal to 2004 levels, it is absolutely clear that their efforts failed."

Some Democrats said McCain, once popular among Jews because of his willingness to reach across the aisle, hurt himself in the community by choosing the deeply conservative and relatively inexperienced Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate.

An American Jewish Committee poll commissioned in September found that 54 percent of American Jews disapproved of the Palin pick, compared to just 15 percent who disapproved of Obama's decision to tap Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.).

But Obama's appeal to Jews might have been most deeply rooted in shared values, said Mik Moore, Wallach's partner in JewsVote.org.

"Folks just wanted to be with us, with the more progressive candidate; it's where their heart is," he said.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: C. Ham
Date: 05 Nov 08 - 11:34 AM

According to JTA, the exit polls show Obama took 78% of the Jewish vote despite the scare mongering of the McCain-Palin campaign aimed at the Jewish community.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Amos
Date: 22 May 08 - 11:54 PM

Obama's speech was first-rate, and I am glad he got to show his actual face to the doubters and fearers and skeptics there.

My sense has always been that the Jewish people who are "afraid of" him are dealing in false pictures of who he is and what he stands for.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Azizi
Date: 22 May 08 - 11:45 PM

Senator Barack Obama gave a speech today to about 700 people the B'nai Torah Synagogue in Boca Raton, Florida today. That speech and the questions & answers period his prepared remarks focused largely on American-Israeli relations.

Here's a link to a video excerpt of that speech:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qm7bjP77qdw

Barack Obama Courts Jewish Voters in Boca Raton, FLA; May 22, 2008

**
In addition, see this dailykos diary and comments about that speech:
That diary also includes two other videos of that event:

Obama at the B'nai Torah synagogue (video)
by rontun
Thu May 22, 2008 at 07:07:54 PM PDT
Presumptive Democratic Presidential nominee

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/22/211440/447/854/520869

Here are some comments from another political blog, http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=1251 ,about that audience's reaction to Obama:

PalGirl2008, on May 22nd, 2008 at 2:56 pm Said:
outstanding townhall meeting…….
the questions were tough, the answers were brillinat, the intercation between Obama and the audience was awesome.

Franco, on May 22nd, 2008 at 2:59 pm Said:
I just got 2 text messag. from Jewish friends who were at the town hall just now, they said the energy in the room was unbelievable, and that he won big there, they said the talk before he showed up was not good, but after Wexlers speech and then Obamas answers, they said people all around said,and I quote.."looks like we are in the room with the next president of the United States"

Shavon, on May 22nd, 2008 at 2:59 pm Said:
PalGirl2008,
This audience was perhaps the most intellectually saavy this primary season yet between ALL the candidates. Really smart, tough questions with brilliant answers to each one.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 May 08 - 10:05 PM

"...the countries that voted against the Rome Statute of the International Court were: Iraq, Israel, Libya, the People's Republic of China, Qatar, the United States, and Yemen."


                   One would think they must have something in common!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Wolfgang
Date: 21 May 08 - 09:59 AM

...the countries that voted against the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court....

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Wolfgang
Date: 21 May 08 - 09:57 AM

Just BTW, the countries that voted against the Rome Statute of the International Court were:

Iraq, Israel, Libya, the People's Republic of China, Qatar, the United States, and Yemen.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Wolfgang
Date: 21 May 08 - 09:47 AM

I see that the World Court has already declared that both the apartheid wall and settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are illegal.

Israel has not signed on to the World Court and does not recognize its rulings. (Carol)

It seems to me that you use the same expression for two different institutions.

An attempt to clarify what you have muddled:

The "World Court" that has declared the wall illegal is the "International Court of Justice". All UN members (like Israel) are automatically parties of its statute which has not prevented many countries not to recognise the advisory opinions of the court in the past.

The "World Court" Israel and close to 100 others countries (including the USA) have not signed to yet is the "International Criminal Court".

Both courts BTW are seated in The Hague which makes the confusion understandable.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Nickhere
Date: 20 May 08 - 07:08 PM

Eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 May 08 - 06:59 PM

"They could have built thriving cities in Gaza and the West Bank"

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Nickhere
Date: 20 May 08 - 06:54 PM

Good point McGrath. One life lost is one too many, especially if it's someone close to you. Wasn't it Stalin who said 'the death of one man is a tragedy, of millions is s statistic'?
And I wonder if anyone who whittles down the number of palestinian refugees could be called a 'Nakba-denier'? (Not that I'm saying millions were forced into exile...)

