Prelude to the Malley Kerfuffle

Come with me while I do my homework. Here's the situation: My friend Ed Lasky has written several important articles at the American Thinker having to to with the ObamaNation's stance on Israel and Israel-related matters. For our purposes here a quick review will suffice, but it you choose to delve more deeply I'll gladly give you extra credit.

March 3, 2007: Obama speaks before AIPAC

Although the Senator finds Hezb'allah violence against Israel worthy of being condemned he seems to ignore acts of Palestinian terrorism (merely talking of Palestinian "extremists" instead). He criticized Hezb'allah rocket attacks from Lebanon, but not Hamas rocket attacks from Gaza. He notes the destruction of homes by Hezb'allah but not the destruction of lives from Palestinian suicide bombings. He condemns Holocaust denial by Iran but is silent about Palestinian indoctrination of hatred among its children.

Ed posted Barack Obama and Israel in March of last year and followed up with a "substantially new and more complete" version on January 16, 2008.

First mentioned of course is Obama's pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jr. of the Trinity United Church of Christ, the man who baptized Barack in 1988, married him to his wife in 1992 and baptized their children in 1999 and 2001. A 2004 interview in the Chicago Sun-Times quotes Obama as saying that

he attends the 11 a.m. Sunday service at Trinity in the Brainerd neighborhood every week -- or at least as many weeks as he is able. His pastor, Wright, has become a close confidant.

The Sun-Times piece also quotes Obama's friend and adviser Rev. Michael Pfleger, a Catholic priest in Chicago "who has known Obama for the better part of 20 years." Pfleger says, "I don't think he (Obama) culd easily divorce his faith from who he is."

Okay? So there's a history there. Next up, Obama's political ambitions necessitated that that history be erased, at least for time being. I have no doubt that Pinch Sulzberger now regrets this being exposed in the New York Times (April 2007):

"If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me,” Mr. Wright said with a shrug. “I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen.

Those seeking extra credit will read the Lasky article in full, as Ed delineated with great care the radical beliefs and statements of Rev. Wright from which Obama seeks to distance himself.

For me, that episode alone was enough to disqualify an ObamaNation from any future, but Ed went on to "Obama's [other] anti-Israel friends," including Edward Said and Ali Abunimah.

electronic intifada dot net: From left to right, Michelle Obama, then Illinois state senator Barack Obama, Columbia University Professor Edward Said and Mariam Said at a May 1998 Arab community event in Chicago at which Edward Said gave the keynote speech. (Image from archives of Ali Abunimah)

Lasky, continued:

Abunimah recently wrote an article critical of Obama's very recent and somewhat lukewarm outreach to the Israel's supporters. He wrote that years ago Obama had been forthright in his criticism of American foreign policy and had called for an even-handed approach to the Palestinian-Israel conflict. But Abunimah detected a change as Obama began his Senate run. He met Obama at an event that occurred in the midst of the Senator's primary campaign for Senate. Abunimah writes,

Obama said, "Hey, I'm sorry I haven't said more about Palestine right now, but we are in a tough primary race. I'm hoping when things calm down I can be more up front." He referred to my activism, including columns I was contributing to the Chicago Tribune critical of Israeli and US policy, "Keep up the good work!"

Lasky also quotes an Obama interview in the Chicago Jewish News, March 2004:

when asked about the Israeli security fence, Obama replied: “the creation of a wall dividing the two nations is yet another example of the neglect of this Administration in brokering peace.”

You can mark that up to obligatory Bush-bashing, but much of what is worrisome is found in Obama's own personal associations. Is it fair to worry that Jimmy Carter and George Soros support Obama? Should we consider as relevant the fact that Congressman Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii) was close friends with Barack's father and a lifelong friend and supporter of Barack? Ed Lasky thinks so: "People are often judged by the company they keep and the quarters from which they receive support." In Obama's case, the associations are rich for the digging and lead us from Abunimah to the ISM and from Robert Malley to Arafat himself, about as anti-Israel as you can get. How I wish I had paid more attention in those anthropology classes on devising flow charts; this one would be mind-boggling.

