Obama's Pro-Palestine Leanings Evident Early On

The American Thinker has a great article pointing our that Barack Obama's pro-Palestinian tendecies were evident long before he became President.
In fact, Obama flirted with (and praised) radical PLO sympathizers.
But, for the most part the mainstream liberal media shielded the public from these alarming leanings. There were a few exceptions (as the article notes) but the media didn't want to alarm voters lest it derail the Obama juggernaut.
Here's an excerpt from the article:

When President Barack Obama publicly endorsed the Palestinian view of Israel's future this week, he took many Americans, including many of his Jewish-American supporters, by surprise.  Had the media been doing their job, he would not have surprised anyone.

In April 2008, Peter Wallsten of the Los Angeles Times wrote a lengthy article titled "Allies of Palestinians see a friend in Obama."  The article pulled some of its information from a video shot at a 2003 farewell dinner for Rashid Khalidi, a Palestinian booster and a de facto spokesman for the PLO during his Beirut years.  Khalidi, who had spent several years at the University of Chicago, was leaving for New York.

Domestic terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn reportedly attended the dinner as well.  This would make sense.  Khalidi begins the acknowledgment section of his 2004 book, Resurrecting Empire, with a tribute to the guy who lived -- and edited -- in their neighborhood.  "First, chronologically and in other ways," writes Khalidi, "comes Bill Ayers."  Unlike the calculating Obama, Khalidi had no reason to be coy about this relationship.

At the dinner, Obama thanked Khalidi and his wife for the many meals they had shared chez Khalidi and for reminding Obama of "my own blind spots and my own biases."  Obama hoped that "we continue that conversation -- a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid's dinner table [...] [but around] this entire world."

Click here to read more.

Contact Hearst; Tell Them:Dismiss Helen Thomas!

You can call or e-mail Hearst corporate communications chief Paul Luthringer and tell him that Hearst needs to get rid of Helen Thomas. Fire her.
Call Paul Luthringer at 212-649-2540 or e-mail him at pluthringer@hearst.com.
Tell him that Helen Thomas must go.
Here's my e-mail to Luthringer:
Dear Mr. Luthringer:
The Hearst Corporation must directly and bluntly address the Helen Thomas imbroglio.
As a lifelong public relations practitioner, I understand that you have a responsibility to protect the reputation of a valued American brand. So, it makes sense that Hearst would issue a statement separating itself from Thomas' outrageously bigoted remarks.
But that's not enough. And neither is Thomas' apology.
Thomas has now already admitted she "crossed the line." Indeed she did. And her actions warrant dismissal.
It behooves the Hearst Corporation to fire Helen Thomas now. That is the right thing to do.
Hearst is her employer. And so long as that is the case, Hearst will be tainted with and by this mess. You need to make a complete break with Helen Thomas.
You need to do it not just for the reputation of the corporation but because it is the right thing to do.
Don't delay. Do it now.
Respectfully,
Dan Cirucci

Fire Helen Thomas: Here's How!

It's long past time for Helen Thomas to leave her post in the White House press corps.
Her recent remarks calling for Jews to "get the hell out of Palestine" and "go back to Poland; go back to Germany" are a disgrace. She's a bigot.
But Helen Thomas will not leave of her on accord.
She apparently has no class; no decency; no sensibility.
She seems to be a stubborn old fool who doesn't want to budge.
So, she will have to be removed by her employer, the Hearst Corporation.
So far, Hearst has dissociated itself from Thomas' scurrilous remarks but the company will not say that it will fire her.
This is where you come in.
You can call or e-mail Hearst corporate communications chief Paul Luthringer and tell him that Hearst needs to get rid of Helen Thomas. Fire her.
Call Paul Luthringer at 212-649-2540 or e-mail him at pluthringer@hearst.com.
Tell him that Helen Thomas must go.
Helen Thomas wants to get the Jews the hell out of Israel. But now, we want to get Thomas the hell out of the White House.
And we can succeed.
Do it today!

Helen Thomas Must Go

It's time to show Helen Thomas the door -- the White House door.
And she shouldn't let that door hit her in the ass on the way out.
Thomas has been part of the White House scene for the better part of six decades. That's enough.
Helen Thomas made a fatal error: she didn't know when it was time to leave.
The so-called "Dean" of the White House press corps (or corpse as Obama would pronounce it) could have departed in grand style 10 or 15 0r 20 years ago.
But apparently she had no plan and nowhere else to go. Whatever.
Now, with her scurrilous comments about Israel and the Jews, she's shown herself to be a complete old fool.
Helen Thomas belongs on a farm somewhere with Jimmy Carter. They can sit under a tree together and sip warm milk.
I would post the video of her comments here (or a photo) but frankly, I can't stand to look at the old gal. She looks like 50 miles of bad road and sounds even worse. And I'm not even gonna say it's sad because it doesn't even rise to that level.
Yes, Thomas issued an apology for saying the Jews in Israel should "get the hell out of Palestine " and they should "go back to Poland, back to Germany." But it's too late and the apology was half-hearted anyway.
And yes, we know that Thomas is of Lebanese descent but this is America, get over it!
She's old. She's way past her prime. She's wrong. And she's nasty.
It all reminds me of a old song*:

