Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!

[karaszero]

Mike, you have made the point over and over again of why you started this thread believe me we get it; you wanted to B***h and moan about two men (you don't know) who didn't pass the love Israel test, so you tossed ole jesse and farrakhan in (for good measure) to make your points. You definately are smart enough to know that these assumptions of yours wouldn't go unchallenged, but you probably didn't think of the S**t storm you would cause by making those absurd judgements. Your response to Israels' business with S. Africa was weak. First you say it is a Flashback to the 80s,then you say " It is troubling I agree, however, Israel did reverse it's course in it's relationship to that regime". So let me get this straight you were disgusted, literally sick to your stomach that Obama could be linked to someone as despicable as Rev Wright, who in turn was just as despicable as Farrakhan, who last but not least  reminded you of jesse. The last relevant point in your defense of Israel was that they were not the only ones who had business dealings with S. Africa (an attempt to minimize Israels negative actions) I want to know why didn't the thought of Israel in bed with apartheid S. Africa make you pop your cookies? Nothing obama could say would change your mind about him and you held him to a higher standard than you yourself have

[michaelintp]

Karaszero, please.  I don't want to get into some kind of personal dispute with you or with anyone on this forum.  They too quickly turn into a "you said this" or "you think that" sort of debate. I'm not interested in talking about myself or about any other person here. I concluded some time ago that getting into acrimonious debates on message boards is a waste of time and energy.  Look, your a good guy.  I know you have strongly held views ... and that on some major issues we disagree. 

The Barak Obama Presidential bid is interesting because, as some suggest, Obama may just be the next President of the United States.  The extent that his Presidency may impact issues important to Jews, and the degree of American Jewish support for Obama, is also interesting.  I would think even to some strong Obama supporters.

Notwithstanding my comments on this thread, there is no evidence yet of a major Jewish defection from Barak Obama.  In a Gallop poll conducted between March 1st  and March 22nd, Jewish Democratic voters only show a slight preference for Hillary Clinton (48%) over Barack Obama (43%) for the party's 2008 presidential nomination. The five-point Clinton advantage is within the margin of error for this sample of Jewish Democrats.  The following interesting article from Gallop outlines the support for Obama and Clinton by various religious groups:

Clinton, Obama Closely Matched Among Jewish Democrats
http://www.gallup.com/poll/105595/Clinton-Obama-Closely-Matched-Among-Jewish-Democrats.aspx

However, news of the Trinity Church’s dissemination of the pro-Hamas piece came out a couple of days before March 22nd, and Obama repudiated it on the 23rd.  Also, only later did the news come out of the additional piece in the Pastor’s Corner alleging that the Israelis were making an ethnic bomb to kill Blacks and Arabs.  So this poll does not really measure whether either of these revelations have had any impact on Jewish support for Obama.

Slowly this issue is hitting the Mainstream Media.  This time, in honor of Wise Son, I’ll share a March 28th article from the Times of London that touches on the subject:

Rev Jeremiah Wright lands Barack Obama in trouble again
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3636128.ece

Much earlier on this thread someone posted that the Anti-Defamation League had given a pass to Obama’s Trinity Church and his (now “former”) Pastor Jeremiah Wright.  However, in commenting on Obama’s “race speech” what the head of the ADL actually said was that Obama was “excusing and rationalizing bigotry.”

Got this info from the following article, which doesn’t really raise anything we’ve not already discussed.  Just thought I would set the record straight on the position of the ADL.

Jerusalem Post
Mar 29, 2008 22:24 | Updated Mar 30, 2008 10:19
View From America: Don't blame me, I just pray here!
By JONATHAN TOBIN http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1206632361818&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull


edited to correct small typo

[Redjack]

i think the segregation of jews from the mass of white people is artificial. It elevates issues that have nothing to do with the real meat of the problems addressing the nation to positions they don't deserve to occupy.

I'm surprised there aren't more Katrina questions and, tangentially, more "interest" in the fate of the displaced from that region which gets no ink at all.

Oh. Wait.

Turns out I'm not surprised.

[michaelintp]

i think the segregation of jews from the mass of white people is artificial.

Hahaha, that's because you're not Jewish, Redjack!!!   

[michaelintp]

From what has been said of Wright beyond the current media storm, which really does seem to be trying to box him into their narrative of 'Obama's preacher is a bigot, maybe he is too', he actually seems the kind of man to respond well to approaches from thoughtful members of the Jewish community (like your good self), who want to genuinely increase understanding of the whole issue, rather than necessarily boosting the interests of one party.
Anyway, that's just a thought.