The crux is in the meeting of Obama's associations with his few words. Lasky notes that in Obama's speeches, he has said that the Israeli government "must make difficult concessions...," has supported aid to Palestinian Arabs, and has blamed "not just Hezbollah... not just Hamas, it's also cynicism." (If cynicism had ever killed any Jews, I think I would have been among the first to know.)

And of course we all remember that in Iowa Obama stated that "Nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people." Whoops.

My point here is that Lasky was for a long time virtually alone in asking, "why does almost every off the cuff remark he makes - remarks that spring from his heart as much as from his brain - have an anti-Israel slant? Anyone see a pattern here? Anyone?"

I have read everything Ed has written, I have seen the pattern, but I've been waiting, waiting for Obama to miraculously eliminate the Clintons from their bid for ultimate power, before I jump with both feet onto an anti-ObamaNation bandwagon. Perhaps not the best decision I ever made, but that was my thinking.

I'm getting ahead of myself; let's go on. April 30, 2007: Soros, Obama and the Millionaires Exception. In this piece, Lasky takes us through more smoke and mirrors.

Last March, in the highly-touted New York Review of Books, multi-gazillionaire George Soros caused an uproar by calling for the Democrat party to "liberate" itself from the influence of the so-called Israel Lobby and deal with Hamas. While Obama did not personally repudiate this, a spokeswoman for his campaign did. End of story? Not according to Ed.

... a mere two weeks later... Barack Obama attended a fundraiser at the New York residence of Steven and Judy Gluckstern. There was a photo at the beginning of the article of Obama speaking from a stairwell to the small group assembled to give him money for his campaign? None other than...George Soros was in the audience.

It seems that Obama's "criticism" ... has not prevented Barack Obama from socializing with, and receiving money and support from, George Soros.

George Soros is a very dangerous guy and a very powerful one. Don't forget that in 1992 he undertook a scheme to make a billion-dollar profit by devaluing the British Pound.

And get this:

In early January 2007, Soros was interviewed by Wolf Blitzer of CNN. Blitzer began the interview by asking Soros about the following quote that appears in Soros's newly published book, The Age of Fallibility:

"The Bush administration and the Nazi and communist regimes all engaged in the politics of fear ..."

Just last night I posted an ObamaNation video in which Barack goes on about "the politics of fear" (scroll down, it's not too far) and if you Google {Obama + "politics of fear"} you get "about 73,300" results. It's the ObamaMantra. The question is, did he get it from Soros, like he got his "Audacity of Hope" from Rev. Wright?

This makes me wonder two things. First and foremost, how in the world can Republicans respond to this ObamaMantra, when in fact we do believe that Islamofascist aggression is something to be greatly feared? And second, and more relevant here, is the Obama campaign at its heart just a pretty face stand-in for Soros's own bid for presidential power? Born in Hugary (as György Schwartz), George Soros can't run for president himself, but he sure as hell can buy and sell Obama to represent his interests.

[See also Ed Lasky: George Soros and the Future of the World Bank]

It's a scarey thought, but one well worth our consideration: Is Obama, as Rush Limbaugh suggested, a "blank canvas upon which anyone can project their fantasies and desires"? Or is the truth even worse, that he is a canvas being very meticulously painted by Soros' calculations in some kind of evil scheme to paint-by-numbers a president?

This is turning out to be not such a "quick review" after all. What can I tell you, curiosity killed the cat [he was exhausted].

In June 2007, Ed Lasky questioned Obama's Moral Courage.

During his weekend speeches to chucrch groups did he bring up, did he even touch upon, the issue of the church's views towards Israel? Did he touch upon the church's silence regarding Palestinian Muslim violence against its own Christian community? Did he use his powerful voice to appeal to the church members to listen to the concerns of their fellow Americans who were so upset that they issued a public letter to express their sorrow that the church would so single-mindedly attack Israel-a nation besieged by enemies and threatened by an Iranian dictator with a genocidal dream? Did he use his gifts of oratory to ask the church to reconsider its positions and to reach out to those it has harmed-to help heal wounds? In a word, No.

And then last month, Lasky moved on to Barack Obama's Middle East Expert, Robert Malley.

Since this post was meant to be only a prelude to the Malley Kerfuffle, we'll go over some of what Ed found, but will stop short (for the time being) of the recent outraged and ugly responses from those on the Left.

