- Obama's Friend And Mentor Planning #Flotilla To Break Gaza Blockade (Illegally)
- Why is the new york times working against sanctions?
- An "idiot wind" blows back
Posted: 21 Jul 2010 09:13 AM PDT
No, I'm not talking about William Ayers (who helped organize the Gaza Flotilla along with his wife)--I'm talking about the other friend and mentor that Obama denied being friendly with: Rashid Khalidi:
Whatever else you may think of the idea, the fact remains that the way Khalidi is planning this is illegal. Andy McCarthy, former Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, points out:
The only question is whether the US will take any action against Obama's friend.
The LA Times at the time showed that the truth was that relationship was much more than that:
But they did more than talk--Obama and Khalidi raised money for each other:
This video ties it all together:
So 2 friends of Obama--both with ties to terrorism--support flotillas to Gaza.
Nothing was done to stop Ayers.
Will anything be done to stop Khalidi?
Hat tip: Powerline
by Daled Amos
Posted: 21 Jul 2010 04:25 AM PDT
Recently the UN agreed on new stricter sanctions on Iran. And the New York Times has now responded with a report Standardized English Tests Are Halted in Iran:
The Educational Testing Service has announced that it is temporarily suspending registration for its tests in Iran, including the popular Test of English as a Foreign Language, in what may be one of the first tangible effects of the new sanctions levied against the country by the international community. Experts and Iranian expatriates were appalled, saying that if the sanctions prohibited Iranians from studying abroad, they would hurt precisely the kind of outward-looking young Iranians the West would like to help.
So the gist of the article is: sanctions are going to be counterproductive. This isn't reporting it's advocacy. Worse, it's advocacy for one of the most brutal regimes in the world.
Compare that with today's Washington Post: New sanctions crimp Iran's shipping business as insurers withhold coverage:
The new measures pose a serious test for Iran. In particular, the U.S. sanctions, which threaten to penalize foreign companies that sell fuel and other refined petroleum products to Iran, have forced ports and freighting companies across the globe to reevaluate their Iranian business. Dozens of Iranian vessels that transport crude oil, industrial equipment and other goods and supplies in and out of the Islamic Republic have been denied insurance coverage for weeks, insurance company representatives said.
The New York Times seized on an incidental effect of the sanctions and missed the bigger picture. True, the Times has been reporting on the growing unrest in the bazaar, so it's not been totally useless. But why isn't the Times sticking to reporting instead of apologetics?
Posted: 21 Jul 2010 03:32 AM PDT
Prior to the presidential election in 2008 the editors of the Washington Post objected to charges that there was something wrong with candidate Obama's relationship with Rashid Khalidi.
It's fair to question why Mr. Obama felt as comfortable as he apparently did during his Chicago days in the company of men whose views diverge sharply from what the presidential candidate espouses. Our sense is that Mr. Obama is a man of considerable intellectual curiosity who can hear out a smart, if militant, advocate for the Palestinians without compromising his own position. To suggest, as Mr. McCain has, that there is something reprehensible about associating with Mr. Khalidi is itself condemnable -- especially during a campaign in which Arab ancestry has been the subject of insults. To further argue that the Times, which obtained the tape from a source in exchange for a promise not to publicly release it, is trying to hide something is simply ludicrous, as Mr. McCain surely knows.
The Post allowed one of the subjects of the editorial a last word:
Which reminds us: We did ask Mr. Khalidi whether he wanted to respond to the campaign charges against him. He answered, via e-mail, that "I will stick to my policy of letting this idiot wind blow over." That's good advice for anyone still listening to the McCain campaign's increasingly reckless ad hominem attacks. Sadly, that wind is likely to keep blowing for four more days.
I wrote about the Post's editorial here.
A group calling itself U.S. Boat to Gaza is seeking $370,000 in the next month to send an aid ship to the Gaza Strip that would be named after President Obama's best-selling book "The Audacity of Hope."
Khalid doesn't think that naming the boat after the President should be a problem:
The White House declined to comment. Khalidi said he was not aware the boat would be named after Obama's book when he agreed to add his name to the list of sponsors.
There's a certain clarity in Khalidi's position: he intends to help Hamas. The consequence of this writes Barry Rubin:
Helping Hamas is helping to plunge the Middle East, and perhaps the world, into a nightmare of bloodshed and horror.
So Khalidi isn't now (and probably never was) a simple academic, but an activist with a radical anti-Israel agenda.
On Friday, Ms. Lee argued in the Huffington Post that the nine activists who were killed on board one of the ships as they resisted Israeli commandos were not, as Israel has claimed, "terrorists." Ms. Lee used some of the video she shot on board the flotilla's main ship, the Mavi Marmara, to produce a video report (embedded above) on the aid organization that helped sponsor it, the Humanitarian Relief Foundation, often called the I.H.H.
So here a few questions.
2) A little while back while arguing against a recent Supreme Court ruling the editors of the Washington Post acknowledged that providing material support to terrorists should be illegal. Will they now criticize that the fellow they defended two years ago is boasting about providing such support to Hamas?
A journalist should lose his or her job for misreporting, for misquoting, for fabricating, for plagiarizing, for systemic bias -- but not for a message like this one.
Given that Robert Mackey ignored every bit of evidence that the IHH is a terror organization and effectively shilled for one of its defenders, would Friedman agree that Mackey should be fired? (This isn't the first time that Mackey's done this.)
Crossposted on Yourish.
|You are subscribed to email updates from Soccer Dad |
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.
|Email delivery powered by Google|
|Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610|