Interesting thought.  Doesn't make me feel a great deal better, but it is an interesting thought.  As a general rule it is better to judge others favorably.  Certainly on a personal level.  When it comes to politics, it gets a little more complicated.  Because if there is even a chance that you are wrong ...   

[moor]

Anybody ever thought of asking Wright what he meant?


...I'm just sayin'....


 

[michaelintp]

One could ask Wright, a valid point.  Though based on the content of some of his speeches that have been made public, one can pretty reasonably surmise what his response would be.  Though in fairness, it would be interesting to hear some followup from Wright on these issues.  At this point, however, query whether the Obama campaign really wants Wright to have center stage in the Media.

This whole thing could of course play out in a way that would allow Barak Obama to ride above these rough waters.  We are still far enough before the November election that it may be the case that "Pastor Wright" will be "old news" by November, with public interest in him drained; that whenever the guy's name comes up, there will just be snortling and dismissal of him as an old crank.  That seems to be the strategy of the Obama campaign at this point, in distancing the candidate from the Pastor.  One already sees this reaction among those who are predisposed to vote for Obama, and even among those who are predisposed to vote for whoever the Democratic candidate may be.  If this is the way it plays out, there may not be a significant diminution of the traditional Jewish support for the Democratic candidate.

Only time will tell.

[karaszero]

Michael, this is not a personal vendetta against you, but you simply cannot judge people based on soundbytes; objectivity has to be a productive part of any conversation. I do not have an axe to grind, however, I do have a strong desire to see just how far people are willing to go in order to reach an understanding of one another. I do disagree with sinjection in that there is no line that should exist there is injustice all over the world, the country, the city, the block, hell in homes, but in this country the line begins with the native americans

[Wise Son]

If the greed Israel showed in owning 5% of slave ships is true,

Just to be clear, Israel didn't exist at the time. What was said was that that 5% were owned by people in the Jewish community.

Chattel slavery didn't benefit ANY AFRICAN if they weren't taken initially then they sure as hell left eventually so whoever sold out their countrymen didn't have anyplace to hide they only postponed the inevitable. Slavery only benefitted white skinned people.

Well, there probably were African slave-traders who found themselves on the receiving end unexpectedly, but a lot of the work of capturing slaves was 'sub-contracted' to Africans. Of course, I think the responsibility lies with those creating the demand, especeially with the supply-belt way that they demanded fresh slaves. For a comparison, it's well known that in Nazi Concentration camps, some inmates were given positions of authority over others, but that doesn't make them somehow complicit in what was done there, IMO.

[Wise Son]

However, in commenting on Obama’s “race speech” what the head of the ADL actually said was that Obama was “excusing and rationalizing bigotry.”

That doesn't seem fair, especially as the speech was basically given over the furore over the 'Goddamn America' speech, rather than anything to do with Hamas or the Italians.

I think the speech covered some of the reasons behind bigotry and racial tension, but that's not excusing it, just trying to understand it. Still, this is a comment from the head of the ADL, rather than an official ADL statement, so I don't necessarily take it as their official position.

[karaszero]

correction duly noted wise, I appreciate it!

[Catch22]

However, in commenting on Obama’s “race speech” what the head of the ADL actually said was that Obama was “excusing and rationalizing bigotry.”

That doesn't seem fair, especially as the speech was basically given over the furore over the 'Goddamn America' speech, rather than anything to do with Hamas or the Italians.

I think the speech covered some of the reasons behind bigotry and racial tension, but that's not excusing it, just trying to understand it. Still, this is a comment from the head of the ADL, rather than an official ADL statement, so I don't necessarily take it as their official position.

Exactly, Wise.  Nowhere in that speech did he excuse or rationalize bigotry.  If anything, Obama tried his best to show what the underlying cause of bigotry in this country is...from both sides of the equation.  If the head of the ADL got anything sinister out of that speech, then I sympathize for him. 

[Battle]

One could ask Wright, a valid point.  Though based on the content of some of his speeches that have been made public, one can pretty reasonably surmise what his response would be.  Though in fairness, it would be interesting to hear some followup from Wright on these issues.  At this point, however, query whether the Obama campaign really wants Wright to have center stage in the Media.

This whole thing could of course play out in a way that would allow Barak Obama to ride above these rough waters.  We are still far enough before the November election that it may be the case that "Pastor Wright" will be "old news" by November, with public interest in him drained; that whenever the guy's name comes up, there will just be snortling and dismissal of him as an old crank.  That seems to be the strategy of the Obama campaign at this point, in distancing the candidate from the Pastor.   One already sees this reaction among those who are predisposed to vote for Obama, and even among those who are predisposed to vote for whoever the Democratic candidate may be.  If this is the way it plays out, there may not be a significant diminution of the traditional Jewish support for the Democratic candidate.

