TPMCafe
« Under a Bell Jar | Home | Election Officials Needed as Whistleblowers »

Rashid Khalidi Controversy

user-pic

It has come to this--the red baiting and the nastiness of the McCain/Palin campaign, in desperation to get Jewish support, is now baiting and bad-mouthing a notable Palestinian-American historian, Rashid Khalidi, for his and his wife's friendship with Obama. The Khalidi's know Obama from their time in Hyde Park, when Rashid was a professor at the University of Chicago.

Now at Columbia University, he is someone who has always reached out to all sides in the debate about the future of Israel and Palestine. He has been outspoken in his arguments against Arafat's ways of governing and terrorism and when he was at U of C, he was close to Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg, one of the most important American Jewish figures of our time. For the Republicans to go after him is purely vile--they think that the Jewish vote is so stupid and racist that they will turn away from the Democrats solely on this type of slander. For someone like Daniel Pipes, quoted in today's New York Times story, to call him 'marginal,' is a joke, since Pipes is himself, so marginal regarding his own political point of view. One may not agree with Rashid Khalidi, but he is a respected and honored historian. It's time to move the Center back to the Center--let's hope that happens as of November 5--for the sake of America, the sake of Israel and the sake of Palestine.

Americans for Peace Now, an organization for which I am proud to serve as an officer, just sent out this press release:

APN Condemns Attacks on Rashid Khalidi

Washington, D.C. - Americans for Peace Now (APN) abhors and rejects the current character assassination efforts aimed at Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi.

Dr. Khalidi is a respected scholar, author and educator. Contrary to the allegations contained in these attacks, Dr. Khalidi is a longtime public supporter of Israeli-Palestinian peace and the two-state solution, and an opponent of violence and terror. His analysis has helped the world better understand the Palestinian historical and political narrative - understanding that is a requirement for the achievement of Israeli-Arab peace - and has underscored both the challenges and the opportunities that exist for advancing a peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Last month APN called on both candidates and campaigns to keep Israel and the peace process out of any partisan rhetoric in the race for the White House. We noted that "during U.S. elections there are often people both inside and outside the presidential campaigns who want to play politics with the issue - using Israel to score political points for themselves or against their opponent." We warned that doing so represented "a cynical tactic that comes at the expense of the best interests of both the U.S. and Israel."

This latest smear campaign against Professor Khalidi is exactly the kind of tactic we warned against.

APN is a non-partisan, Jewish, Zionist organization dedicated to enhancing Israel's security through peace and to supporting the Israeli Peace Now movement."


30 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

And yet, for all the defenses published far and wide, the tape in question is still hidden away. Kept secret, by a news organization of all things.

What is the offending scene?
Would it change the outcome of the election?
Is this manipulation of the vote?
So much for transparency in government, it seems we have a Bushite in Obama after all.

user-pic

Racists are not welcome in my America.
You can go to hell.

user-pic

You seem to have a number of categories and issues mixed up in your mind. Nothing about this issue with regard to the Times policy on sources involves any decision by either "government" or Obama. I hope that helps you understand things better.

user-pic

Actually, what this episode demonstrates, is that Obama has something to hide with a few days to go before the election. Circumstances and legalities aren't going to change that fact.
When it gets out, I sure hope it wasn't something serious, or we're looking at voter manipulation. Not a good start for an agent of change.

user-pic

shooter,

you obviously believe that news organizations have no right to protect their sources as the Times is doing.

Remember all the hullabaloo surrounding the leaks involving a certain blonde CIA secret agent? One reporter for the NY Times spent some time in jail rather than give up her source. Other reporters required a written OK from the leaker involved before they would give up the name.

The only thing the Times is doing is giving small minded wingnuts on the right ammunition to babble about a conspiracy to protect Obama

user-pic

The LA Times was the organization that first made the association known, why would they do that and then go back and 'protect' Obama in retrospect? It just doesn't make sense. I realize that you can't trust people or organizations to be completely honest, but they claim to have released all of the important details of the video and that they have not released the video itself because they told the source of the video that they wouldn't.

If you have to invent some conspiracy between a newspaper and a candidate that is strong enough to cover something that would be so big that it could move the election at this point rather than publishing it and reaping the rewards, then maybe you'd better adjust your tinfoil hat, because the idea is ludicrous.

Even if we accept that the contents of the video are simply unknown, how does refusing to break an agreement to not release it constitute manipulating a vote? The idea is ludicrous. Similarly, how does this have anything to do with transparency in government? Obama doesn't have the tape, the newspaper does. The government has nothing to do with whether it is released or not, and since it's private property. Fault the LA Times if you like, for doing the unthinkable and actually withholding something that they could make money from. Even if it is completely benign, I'm sure there are many who would pay for the footage just so they could make some commercials out of shaky camerawork of a Palestinian-American eating dinner in the same room as Obama.

Dear God, is that falafel Obama is eating??? He must be in Al Qaida!

user-pic

jason,

excellent post, but your common sense and logic will simply bounce off the head of wingnuts. They don't want to hear truth, or live in reality, there's nothing there for them, they'd rather wallow in conspiracy theory, exaggerations, and mindless assertions.

user-pic

Didn't you get the memo?

There is no tape.

The writer of the L.A. Times piece (let's say) "borrowed" claims made by other writers (including Debbie Schlussel). The event wasn't tape recorded.