It is my impression that Israel might be more favourable to a two-state solution given that, as has been noted above on this thread, a single state would leave Jewish Israelis numerically in the minority.

Of course there is a whole other possible debate here on whether any country that boasts western democratic values can set itself up as a mono-ethnic theocracy. Could Ireland, for example, decide that as we had suffered centuries of colonisation (we have the distinction of having been colonised long before even the Carribean and America), apartheid and progroms (the Penal times), genocide by default (1 million dead 1845-9, 1 million forced into exile) and so on (the whole world is wearily familiar with our woes... ;-)) ) ... would it be acceptable for us for our 'secured ongoing existence' to set up a Catholic Ireland where we pressurised all non-Irish-catholics to leave by making things as uncomfortable as possible for them, treating them as second class citizens, colonising Scotland and driving the Scots out, simply helping ourselves to whatever we liked there and building where we liked, on Old McDonald's farm while he watched helplessly from the sidelines, held back from doing anything by our well-armed soldiers... etc.,

I wonder how long we'd get away with it.

I don't think any two-state solution will either be acceptable or work if Israel refuses to demolish its illegal West Bank settlements and withdraw to its 1967 borders. I can't see it doing that in a hurry. It pulled its settlements out of Gaza simply to concentrate them in the West Bank, now crisscrossed by roads on which only Israeli Jews may drive without a permit. Palestinians have different colour licence plates etc., all sounds eerily familiar.

Since Israel seems determined to expand to Jordan's borders at least, perhaps the one-state solution isn't such a bad idea. Of course it would also need to cease being a discriminatory state (verging on apartheid).

Sigh. We'll just have to wait and see, but I reckon it has a better chance of happening under Obama than with Bush.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: CarolC
Date: 20 May 08 - 06:48 PM

...or they could have lived in their place of origin in freedom instead of being forced to flee at the point of a gun.

The Palestinians were under no obligation to agree to being removed from their homes and their land and transported to someone else's land. That is ethnic cleansing. And nobody had a right to force, or even to expect them to agree to it.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 20 May 08 - 06:36 PM

The reason the numbers are important is that 3/4 million Palestinian Arabs could have had a nation in 1948. They and their progeny could have been celebrating the 60th anniversary this year, just as the Israelis have.

That nation could have thrived as a under the aegis of (Trans)Jordan, which had been lopped off of Palestine in the 1920s to accommodate the Hashemite sheiks. Having rejected the partition (and thereby a country) they could have lived and thrived in Jordan, but that country, nor all the Arab world refused to take them in, but kept them in camps away from the general populace, in hopes of destroying Israel.

There is no reason even today for Palestinian Arabs to live as refugees. They could have built thriving cities in Gaza and the West Bank (Palestine), but they choose squalor for the masses, and confrontation by the elite with Israel...and even Lebanon.

So the three-quarter million have grown to 3-5 million souls, most of whom are little better off than they were in pre-war Palestine, Jordan or Lebanon.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 May 08 - 05:47 PM

When people argue about the actual numbers involved in some historic atrocity on this kind of nightmarish scale, it always seems to me they are in danger of missing the point.

Whether it's the Holocaust or the Nakba, this shouldn't be treated as a matter of totting up figures for the Guinness Book of Records. "Only 800,000"... "Only 3 million"... As if in some way coming up with reduced figure made a significant difference.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 May 08 - 10:33 AM

"Same with the US. We don't recognize it either."


                   That's right! I'd forgotten that. It's funny how these two countries seem to be joined at the hip. A little separation surgery might be in order.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Ghost of Electricity (inactive)
Date: 20 May 08 - 10:16 AM

"Anyone sitting at that negotiation table that doesn't fully undertand that 4,000,000 Palestinains were displaced in 1948 doesn't belong at that table because without that knowledge there can be no settlement."

Anybody who doesn't understand that the number of Palestinians displaced in 1948 was approximately 750,000 should do their homework.

Approximately 800,000 Jews were displaced from various Arab countries in the wake of Israel's creation.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 May 08 - 10:44 PM

Bobert,

I do not think that you are so stupid that you will not realize that a number twice the TOTAL population of Palestine, including Jews, could not be Palestinian Arab Moslim refugees.

Why do you insist that a single person telling a lie is to be believed over common sense, statistics, reality, etc. If this is an example of your numerical skill, I fail to see how you can be taken seriously if you mention numbers, percents, fractions, or any other quantitative measure.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 May 08 - 10:33 PM

No.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Bobert
Date: 17 May 08 - 10:26 PM

See the other thread, BB... You are wrong...

