Barak Obama wants jewish votes now

feb 27th, 2008

now obama makes nice with jews. just like he made nice with india a week ago. pure campaign tactics. the guy will bend whichever way the wind blows, just like bobby jindal, to get votes. and then once he's got your votes, he's not going to give you the time of day.

questions remain about obama's manchurian candidate status and his personal pastor, a black supremacist who i assume is also a jew-hater.

i am increasingly sceptical about obama. and no, this is not new, i have been saying this since july last, when i wrote the following on rediff: http://www.rediff.com/news/2007/jul/20rajeev.htm

also see my feb 27th column expressing my scepticism about obama on rediff at: http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/feb/27rajeev.htm


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: B

Obama's Closed Door Interaction

with Jewish leaders
Feb. 24 2008  in Cleveland, Ohio
By Ami Eden  of the Jewish Telegraphic Association

About 100 Jewish communal leaders attended this
meeting. Whoever recorded the remarks was only able to
get Obama's answers, not the actual questions from the
audience.

For the most part, Obama sought to reassure the
audience on Israel, Iran, his church, his pastor, his
foreign policy advisers, his religion. At the
same time, he picked a few spots to push back against
some of his critics in the Jewish community.

Here are the key quotes:

WE NEED 'TIKKUN OLAM' IN WASHINGTON: "We need to
change how Washington works because politics shouldn't
just be about scoring political points, it should also
be about solving problems. We need to change our
priorities to make healthcare more affordable. To have
an energy policy that not only creates jobs and
secures our planet but also stops sending billions of
dollars to dictators and effectively leads us to fund
both sides of the war on
terrorism. We need a change in our foreign policy to
allows to end the war in Iraq responsibly and lead the
world against the common threats of the
21st century, terrorism and nuclear proliferation,
genocide, poverty and hopelessness in the world. These
changes are founded in a view of the world
that I believe is deeply imbedded in the Jewish
tradition. That all of us have a responsibility to do
our part to repair the world. That we can take
care of one another and build strong communities
grounded in faith and family. That repairing the world
is a task that each of us is called upon to
take up every single day. That is the spirit that I
expect to take with me to the White House."

STAND BY YOUR ISRAEL: "I will also carry with me an
unshakable commitment to the security of Israel and
the friendship between the United States and
Israel. The US Israel relationship is rooted in shared
interests, shared values, shared history and in deep
friendship among our people. It is
supported by a strong bipartisan consensus that I am
proud to be a part of and I will work tirelessly as
president to uphold and enhance the friendship
between the two countries. Two years ago I had a
chance to travel to Israel and it left a lasting
impression on me. I have long understood Israel's
great dilemma, it's need for security in a difficult
neighborhood and it's quest for peace with its
neighbors, but there is no substitute for meeting
the people of Israel. Seeing the terrain, experiencing
the powerful contrast between the beautiful holy land
that faces the constant threat of deadly violence. The
people of Israel showed their courage and commitment
to democracy everyday that they board a bus or kiss
their children goodbye or
argue about politics in a local cafe. And I know how
much Israelis crave peace. I know that Prime Minister
Olmert was elected with a mandate to pursue it. I
pledge to make every effort to help Israel achieve
that peace. I will strengthen Israel's security and
strengthen Palestinian partners who support that
vision and personally work for two states that can
live side by side in peace and security with Israel's
status as a Jewish state ensured so that Israelis and
Palestinians can pursue their dreams. I also expect to
work on behalf of peace with the full knowledge that
Israel still has bitter enemies who are intent on its
destruction. We see their intentions every time a
suicide bomber strikes, we saw their intentions with
the katusha rockets that Hezbollah rained down on
Israel from Lebanon in 2006 and we see it today in the
Kasams that Hamas fires into Israel every single day
from as close as Gaza or as far as Tehran. The Defense
cooperation between t he United States to Israel has
been a model of success and I believe it can be
deepened and strengthened."