I wanted the music to play on forever
Have I stayed too long at the fair?
I wanted the clown to be constantly clever
Have I stayed too long at the fair?
I bought me blue ribbons to tie up my hair,
But I couldn't find anybody to care;
The merry-go-round is beginning to taunt now
Have I stayed too long at the fair?
The music has stop and the children must go now
Have I stayed too long at the fair?
Oh, mother dear, I know you're very proud,
Your little girl in gingham is so far above the crowd;
No, daddy dear, you never could have known
That I would be successful, yet so very much alone...
I wanted to live in a carnival city,
With laughter and love everywhere;
I wanted my friends to be thrilling and witty,
I wanted somebody to care;
I found my blue ribbons all shiny and new
But now I discover them no longer blue...
The merry-go-round is beginning to taunt me,
Have I stayed too long at the fair?
There's nothing to win
And there's no one to want me
Have I stayed too long at the fair?

*with apologies to Billy Barnes

Toomey Bashes Obama On Israel

U.S. Senate candidate Pat Toomey has criticized the Obama Administration for its unusually harsh reaction to Israel’s decision to build new homes in Jerusalem, and contrasted that with the Administration’s feckless policies toward Iran.
Over the past year, the Obama Administration has put forth meaningless deadlines for Iran to meet regarding its brazen pursuit of nuclear weapons, only to turn a blind eye when Iran ignored those deadlines. Further, this administration has stood by largely silently as the Iranian theocratic dictators stamp out the pro-democracy movement within its midst. Pat Toomey has vigorously and repeatedly urged a stronger policy toward Iran (National Review Online, 10/15/09) (Morning Call, 12/04/09).
Now, the Obama Administration has plunged relations with Israel, our best ally in the region, to what is being called their lowest point in 35 years. And over what? Israel’s decision to build 1,600 homes for its citizens.
“Over the past year, we have watched the Obama Administration coddle Iran with meaningless gestures while the fanatics in Tehran continue their pursuit of nuclear weapons unabated,” Mr. Toomey said. “But when America’s strongest ally in the Middle East makes an internal decision about its own capital city, the administration unleashes a heavy barrage of denunciations.
There is something seriously wrong when President Obama gives Iran a free pass, but places excessive demands on Israel. It’s as if this administration sees Jewish homes in Jerusalem as a bigger threat to international peace than nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists. It’s illogical and outrageous.”
Toomey continued, “The worst aspect of this unwise step by President Obama is that it will undoubtedly undermine the cause of a negotiated settlement to the Arab-Israeli conflict. "President Obama’s moves will embolden the radical elements among the Palestinians and their backers in Iran and Syria to insist on even more unilateral concessions from Israel, and to offer no concessions of their own.
"Obama has it exactly backwards – he should make it clear to the Palestinians that they can expect no progress in peace talks until they first meet the most basic commitments toward living in peace and security alongside Israel.”

ADL: 'Shocked, Stunned' By Obama Actions

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) said it was shocked and stunned by the [Obama] Administration's public dressing down of Israel by saying it had "undermined trust and confidence in the peace process, and in America's interests," as related by Assistant Secretary of State Philip J. Crowley in his daily briefing. Crowley was referring to the announcement about future building in Jerusalem made during Vice President Joe Biden's Israel visit.

Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, issued the following statement:

We are shocked and stunned at the Administration's tone and public dressing down of Israel on the issue of future building in Jerusalem.

We cannot remember an instance when such harsh language was directed at a friend and ally of the United States.

One can only wonder how far the U.S. is prepared to go in distancing itself from Israel in order to placate the Palestinians in the hope they see it is in their interest to return to the negotiating table.

It is especially troubling that this harsh statement came after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu publicly and privately explained to Vice President Biden the bureaucratic nature in making the announcement of proposed new building in Jerusalem, and Biden accepted the prime minister's apology for it.

Therefore, to raise the issue again in this way is a gross overreaction to a point of policy difference among friends.

The Administration should have confidence and trust in Israel whose tireless pursuit for peace is repeatedly rebuffed by the Palestinians and whose interests remain in line with the United States.

The Anti-Defamation League, founded in 1913, is the world's leading organization fighting anti-Semitism through programs and services that counteract hatred, prejudice and bigotry.

Is Obama Dissing Israel?