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 May 08 - 10:20 PM

"that 4,000,000 Palestinains were displaced in 1948"


Since they were not, and you have been informed, I will presume you mean to keep spreading this false number.

"Of the 1,358,000 Palestinian Arab citizens of Palestine in 1948, approximately 873;600 resided within what would become the Israeli borders, 485,000 without. The Israelis recorded 156,000 non-Jews in 1948, a number that included perhaps 1,000 non-Arabs, leaving 155,000 Palestinians in Israel. This means that 718,000 Palestinians either were refugees or died during the war. Note that this number depends on the somewhat imprecise estimation of the numbers who lived on both sides of the border before the war, and so should be taken as a mean estimate."

So your WAG of 4 million is a lot like your other statistics- without merit. THREE times as many as the ENTIRE non-Jewish population??? Or are you saying the other ARAB nations sent a few more along, just to keep them company?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Bobert
Date: 17 May 08 - 10:13 PM

Two things are certain:

1.) The next president is going to have to make a major effort to bring some settlement in the Isreali/Palestinian situation and...

2.) Anyone sitting at that negotiation table that doesn't fully undertand that 4,000,000 Palestinains were displaced in 1948 doesn't belong at that table because without that knowledge there can be no settlement...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: CarolC
Date: 17 May 08 - 10:06 PM

Same with the US. We don't recognize it either.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 May 08 - 09:59 PM

"Israel has not signed on to the World Court and does not recognize its rulings."


                     It's interesting that they can avoid confrontation simply by ignoring that justice exists.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 May 08 - 07:39 PM

can't imagine Barack translates very well.

It does actually - spelt Baruch. It's the name of a Jewish prophet, and there's a Book of Baruch in the Bible (part of the apocrypha, doesn't get in all versions). Different spelling, same name. Means Blessed, just like Benedict.

Rather fittingly/ironically, in the Eastern Church the Book of Baruch "is considered an extension of the Book of Jeremiah, and is announced in the services as "Jeremiah"...
....................
Yes, Azizi, what you said is what I meant by this being a minefield, with lots of boobytraps set for Obama especially

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: CarolC
Date: 17 May 08 - 11:50 AM

I see that the World Court has already declared that both the apartheid wall and settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are illegal.

Israel has not signed on to the World Court and does not recognize its rulings.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 May 08 - 11:25 AM

"If this issue were to go to the world court... I think the court would be able to not only convict Israel of war crimes, but it would also rule that Israel's occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem are illegal (as the UN has already done)."


                   And it doesn't go to the world court, why?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Azizi
Date: 17 May 08 - 07:54 AM

Here's another online article that reinforces my theory that Obama's minefield with regard to Israeli/Palestinian politics is more treacherous than most US politicians because he has to debunk the rumors that he is Muslim himself.

Jan 29, 2008 0:19 | Updated Jan 29, 2008 12:08
Obama: Palestinian refugees can't return
By Hillary Leila Krieger and Tovah Lazaroff, Miami; Jerusalem Post

"Palestinian refugees belong in their own state and do not have a "literal" right of return to Israel, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Monday.

"The outlines of any agreement would involve ensuring that Israel remains a Jewish state," Obama told The Jerusalem Post and other members of the Jewish and Israeli press on a conference call. He reiterated his support for a two-state solution, but said, "We cannot move forward until there is some confidence that the Palestinians are able to provide the security apparatus that would prevent constant attacks against Israel from taking place."

His conversation with reporters and his support for the Israeli position on refugees came on the heels of scurrilous charges that Obama is secretly a Muslim who received a radical Wahhabi education.

"There has been a constant and virulent smear campaign via the Internet that has been particularly targeted against the Jewish community," he said. "It is absolutely false. I have never practiced Islam. I was raised by my secular mother, and I have been a member of the Christian religion and an active Christian."

Obama said he wanted to speak personally on the subject so that voters in the Jewish community could hear "from the horse's mouth" that "there is no substance there and that there is a strong and deep commitment and connection to the Jewish community that should not be questioned."

Obama has also recently articulated stances in support of Israel and Jewish issues, including his comments during the conference call, as well as a letter he sent Tuesday urging that America not endorse a UN Security Council resolution on Gaza that doesn't condemn Hamas's rocket attacks on Israel.