Now The Times is in a very awkward position, to be sure. But it isn't Obama they're protecting, it's their contributor, who wrote an article using whole paragraphs cut and pasted from three older articles.

user-pic

If a newspaper gets a tape with the understanding that it won't release that tape, then it should honor that understanding. Will the doubters ever stop looking for the "October surprise?"

user-pic

Kinda like instructions to a telecomm company? Good to know for future controversies.

user-pic

Once again, you seem to be having trouble grasping basic concepts. The telecoms are accused of facilitating an illegal act. Moreover, they were accused of violating the civil rights of its customers. There is no comparison between that sort of act and a newspapers decision to honor the privacy of its source. That is, there is no comparison by anyone who isn't an imbecile.

I hope that helps.

user-pic

allastair,

please refer to my post to JasonPatterson above.

user-pic

Constitutional limitations apply differently to press organizations than they do to government agencies and executives. And there's a big difference between one living room, and everyone's living room telephone.

Any thoughts on the McCain-Hensley/Lansky-Bronfman connection?

user-pic

For the Republicans to go after him is pure vial

"pure vial?"

user-pic

It's a really clean glass container, new slang for 'not very nice' don't you know...

user-pic

The question is, did Obama meet with Khalidi without any preconditions? Y'know, like the way McCain met with Chilean Dictator Agusto Pinochet?

Obama's associations are much cleaner than McCains, and most Americans, with the exception of deluded fools like Cooter242, understand this.

user-pic

"Cooter"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

user-pic

For the Republicans to go after him is pure vial--they think that the Jewish vote is so stupid and racist that they will turn away from the Democrats solely on this type of slander.

Never underestimate the power of fear and smear:

An article in the LA Times blog, ISRAEL: absentee voting exit polls, shows McCain garnering 76% of the vote, including 46% of Democrats.

user-pic

I'm an Orthodox Jew with my own Khalidi story. Check it out here:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/aribeng/2008/10/im-an-orthodox-jew-and-i-know.php

In brief, I was friends with his daughter when we played baseball together at Cambridge. And I moderated a debate between Khalidi and a guy from Hebrew U. at the Jewish Center I ran. I may disagree with most of his positions, but the guy is not only a scholar, but a mensch.

user-pic

Yes, but his name sounds foreign, and scary, and he might be a tur-riss. Lookout.

user-pic

What smitty said.

Plus which, JoAnne OBVIOUSLY doesn't understand. Khalidi is an A-rab, which is a little like being an A-Rod, but worse.

She clearly needs to get out of that Cambridge bubble and listen to Rush more often.

user-pic

". . .they think that the Jewish vote is so stupid and racist "

Let's face it, it's not just the Jewish vote the Repubs are trying to bait and manipulate, its everyone who buys into the whole sick AIPAC mentality, plus everyone else who is just bigoted against Arbs and Muslims by ignorant predispostion, plus your standard xenophobes, not to mention those who just love a good target to hate and blame because that is what their political leaders subtext encourages. And, of course, '911 changed everything'

user-pic

People who accuse AIPAC of having a sick mentality are just abject Jew-haters. I thank Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Jerry Nadler, Nita Lowey, Barbara Mikulsky, and over two hundred Democratic liberal supporters of AIPAC's positions for showing you to be a jerk.

user-pic

"People who accuse AIPAC of having a sick mentality are just abject Jew-haters."

In my case that would be 'self hating Jew hater'. Thanks for the stereotype. I'll retract my "sick" if you retract you "Jew hater"???

" I thank . . .liberal supporters of AIPAC's positions "

Can you say pandering?

AIPAC is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

user-pic

You are one sick puppy, self-hater. You don't belong in Judaism or in American politics. Go to Ramallah, you fucking dog. Neither you nor anyone who thinks like you will have any say in an Obama Administration, thank G-d.

user-pic

Like it or not people, something is being withheld from the public on the eve of a transformational election. All the arguments so far try to provide a basis of some sort for secrecy. So what? Who cares? The great Obama has a skeleton in his closet that he's afraid to have laid out and put on the table.

He and/or the Times certainly can keep something secret if they desire. The question is, what do they have that is deemed too sensitive for the public to hear? What would be so devastating?

The public is allowed to set the direction of the country only once, every two years. The public deserves to know what the candidate is hiding before election day.

user-pic

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ--that's from the rest of us TPMers, and the major media. The MSM apparently doesn't see any fire behind this smoke, and that's not even counting all the Swiftboaters gunning for Obama.

It's just you, Sarah Palin, and the rest of the 22% Bush minority who believe there's anything there.

Btw, found those WMDs yet?

user-pic

But how do you know that? I don't know that. My own theory is that there is no tape. Call it a hunch, but the article in The Times looked awfully familiar to me...

user-pic

Shooter - you don't believe your own crap. So why all this effort? Why go around trolling and venting? Don't you have anything better to do? Some Arabs to hate? Some Muslims to intimidate? Inflict violence on? I mean seriously, see a therapist already, dude....

user-pic

When has Peace Now ever condemned an anti-Semite?

The number of times that Peace Now has opposed Jew hatred is identical to the number of times that the Ku Klux Klan has opposed Jew hatred.

In all fairness, however, Peace Now is extremely vigilant when it comes to condemning those who believe Israel has a right to exist.

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Recent Reader Posts

All Reader Posts »





Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall

Site Editor
Lila Shapiro

Intern
Kyle Krahel-Frolander



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address