IRAN : ALL MILITARY OPTIONS ON THE TABLE, BUT LET'S
TRY SOME AGGRESSIVE DIPLOMACY FIRST: "Now the gravest
threat as [U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler (D-Fla.)] mentioned
to Israel today I believe is from Iran. There a
radical regime continues to pursue its capacity to
build a nuclear weapon and continues to support
terrorism across the region. President Ahmadinejad
continues his offensive denials of the Holocaust and
disturbing denunciations of Israel. recently referred
to Israel as a deadly microbe and
a savage animal. Threats of Israel's destruction can
not be dismissed as rhetoric. The threat from Iran is
real and my goal as president would be to eliminate
that threat. Ending the war in Iraq I believe will be
an important first step in achieving that goal because
it will increase our flexibility
and credibility when we deal with Iran. Make no
mistake I believe that Iran has been the biggest
strategic beneficiary of this war and I intend to
change that. My approach to Iran will be aggressive
diplomacy. I will not take any military options off
the table. But I also believe that under this
administration we have seen the threat grow worse and
I intend to change that course. The time I believe has
come to talk to directly to the Iranians
and to lay out our clear terms. Their end of pursuit
of nuclear weapons, an end of their support of
terrorism and an end of their threat to Israel and
other countries in the reason. To prepare this goal I
believe that we need to present incentives, carrots,
like the prospect of better relations and integration
into the national community, as well as disincentives
like the prospect of increased sanctions. I would seek
these sanctions through the United Nations and
encourage our friends in Europe and the Gulf to use
their economic leverage against Iran outside of the UN
and I believe we will be in a stronger position to
achieve these tough international sanctions if the
United States has shown itself to be willing to come
to the table. I will also continue the work I started
in the United States Senate by enacting my
legislation to make it easier for states to divest
their pension funds from Iran. As president I will
leave all options on the table for dealing with a
threat from Iran including the military options. But I
believe that we have not pursued the kind of
aggressive and direct diplomacy that could yield
results to both Israel and the United States. The
current policy of not talking is not working. It is
time to change that. I am running for president
because I believe that America can do better both at
home and abroad. I believe that we can do better in
our relationship with Israel through a more effective
foreign policy that reduces the threat of terrorism
and increase the possibility for peace."

I AM NOT, NOR HAVE I EVER BEEN, A MUSLIM

(ESPECIALLY AN ANTI-AMERICAN ONE): "Well, let's just be very
specific about what these emails have been. And
they have just been virulent and started very early.
And I have to say are not. I mean they are clearly
political in the sense that they go in waves.
And seem to track the next primary or caucus. Suddenly
they magically appear in great volume in whatever
state it is we are campaigning. And the emails suggest
that
A. I am Muslim,
B. I went to a madrassa
C. I used a Koran to swear myself into the Senate
D. I don't pledge allegiance to the flag.
There are all sorts of variations, but you get the
general gist. And our general view has been, that the
internet is very difficult, because it is very low
cost, it can just be churned out and you can't trace
it back to where it's coming from. What we have tried
to do is just make sure that we are flooding the
internet with the accurate information and pushing
back as much as possible. I don't think that we are
in an era anymore where you can just ignore these
things and not dignify them. There was a time when
they would be amplified as consequence of you
calling attention to it. I don't think that's the case
any more because of our media age. You know we saw
what happened with the swift boat situation
back in 2004. All you have to do is run the ad once
and then it gets repeated. And so what we've done is
try to lift it up and actively debunk it and encourage
stories about it. If anyone is still puzzled about the
facts,in fact I have never been a Muslim. We had to
send CNN to look at the school
that I attended in Indonesia where kids were wearing
short pants and listening to ipods to indicate that
this was not a madrassa but was a secular school in
Indonesia. Where I attended for two year prior to
coming back to Hawaii. If you look at Nicholas
Kristof's article today it gives you an indication of
where I got my name. My grandfather who was Kenyan
converted to Christianity then converted to Islam, my
father never practiced he was basically agnostic and
so other than my name and the fact that I lived in a
populous Muslim country for 4 years when I was a child
I have very little connection to the Islamic religion.
But these are the kind of things that you deal with in
politics. What is interesting is that is hasn't worked
because I haven't been voted off the island yet. Next,
yes sir."