"The right of return [to Israel] is something that is not an option in a literal sense," Obama said during the call - though he noted, "The Palestinians have a legitimate concern that a state have a contiguous coherent mass that would allow the state to function effectively."...

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1201523779464

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Azizi
Date: 17 May 08 - 07:47 AM

Here's an online article that I think fairly represented comments that Barack Obama made regarding Palestinians:

Obama: Palestinians Matter, Too
posted by Ari Berman on 03/14/2007 @ 09:59am

"Barack Obama did the unthinkable recently: he had the audacity to mention the Palestinians.

"Nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people," Obama told voters in Iowa on Sunday. That remark hardly endeared him to the hawkish pro-Israel supporters at AIPAC, where Obama (and Hillary) spoke on Monday.

According to the New York Times, Obama and Hillary held dueling receptions to woo Jewish voters. Hillary offered the standard pro-Israel line, even displaying a sign spelling her name in Hebrew (can't imagine Barack translates very well).

In the past, Obama has spoken highly of the Palestinian people and the calamities they've faced. No doubt, his opponents will now try and use that against him"...

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion?pid=175173

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Azizi
Date: 17 May 08 - 07:44 AM

Sorry about my mistake with that bold font commands.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Azizi
Date: 17 May 08 - 07:43 AM

...it's easy to understand why a politician in his situation might feel a need to be extra-cautious in anything he says in this minefield.
-McGrath of Harlow

I agree that US politicians have to walk minefields with regard to Israeli/Palestinian issues. However, it seems to me that the false rumors that Barack Obama is or was a Muslim adds to the political minefield that he has to walk with regard to Israeli/Palestinian issues. It seems as though any comment Barack Obama makes on those issues will be heavily scrutinized with that rumor in mind. Also, it seems to me that any support Obama receives from Muslims or from Palestinians as well as any contact that Obama himself or persons associated with his campaign have ever had with persons who are Muslim or persons of Arab descent, or persons who are Palestinians has been and will be unfairly used as proof of the false allegations that Obama prefers Muslim people to Jewish people because he is or was a Muslim himself.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: CarolC
Date: 16 May 08 - 10:15 PM

For the same reason a cat makes itself look as big as it possibly can when it's being threatened by a dog.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 May 08 - 09:55 PM

And Egypt demanded the removal of the UN troops because WHY???

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: CarolC
Date: 16 May 08 - 09:48 PM

The quotes cited by CarolC are the opinions of individuals, an opinion does not constitute a fact.

Some of them are. And those are the opinions of members of the Israeli military and the Israeli government. However, the announcement made by Israel that it intended to attack Syria and overthrow its government is not an opinion, it is a statement of intent.

If this issue were to go to the world court, with the witness testimonies we have and the words of these members of the Israeli government, as well as quite a lot of declassified Israeli government documents, I think the court would be able to not only convict Israel of war crimes, but it would also rule that Israel's occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem are illegal (as the UN has already done).

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: CarolC
Date: 16 May 08 - 09:40 PM

Nasser had sent an emissary to the US because he didn't want to go to war with Israel, and he was seeking a way to avoid it. Talks had been scheduled, but Israel attacked Egypt before the talks could take place. Israel wanted a war, Egypt did not.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 May 08 - 08:18 PM

I'd have preferred it if he had put it that way, with a mention of the Palestinian parents who have far more reason for those kind of fears for their children than their Israeli neighbours. But it's easy to understand why a politician in his situation might feel a need to be extra-cautious in anything he says in this minefield.

I have a feeling that it might not make that much difference to Palestinians who wins this election - and just trust that any of the runners will be better than the present incumbent. Which wouldn't be difficult.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Azizi
Date: 16 May 08 - 07:32 PM

bobad, thanks for posting that article.

I wonder what Boehner's said about Goldberg's comment that "Mr. Boehner, I'm sure, is a terribly busy man, with many burdensome responsibilities, so I have to assume that he simply didn't have time to read the entire Obama interview, or even the entire paragraph, or even a single clause. If he had, of course, he would have seen that Obama was clearly calling the Middle East conflict, and not Israel, a sore," Goldberg wrote. "Why, there's no one who would disagree that the Middle East conflict is a 'sore,' is there?"
Ouch! :o)

Also, with regards to Senator Obama's comment "I want to make sure that the people of Israel, when they kiss their kids and put them on that bus, feel at least no more existential dread than any parent does whenever their kids leave their sight", the reference to "people of Israel" could have been also "Palestinian people", "people of Iraq", etc etc world wide, including people of the United States. That's why I want Barack Obama to be the next USA president instead of John McCain who will just continue George W. Bush's disastrous foreign policies.