Only time will tell.

The whole debacle that surrounded Pastor Wright (which implicated Mr. Obama) was never an issue to begin with. That's why the strategy of the Obama campaign at this point, in distancing the candidate from the Pastor would be the wise option.

[Vic Vega]

Getting back to the original topic of this thread ...

Doesn't anyone else not believe Barak Obama when he says he was unaware of his church's pro-Hamas publication in the Pastor's Page (calling it a "fresh view") and the publication of the rant of the anti-Israel fanatic who claimed that Israel was creating a bomb to kill Arabs and Blacks (which, I'm sure, would cause some dismay among those Jews who immigrated to Israel from the surrounding Arab countries and Ethiopia  ).

I mean, what are we going to learn next?  That the Rev. Jeremiah Wright endorsed and published in his Pastor's Page an article proclaiming: "To add gentile blood to their Passover matzos, the Zionists are abducting and slitting the throats of Arab children" ...   

When these matters were published (um ... the "Hamas" endorsement and the "Black Bomb" rant, not my imaginary "Passover matzo" statement) Barak Obama was already running for President.  It was just that, at that time of those publications in the Church Bulletin, nobody was making a stink about the Church's positions and the Pastor's statements.  Still, does anyone in their right mind really believe that, for over the past 20 years, Barak Obama has not been aware of the position of his Pastor, his Spiritual Mentor [or is it now "Former Paster" and "Former Spiritual Mentor"] on issues surrounding Israel?  That while running for office someone on his staff, or some friends in the Church, were not informing him of what was going on?  That he would be so out of the loop as to matters as controversial as the two I've cited here?  Frankly, I find this to be beyond belief.

Isn't it more likely that, in his heart of hearts, either Barak Obama didn't care ... or to some degree sympathized with the views of his Pastor? (As Ralph Nader claims)

I know you're being humorous here Mike but your getting dangerously close to "slippery slope" territory here. Speech against Israel doesn't equal Blood Libel.

As usual, context is everything.

If the main thrust of Rev. Wright's sermons in 20 years of preaching were the Middle East and its environs in the present day, he'd of bored his congregation out the door ages ago.

I'm fairly certain Wright's views on Israel and its policies didn't come up all that often. If you don't speak on what is actually relevent to your congregation you won't have one for long. On close inspection of those infamous Youtube segments you'll note that most of the congregation is just politely sitting and listening with no particular interest.

Wright spoke out in opposition to what he saw as a wave of hypocrisy coming from 9/11. As a practical matter it probaby doesn't come up all that often. And again, as has been noted repeatedly, this guy wasn't going to be advising Obama on foreign policy so the idea that Obama's staff needed to vet Obama's Pastor's personal politics is bizarre.

Especially in light of the fact that in any honest discussion of the matter many of Wright's views are not uncommon in the Black Community and should come as a shock to no-one. 
   

But Vic, the church went way beyond "speech against Israel" fer goodness sake.  It approvingly published a rant in the Pastor's Corner by a nutjob who claims that Israel was developing a "Ethnic Bomb" to kill only Blacks and Arabs.  Nevermind that such a bomb would kill a significant segment of the Israeli Jewish Population (who are either Black or from Arab countries).  Oh brother ...!!!  While I was kidding, such a charge does indeed come perilously close to the blood libel, in that it is an absolutely insane allegation fueled by absolute bigotry.

I'm sure you are right that most of the Pastor's speeches and written work did not pertain to Israel and the Middle East, but it is also fair to say (from what I've heard) that he was not inactive in that arena either.  Barak Obama is a savvy guy.  Anyone who had taken Political Science I would realize that the (radical) views of a man a candidate characterizes as his "spiritual mentor" would eventually be raised and become the subject of public scrutiny.  By both the candidate's opponents and by those who are just trying to get a real picture of who the candidate really is.

The fact that some of the extremist views expressed by Wright might indeed be shared by some segment of the Black Community suggests to me only one thing ... that better communication is needed, to foster mutual understanding.

Obama made the mistake of thinking he would be judged for comments that he actually said such as this:
"One of the reasons why so many of my supporters come from the Jewish community...is that I have been a stalwart friend of Israel and supported the special relationship we enjoy with it... They are among our most important allies and their security is sacrosanct."

As opposed to being judged for the alleged views of his pastor.