I BARELY KNOW BRZEZINSKI: "There is a spectrum of
views in terms of how the US and Israel should be
interacting. It has evolved over time. It means that
somebody like Brzezinski who, when he was national
security advisor would be considered not outside of
the mainstream in terms of his perspective on
these issues, is now considered by many in the Jewish
Community anathema. I know Brzezinski he's not one of
my key advisors. I've had lunch with him once, I've
exchanged emails with him maybe 3 times. He came to
Iowa to introduce for a speech on Iraq. He and I agree
that Iraq was an enormous strategic blunder and that
input from him has been useful in assessing Iraq,
as well as Pakistan, where actually, traditionally, if
you will recall he was considered a hawk. The liberal
wing of the Democratic Party was very
suspicious of Brzezinski precisely because he was so
tough on many of these issues. I do not share his
views with respect to Israel. I have said so
clearly and unequivocally."

YOU CAN BE PRO-ISRAEL WITHOUT BEING PRO-LIKUD: "The
others that you refer to are former members of the
Clinton administration. Somebody like a Tony Lake,
the former National Security Adviser, or Susan Rice
-these are not anti-Israel individuals. These are
people who strongly believe in Israel's right to
exist. Strongly believe in a two-state solution.
Strongly believe that the Palestinians have been
irresponsible and have been strongly critical of them.
Share my view that Israel has to remain a Jewish
state, that the US has a special relationship with the
Jewish state. There's no inkling that there has been
anything in anything that they've written that would
suggest they're not stalwart friends of Israel. This
is where I get to be honest and I hope I'm not out of
school here. I think there is a strain
within the pro-Israel community that says unless you
adopt a unwavering pro-Likud approach to Israel that
you're anti-Israel and that can't be the measure of
our friendship with Israel. If we cannot have a honest
dialogue about how do we achieve these goals, then
we're not going to make progress. And frankly some of
the commentary that I've seen which suggests guilt by
association or the notion that unless we are never
ever going to ask any difficult questions about how we
move peace forward or secure Israel that is
non military or non belligerent or doesn't talk about
just crushing the opposition that that somehow is
being soft or anti-Israel, I think we're
going to have problems moving forward. And that I
think is something we have to have an honest dialogue
about. None of these emails talk about the fact
that on the other side, members of my national finance
committee, like Lester Crown, are considered about as
hawkish and tough when it comes to
Israel as anybody in the country. So, there's got to
be some balance here. I've got a range of perspectives
and a range of advisors who approach this
issue. They would all be considered well within the
mainstream of that bipartisan consensus that I raised
or that we talked about in terms of being pro-Israel.
There's never been any of my advisors who questioned
the need for us to provide Israel with security, with
military aid, with economic aid. That there has to be
a two state solution, that Israel has to remain a
Jewish state. None of my advisors would suggest that,
so I think its important to keep some of these things
in perspective. I understand people's concern with
Brzezinski given how much offense the Israeli lobby
raised, but he's not one of my central advisers."

IN SEARCH OF AN UNROMANTIC PEACE PLAN:

"Well here's my starting orientation is
A - Israel's security is sacrosanct, is non
negotiable. That's point number one.
Point number two is that the status quo I believe is
unsustainable over time. So we're going to have to
make a shift from the current deadlock that we're in.
Number three that Israel has to remain a Jewish state
and what I believe that means is that any negotiated
peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians is
going to have to involve the Palestinians
relinquishing the right of return as it has been
understood in the past. And that doesn't mean that
there may not be conversations about compensation
issues. It also means the Israelis will have to figure
out how do we work with a legitimate Palestinian
government to create a Palestinian
state that is sustainable. It's going to have to be
contiguous, its going to have to work its going to
have to function in some way. That's in Israel's
interest by the way. If you have a balkanized
unsustainable state, it will break down and we will be
back in the same boat. So those are the starting
points of my orientation. My goal then would be to
solicit as many practical opinions as possible in
terms of how we're going to move forward on a
improvement of relations and a sustainable peace. The
question that I will be asking any advisor is how does
it achieve the goal of Israel's security
and how does it achieve the goal of sustainability
over the long term and I want practical, hardheaded,
unromantic advice about how we're going to achieve
that.