I agree with the statement that Obama "has a vision to change America so that it leads the "world community but not with domination and arrogance." Just because a Hamas official said it doesn't mean that that statement is wrong. And it also doesn't mean that Barack Obama supports Hamas.

Also, I believe that a president Barack Obama would be fairer to Palestinians' short term and long term concerns than a president John McCain would be.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 May 08 - 07:23 PM

Another good reason to avoid Obama!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 May 08 - 06:57 PM

"Obama spent a good deal of the interview stressing his support for a variety of positions held by most prominent Jewish organizations, including the U.S. policy of boycotting Hamas unless it recognizes Israel, renounces violence and honors past agreements with Jerusalem. He also strongly rejected former President Jimmy Carter's use of the term apartheid in connection to Israel, saying the term was "emotionally loaded, historically inaccurate, and it's not what I believe.""


Good enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: bobad
Date: 16 May 08 - 06:47 PM

Azizi, there is button to click on the JTA site that says something like read the article without registering, but in any case I will post it here.

NEW YORK (JTA) -- The Democratic race may have a few more weeks left, but Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain are already waging a bruising battle for Jewish support in the general election.

In recent days, the McCain team has stepped up its efforts to link Obama to Hamas, with several surrogates
also misrepresenting the Democratic candidate's comments to make it seem as if he had criticized Israel in harsh terms.

At the same time, Obama has been stepping up his outreach to Jewish voters, giving several high-profile interviews and speeches outlining his support for Israel and ties to the Jewish community.

In addition to granting lengthy interviews to Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic and Martin Peretz, the editor-in-chief of The New Republic -- two journalists well known and respected among many pro-Israel activists -- he also spoke at last week's Israel 60 event hosted by the Israel Embassy in Washington. Obama was also scheduled to spend several days campaigning in Florida next week.

The flurry of campaign activity comes as a new poll shows Jewish voters overwhelmingly backing Obama over McCain, but suggesting that the Arizona Republican currently commands more support than previous GOP nominees.

According to the poll, conducted by Gallup, Obama would win 61 to 32 percent among Jews, slightly less than the 66 to 27 percent advantage that U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) would have over McCain.

Some Republicans were quick to note that either number would represent a significant drop from the 80 percent or so that Bill Clinton and Al Gore each reportedly won in their respective presidential runs, or the 75 percent that John Kerry took in 2004. Some Democrats, meanwhile, were insisting that Obama's figures would go up once the media and voters began focusing their attention on McCain's support for a range of conservative positions. Just last week, for example, he promised he would appoint U.S. Supreme Court justices like John Roberts and Samuel Alito.

The apparent potential for movement in either direction appears to be energizing partisans on both sides, and has insiders predicting an increasingly bitter fight.

The big flap this week involved Obama's lengthy interview about Israel and the Middle East with The Atlantic.

Obama spent a good deal of the interview stressing his support for a variety of positions held by most prominent Jewish organizations, including the U.S. policy of boycotting Hamas unless it recognizes Israel, renounces violence and honors past agreements with Jerusalem. He also strongly rejected former President Jimmy Carter's use of the term apartheid in connection to Israel, saying the term was "emotionally loaded, historically inaccurate, and it's not what I believe."

During the interview, Obama also recalled that from his days in elementary school, "as a kid who never felt like he was rooted," there was something "powerful and compelling" to him about the Jewish and Zionist narrative of enduring tragedy and returning home.

But top GOP lawmakers and the Republican Jewish Coalition were quick to pounce on a portion of the interview in which Obama insisted that he did not see Israel as a "drag" on America's reputation overseas, but described the continuing Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a "constant wound" and a "constant sore" that infects all of U.S. foreign policy.

The minority leader of the U.S. House of Representatives, John Boehner (R-Ohio), and U.S. Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), another top-ranking House Republican and the body's only Jewish GOPer, both issued statements claiming that Obama had used those terms to describe Israel, rather than the conflict. The Republican Jewish Coalition also criticized Obama's remarks.

Goldberg, who conducted the interview, responded with a biting blog post about Boehner's statement

"Mr. Boehner, I'm sure, is a terribly busy man, with many burdensome responsibilities, so I have to assume that he simply didn't have time to read the entire Obama interview, or even the entire paragraph, or even a single clause. If he had, of course, he would have seen that Obama was clearly calling the Middle East conflict, and not Israel, a sore," Goldberg wrote. "Why, there's no one who would disagree that the Middle East conflict is a 'sore,' is there?