One of [Obama's] advisors in particular, Robert Malley, clearly warrants attention....

Normally, one should be reluctant in exploring a person's family background -- after all, who would want to be held responsible for the sins of one's father? However, when close relatives share a strong current of ideological affinity, and when a father has a commanding persona, it behooves a researcher to inquire a bit into the role of family in forming views. That said, Robert Malley has a very interesting father.

His father Simon Malley was born to a Syrian family in Cairo and at an early age found his métier in political journalism. He participated in the wave of anti-imperialist and nationalist ideology that was sweeping the Third World. He wrote thousands of words in support of struggle against Western nations. In Paris, he founded the journal Afrique Asie; he and his magazine became advocates for "liberation" struggles throughout the world, particularly for the Palestinians.

Simon Malley loathed Israel and anti-Israel activism became a crusade for him-as an internet search would easily show. He spent countless hours with Yasser Arafat and became a close friend of Arafat. He was, according to Daniel Pipes, a sympathizer of the Palestinian Liberation Organization --- and this was when it was at the height of its terrorism wave against the West. His efforts were so damaging to France that President Valerie d'Estaing expelled him from the country.

Malley has seemingly followed in his father's footsteps: he represents the next generation of anti-Israel activism. Through his writings he has served as a willing propagandist, bending the truth (and more) to serve an agenda that is marked by anti-Israel bias; he heads a group of Middle East policy advisers for a think-tank funded (in part) by anti-Israel billionaire activist George Soros; and now is on the foreign policy staff of a leading Presidential contender. Each step up the ladder seems to be a step closer towards his goal of empowering radicals and weakening the ties between American and our ally Israel.

This is a discussion to be continued but I do want to note before I quit that it's been picked up by Daniel Ayalon, Caroline Glick, Saul Singer, the New York Post, Hillel Halkin, the AJC, Noah Pollak, Powerline and Mickey Kaus [see The Audacity of Questioning Obama's Commitment to Israel] and lately by my friend Rick Richman as well.

Ed may have started out alone, but his dogged determination has resulted in the story, or stories, gaining traction - in synch with Obama's own political gains. It's hard for me to stop here, I have so much catching up to do, but it's 1:30 in the afternoon and I'm still in my pajamas.

One last thing. I can't resist posting this item, from BarackObama.com. Specifically, it is a comment posted on two different "community blogs" - Jews for Obama and something called the Citizen Strategy Think Tank.

Bigname Scientist writes:

I have been receiving from older relatives, the viral anti-Obama email, most recently reprints of Lasky's pieces in "American Thinker" attacking his associations with Robert Malley, and his preacher who associates with Farrakhan, and Brezinski, etc.

Like all chain email, it is very emotional and alarming, and asks you to send this important information to everyone you know....

... we are losing in assymetric information warfare. Positive Obama/Jewish/Israel information NEEDS TO SPREAD AS VIRALLY as the hatemail. It needs to be visual rather than textual. Can't somebody find video of him at a bar mitzvah dancing the Hora? He needs to make a couple of bad jokes in yiddish, or do a Sammy Davis Jr imitation. We need these on Youtube ASAP.

This is so assinine as to make me wonder if it's not one of us, trying to make the other side look bad. However, given the last visual virus the ObamaNation offered up, I'd say it's far more likely that this is for real.

We can laugh at the antics of these clowns, but it's urgent that we don't take our eyes off the ball. There is more than a grain of truth in Bigname Scientist's phrase, "assymmetric information warfare." In Ed Lasky we have the citizen journalists' David going up against the Soros Goliath. Kol hakavod to Ed - for your valuable research, your unwavering resolve and your sheer courage to go it alone if you had to.

It took us a while to get in position, but we've got your back. In fact, a whole "army" of Davids seems to be straggling in... at long last.

Comments

[RR]

Brilliant post -- kol hakavod to you both.

[Alexander Rafael]

I have to point out that Goliath had a shield bearer that went in front of him into the battle, so the picture is misleading. In fact there might be a whole army of shield bearers. Also, Shaul allowed David to go in to the battle because David had killed a Lion and A Bear, previously. In prophets parlance, Lion might be England and Bear is Russia. And Soros did kill a Lion.