As for Wright's views, let me try to put things in perspective: Every day on my way to work(I work in the Harlem area) I pass a building that formerly housed the one of Al Sharpton satellite offices and is now currently the(one of the) headquarters of the Black Israelite sect(don't ask).  I also pass kiosks manned by the New Black Panther Party and various other psuedo-nationalists hawking their wares.

I haven't even mentioned the Black Muslims who have at least one Mosque within walking distance from me.

To be blunt, I couldn't swing a dead cat around here without hitting a brother with ideas far more extreme than Wright's. And if East Harlem is a hotbed of extremist thought, its news to me. I can't imagine the South Side of Chicago being that much different.

That's why I'm mildly surprised that there is any controversy regarding this matter at all. Viewed in the context of the community he serves Wright's hardly alarming. If he IS alarming then...I agree better communication is needed.

[michaelintp]

Chattel slavery didn't benefit ANY AFRICAN if they weren't taken initially then they sure as hell left eventually so whoever sold out their countrymen didn't have anyplace to hide they only postponed the inevitable. Slavery only benefited white skinned people.

Well, there probably were African slave-traders who found themselves on the receiving end unexpectedly, but a lot of the work of capturing slaves was 'sub-contracted' to Africans. Of course, I think the responsibility lies with those creating the demand, especially with the supply-belt way that they demanded fresh slaves. For a comparison, it's well known that in Nazi Concentration camps, some inmates were given positions of authority over others, but that doesn't make them somehow complicit in what was done there, IMO.

In order to avoid a digression and because this topic more relevant to the Black Panther Annual #1 comic book, we are discussing the slavery issue in the "Panther Politics" section of the forum, under the BP Annual #1 discussion.  In case anyone is interested.

Obama made the mistake of thinking he would be judged for comments that he actually said such as this:
"One of the reasons why so many of my supporters come from the Jewish community...is that I have been a stalwart friend of Israel and supported the special relationship we enjoy with it... They are among our most important allies and their security is sacrosanct."

As opposed to being judged for the alleged views of his pastor.

Vic, I have the feeling that we are talking past each other. 

Forget we are talking about Obama for a moment.  For most politicians, wouldn't it be a mistake to just take a politician at his word, instead of looking at the views of his closest associates and advisers to gauge his credibility?  It would only make sense not to "look behind" the candidate if one believed: (1) All politicians are honest; (2) One has specific verifiable information to substantiate that in this instance this particular politician is now honestly conveying his beliefs; or (3) In one's subjective evaluation of his "character" you are sure this politician is speaking the truth.  Reginald Hudlin, for example, has expressed his positive view of Barak Obama's character, and Reginald has confidence in his ability to judge character.  I'm not as confident in my own ability to do so, as I've been duped in the past.

An issue of credibility has arisen in connection with an Illinois voter group’s detailed questionnaire, filed under Obama's name during his first bid for elected office in 1996 when he ran for the Illinois State Senate, which liberal/left positions on every issue (including some stances that might alienate the electorate today).  See http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269.html  First it was explained he didn't see it and that a staffer had filled it in, then a copy surfaced with his handwritten notes on it, then the explanation changes to "he didn't see the whole thing" and so on.  I don't care about the questionnaire.  This is just an example of how you can't necessarily take statements by politicians or their campaigns at face value. 

No need to remind anyone here of Hillary Clinton's recent descriptions of her arriving in Bosnia under a hail of bullets in the '90s (disproven by video of her arrival). 

Sometimes politicians don't say what is in their heart of hearts, or even what really happened.  Sometimes they say what they think will get them elected. 

Anyway guys, I think I've said all I can really say on this topic ... I'm already repeating myself.  Each of you will have to judge for yourself whether you believe or question the sincerity and honesty of each candidate for President.  For me, as to Obama, I'm really left with a big

As for Wright's views, let me try to put things in perspective: Every day on my way to work(I work in the Harlem area) I pass a building that formerly housed the one of Al Sharpton satellite offices and is now currently the(one of the) headquarters of the Black Israelite sect(don't ask).  I also pass kiosks manned by the New Black Panther Party and various other psuedo-nationalists hawking their wares.
I haven't even mentioned the Black Muslims who have at least one Mosque within walking distance from me.
To be blunt, I couldn't swing a dead cat around here without hitting a brother with ideas far more extreme than Wright's. And if East Harlem is a hotbed of extremist thought, its news to me. I can't imagine the South Side of Chicago being that much different.
That's why I'm mildly surprised that there is any controversy regarding this matter at all. Viewed in the context of the community he serves Wright's hardly alarming. If he IS alarming then...I agree better communication is needed.

Jeepers, I guess not very many people wear yarmulkas in your neighborhood. 

... Oh wait, I take it back.  The Black Israelites.