THE PALESTINIANS NEED TO KEEP THEIR COMMITMENTS:

I have consistently said this, and I have said this to
Palestinians, I said this when I was in
Ramallah, that you cannot fault Israel for being
concerned about any peace agreement if the Palestinian
state or Palestinian Authority or Palestinian
leadership does not seem to be able to follow through
on its commitments. And I think the approach we have
to take with respect to negations is that you sit down
and talk, but you have to suspend trust until you can
see that the Palestinian side can follow through and
that's a position that I have
consistently taken and the one I will take with me to
the White House."

IF ISRAELIS CAN DEBATE THESE ISSUES HONESTLY, SO CAN
WE: One last point I'll make on this, in terms of
advisors and the kind of debate I think is
fruitful, one of the things that struck me when I went
to Israel was how much more open the debate was around
these issues in Israel than they are
sometimes here in the United States. It's very ironic.
I sat down with the head of Israeli security forces
and his view of the Palestinians was
incredibly nuanced because he's dealing with these
people every day. There's good and there's bad, and he
was willing to say sometimes we make mistakes
and we made this miscalculation and if we are just
pressing down on these folks constantly without giving
them some prospects for hope, that's not
good for our security situation. There was a very
honest, thoughtful debate taking place inside Israel.
All of you, I'm sure, have experienced this when
you travel there. Understandably, because of the
pressure that Israel is under, I think the U.S.
pro-Israel community is sometimes a little more
protective or concerned about opening up that
conversation. But all I'm saying though is that
actually ultimately should be our goal, to have that
same clear eyed view about how we approach these
issues.

SURE, SOME JEWS THINK THE GOP IS BETTER ON ISRAEL BUT
THEY'RE WRONG:

"Well look, the Jewish community is a)
diverse, b) has interests beyond Israel. There is a the
tradition of the Jewish community in America as a
progressive force that is concerned with the poor, is
concerned with the vulnerable, is concerned with
children, is concerned with civil rights, is
concerned with civil liberties. Those are values that
I believe are much more evident in our Democratic
Party and that can't be forgotten. I think
that what I've seen, and you would know better than I
would, is that to the extent that there's been
bleeding over into the Republican Party, it all has
to do with this issue of Israel. And what I would
simply suggest is look at the consequences George
Bush's policies. The proof is in the point. I do not
understand how anybody who is concerned about Israel's
security and the threat of Iran could be supportive of
George Bush's foreign policy. It has
completely backfired. It is indisputable that Iran is
the biggest strategic beneficiary of the war in Iraq.
We have spent what will soon be close to a trillion
dollars strengthening Iran, expanding their influence.
How is that helpful to Israel? How is that helpful to
Israel? You can't make that argument. And so the
problem that we've seen in U.S. foreign policy
generally has been this notion that being full of
bluster and rattling sabers and being quick on the
draw somehow makes you more secure. And keep
in mind that I don't know anybody in the Democratic
Party, and I will say this for Hillary Clinton and I
will say this for myself, who has indicated in any way
that we would tolerate and allow to fester terrorist
threats, that we wouldn't hunt down, capture, or kill
terrorists that haven't been supportive of Israel capturing or killing terrorists.
So it's not like we're a bunch of folks asking to hold
hands and sing Kumbiya. When Israel launched
its counterattack against Hezbollah in Lebanon during
the summer of 2006, I was in South Africa at the time,
a place that was not particularly friendly
to Israel at the time and I was asked by the press,
what did you think? And I said, if somebody invades my
country or is firing rockets into my country
or kidnapping my soldiers, I will not tolerate that.
And there's no nation in the world that would. So I
don't see this softness within the Democratic
Party on these issues. The question is, can we use our
military power wisely? Can we be strategic in terms of
how we move forward? And I think
that is profoundly in the interests of Israel and in
the interests of U.S. security."