Goldberg then invited Boehner to issue a correction stating "the obvious, which is that Obama expressed -- in twelve different ways -- his support for Israel to me."

Even before the scuffle over The Atlantic interview, Obama and his supporters were crying foul over the McCain camp's repeated references to the fact that one Hamas official was quoted as saying that he favored Obama because he has a vision to change America so that it leads the "world community but not with domination and arrogance."

"I think it's very clear who Hamas wants to be the next president of the United States. I think people should understand that I would be Hamas' worst nightmare," McCain said. "If Senator Obama is favored by Hamas, I think people can make judgments accordingly."

Obama, in an interview Sunday with Wolf Blitzer on CNN, called McCain's comments a "smear," noting that the two candidates have expressed virtually identical positions on Hamas. He called the comments an example of the Arizona Republican "losing his bearings as he pursues this nomination."

The context would seem to suggest that Obama was referring to the fact that McCain has repeatedly expressed his desire for a clean campaign about issues. But a McCain aide issued a statement accusing Obama of making a crack about the Republican's age.

In a separate interview with Blitzer on Sunday, McCain's most prominent Jewish backer, U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), also raised the Hamas issue. Lieberman said that McCain has made clear that Obama "clearly doesn't support any of the values and goals of Hamas," but the question is why would someone associated with the terrorist group favor Obama.

"It suggests the difference between these two candidates," Lieberman said.

In his interview with The Atlantic, Obama offered an explanation for why some right-leaning members of the Jewish community might have a problem with him. The Illinois Democrat said that he was absolutely convinced that "some of the tensions that might arise between me and some of the more hawkish elements in the Jewish community in the United States might stem from the fact that I'm not going to blindly adhere to whatever the most hawkish position is just because that's the safest ground politically."

"I want to solve the problem, and so my job in being a friend to Israel is partly to hold up a mirror and tell the truth," he said, citing the issue of settlements as one example where tough questions need to be asked.

"I want to make sure that the people of Israel, when they kiss their kids and put them on that bus, feel at least no more existential dread than any parent does whenever their kids leave their sight," Obama said. "So that then becomes the question: Is settlement policy conducive to relieving that over the long term, or is it just making the situation worse? That's the question that has to be asked."

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Azizi
Date: 16 May 08 - 06:43 PM

I just realized my comment on 16 May 08 - 06:30 PM post was the
200th post to this thread.

Sorry, leadfingers or whoever else might have been aiming to get that number.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Azizi
Date: 16 May 08 - 06:39 PM

Ghost of Electricity, would you please post some excerpts from that JTA article about Obama vs. McCain whose link you provided in your
16 May 08 - 01:16 PM post to this thread.

That website has a sign-in process in which you have to give your email address and come up with a password in order to read its articles. That's all well and good, but I prefer not to do that.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: bobad
Date: 16 May 08 - 06:38 PM

The quotes cited by CarolC are the opinions of individuals, an opinion does not constitute a fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 May 08 - 06:32 PM

What military commander will state that he was in danger of losing- AFTER he had won a decisive victory...

Just for one such, the Duke of Wellington talking about the Battle of Waterloo - "A damn close run thing". (Actually his exact words were "It has been a damn nice thing - the nearest run thing you ever saw...", which means the same, but tradition has edited and perhaps improved the quote, as happens.)

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: Azizi
Date: 16 May 08 - 06:30 PM

Ghost of Electricity, with regard to your 15 May 08 - 03:56 PM post asking that folks "post about the policies of Barack Obama (who is very possibly the next president) in regard to Zionism, the Jewish people, the peace process, etc", well ya see how well that worked, don't ya?

I mean why start a new thread about the subject of Israel and Palestine if this thread is available for the posting?

My comment doesn't mean that I don't recognize the importance of the topic of the history and current political situation between Israel and Palestine. But that wasn't what this thread was supposed to be about.

But then again this is Mudcat, and I know that I've been known to go off topic on some threads...But still, the topic that was supposed to be the topic of this thread woulda been interesting to talk about...

Subject: RE: BS: Obama on Zionism, Jews
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 May 08 - 06:24 PM

"This action was a response to Israel's stated intention to attack Syria and overthrow it's government."


Oh. let me understand- "Israel is going to attack our defensive forces- we better get all these witnesses and the forces that are keeping the Israelis from attacking us out of the way."


Right.