(White House Photo/Pete Sousa)

From CBS News:
Israeli TV newscasters Tuesday night interpreted a photo taken Monday in the Oval Office of President Obama talking on the phone with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as an "insult" to Israel.
They saw the incident as somewhat akin to an incident last year, when the Iraqi reporter threw a shoe at President Bush in Baghdad.
It is considered an insult in the Arab world to show the sole of your shoe to someone. It is not a Jewish custom necessarily, but Israel feels enough a part of the Middle East after 60 years to be insulted too.
Was there a subliminal message intended from the White House to Netanyahu in Jerusalem, who is publicly resisting attempts by Mr. Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to force Israel to stop any kind of settlement activity in occupied territories once and forever?
Whether or not it is true, it shows the mood in Israel. They feel cornered. The reactions out of Israel reflect that feeling.
Netanyahu is making a speech Sunday, in part as a response to Mr. Obama's address to the Arab world last week in Cairo.
Israel's Channel One TV reported that Netanyahu was told Tuesday by an "American official" in Jerusalem that, "We are going to change the world. Please, don't interfere." The report said Netanyahu's aides interpreted this as a "threat."
Netanyahu met with George Mitchell today for four hours in Jerusalem. The State Department announced this afternoon that Mitchell will be stopping in Beirut and Damascus when he finishes his visits to Israel and the Palestinian Authority.
Where's the protocol here? Where (and who) is the Director of Protocol?
Who's advising the President? Is there anyone watching out for these kinds of mishaps?
Where's the State Department? Who signs off on this stuff?
And why does Obama have his feet on the oval office desk, anyway?

Obama's Flattery Festival

From Charles Hurt at the New York Post:
Obama really buttered them up in Cairo.
He thanked them for everything from algebra to the pen, though he curiously failed to mention that they often throw people in prison for using it.
He even went so far as to tell the audience that he considers "it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear."
Wow. That won't be the last time you hear that line.
And anyway, where exactly is that in the oath of office he took?
And if talking is going to resolve all the problems in the world, Obama got a good bit of that out of the way today.
He talked and talked and talked and talked.
And then kept talking.
Vacillating between a lecture-some professor and a talk show therapist, Obama started out numbering the grave and important issues he wanted to discuss. After a half-dozen, he junked the whole numbering system.
Or, lost count.
The problem with talking so much is that you eventually just start babbling and saying a bunch of stuff that makes no sense.
At one point, Obama fretted over the rise of new power that, to the horror of civilized people, exudes an obsessed and twisted view of "sexuality" and "mindless violence."
Islamo-fascism?
No, the Internet.
They guy is confronting one of the most evil and relentless mindsets in the history of man and he finds room in his big address to whine about the Internet -- by far a greater tool for freedom than anything else.
He also promised -- again, with his trademark modesty -- to bring to the effort of peace in the Middle East all "the patience that the task requires."
That's a lot of patience for one man. Like Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King combined.
Good thing he's the master of so much patience because he'll need every bit of it -- even with great speeches in Cairo.

Speech: Vapid, Self-Absorbed

Israel-Palestine 'Balanced' Policy?

Republican Jewish Coalition Executive Director Matthew Brooks said today:

President Barack Obama, in his major speech in Cairo this morning, struck a balanced tone with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and that's what was wrong with this speech.

American policy should not be balanced - it should side with those who fight terror, not those who either engage in it or are too weak to prevent it.

This conflict will not reach a peaceful conclusion until the Palestinians put an end to terrorism, violence, and incitement against Israel. American policy has long been to support Israel - a fellow democracy and committed ally of this country - in its efforts to achieve lasting security for its citizens. Israel's good faith efforts have been met by unremitting Palestinian violence and what is in effect an internal Palestinian civil war. Peace and security go hand in hand - Israel has repeatedly reached out her hand in peace only to have it slapped back. The President's remarks to the world's Muslims today appear to mark the beginning of a worrisome shift in U.S. policy.

We urge President Obama to return to the policy of holding the security of Israel as a key American priority and requiring significant, concrete, and verifiable moves toward peace from the Palestinian side.

The 51st State

Cartoon by Jerry Holbert - TownHall.com

Reuters Biased Mideast Coverage

From James Taranto in the Wall Street Journal:

"Jewish Settlers Rampage Through West Bank Village," reads the Reuters headline, but the story is rather less sensationalistic in describing what provoked the riot:

Dozens of Israelis from a Jewish settlement where a Palestinian killed a youth last week rampaged on Wednesday through a West Bank Arab village, smashing car windows and damaging homes, residents and medics said.

"Killed a youth"? You have to read all the way down to the eighth paragraph to get a more vivid description:

Last Thursday, a Palestinian wielding an axe killed a 13-year-old youngster and wounded a boy, aged seven, in Bat Ayin. The attacker, who was not identified, fled.

We wondered how Reuters covered that incident at the time, so we dug up this dispatch, whose headline is "Palestinians Kill Israeli in West Bank Settlement: Police"--a good deal more anodyne than the "rampage" one:

A Palestinian with an axe and a knife killed a 13-year-old Israeli boy and wounded a seven-year-old boy in a Jewish settlement in the West Bank on Thursday, two days after a right-wing government took power.

That would be a right-wing government in Israel. Apparently in Reuterville, taking an ax to the neighbor boys is a perfectly natural thing to do when they elect a right-wing government.