WHAT HAMAS NEEDS TO DO: "Now again, going back to my
experiences in Israel and the discussions I've had
with security officials there, I think that
there are communications between the Israeli
government and Hamas that may be two or three degrees
removed, but people know what Hamas is thinking and
what's going on and the point is that with respect to
Hamas, you can't have a conversation with somebody who
doesn't think you should be on the other side of the
table. At the point where they recognize Israel and
its right to exist, at the point where they recognize
that they are not going to be able
to shove their world view down the throats of others
but are going to have to sit down and negotiate
without resort to violence, then I think that will
be a different circumstance. That's not the
circumstance that we're in right now.

LEARNING FROM INDONESIA: "Now keep in mind, Indonesia
is not the Arab world. So its brand of Islam was
always very different. Women were riding on Vespas
and going to work, and people weren't wearing
headscarves until very recently - that was actually an
import from the Middle East. But here's
what's interesting about Indonesia, it's a good case
study. It had had a very tolerant, mild brand of Islam
all the time that I was living there and
basically up and thru 97. And what happened was that
you'll recall the Asian financial crisis hit them
extraordinarily hard. Their gross domestic product
contracted by 30% - they had the equivalent of a Great
Depression, but this was a country that was already
extraordinarily poor. So, there was a direct
correlation between the collapse of that economy and
the rise of fundamentalist Islam inside of Indonesia.
Partly it was exported by Saudi Wahhabist schools that
were sent in and financing schools there, and
suddenly you started seeing head scarves on the
streets and Islamic organizations that were parroting
some of the fundamentalist and more fanatical brands
of Islam that we associate with the Middle East. And
the reason I raise that point is that although people
will often say, well terrorists are drawn from the
middle class and just being poor doesn't mean
that you're automatically ascribe to violent jihadist
tendencies. What is absolutely true is that in the
Arab world and in the Muslim world, I do think there
is a correlation between the degree to which those
communities function properly, give people hope, give
people a sense of direction, give children education,
and how vulnerable they are to these violent
ideologies."

I AM NOT NAIVE: "So what lessons do we learn from that
then? I am not naive.There is a hard core of jihadist
fundamentalists who we can't negotiate
with. We have to hunt them down and knock them out.
Incapacitate them. That's the military aspects of
dealing with this phenomenon. Now somebody
like a Richard Clarke would estimate that the hard
core jihadists would gladly blow up this room maybe
it's 30,000 people, maybe it's 40,000 people,
maybe it's 50,000 people. But it is a finite number.
And that is where military action and intelligence has
to be directed. So all the things I've
talked about in the past - improving our intelligence
capacity, improving our alliances, rolling up
financial support, improving our homeland
security, making sure that we have strike forces that
are effective - that's all the military, intelligence,
police work that's required.
"The question then is what do we do with the 1.3
billion Muslims, who are along a spectrum of belief.
Some extraordinarily moderate, some very pious
but not violent. How do we reach out to them? And it
is my strong belief that that is the battlefield that
we have to worry about, and that is where we have been
losing badly over the last 7 years. That is where Iraq
has been a disaster. That is where the lack of
effective public diplomacy has been a
disaster. That is where our failure to challenge
seriously human rights violations by countries like
Saudi Arabia that are our allies has been a
disaster. And so what we have to do is to speak to
that broader Muslim world in a way that says we will
consistently support human rights, women's
rights. We will consistently invest in the kinds of
educational opportunities for children in these
communities, so that madrasas are not their only
source of learning. We will consistently operate in
ways that lead by example, so that we have no
tolerance for a Guantanamo or renditions or torture.
Those all contribute to people at least being open to
our values and our ideas and a recognition that we are
not the enemy and that the Clash of Civilizations is
not inevitable.

"Now, as I said, we enter into those conversations
with the Muslim world being mindful that we also have
to defend ourselves against those who will not accept
the West, no matter how appropriately we engage. And
that is the realism that has to leaven our
hopefulness. But, we abandon the possibility
of conversation with that broader Muslim world at our
own peril. I think all we do then, is further isolate
it and feed the kinds of jihadist fanaticism we all
detest. "