T Nation

The Lowest McCain Has Sunk

"McCain’s and Palin’s attacks on Khalidi are frankly racist. He is a distinguished scholar, and the only objectionable thing about him from a rightwing point of view is that he is a Palestinian. There are about 9 million Palestinians in the world (a million or so are Israeli citizens; 3.7 million are stateless and without rights under Israeli control in the West Bank and Gaza; and 4 million are refugees or exiled in the diaspora; there are about 200,000 Palestinian-Americans, and several million Arab-Americans, many living in swing vote states). Khalidi was not, as the schlock rightwing press charges, a spokesman for the Palestine Liberation Organization. He was an adviser at the Madrid peace talks, but would that not have been, like, a good thing?

Much of the assault on Khalidi comes from the American loony Zionist Right, which quietly supports illegal Zionist colonies in the West Bank and the ethnic cleansing of the remaining Palestinians. They have been tireless advocates of miring the US in wars in Iraq and Iran to ensure that their dreams of ethnic cleansing are unopposed. They are a tiny, cranky but well-funded group that has actively harassed anyone who disagrees with them (at one point, cued by Daniel Pipes, they cyberstalked Khalidi and clogged his email mailbox with spam for weeks at a time). All opinion polling shows that most American Jews are politically liberal, overwhelmingly vote Democrat, and support trading land for peace to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Khalidi is their political ally in any serious peace process, which many have recognized.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has repudiated the “Greater Israel” fantasy that drives the Middle East Forum, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Commentary, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, the Hudson Institute, the American Enterprise Institute and other well-funded sites of far-right thinking on Israel-Palestine that have become, with the rise of the Neoconservatives, highly influential with the US Republican Party. Olmert’s current position is much closer to Khalidi’s than it is to the American ideologues.

That McCain should take his cues from people to the right of the Neoconservatives shows fatal lack of judgment and signals that if he is elected, he will likely pursue policies that are very bad for Israel, forestalling a genuine peace process (which would involve close relations with Palestinians!)

McCain even compared the gathering for Khalidi that Obama attended to a “neo-Nazi” meeting! I mean, really. this is the lowest McCain has sunk yet.

McCain is bringing up Khalidi in order to scare Jewish voters about Obama’s associations, and it is an execrable piece of McCarthyism and in fact much worse than McCarthyism since it is not about ideology but rather has racial overtones. Not allowed to pal around with Arab-Americans, I guess. What other ethnic groups should we not pal around with, from McCain’s point of view? Is there a list? Are some worse than others?"

Read the whole thing.

What I don’t get is how “country first” is so easily turned into “win at all costs”. The two notions aren’t the same, not even if you do think Obama is the devil.

Ah, racist. There you go.

Can someone tells me what makes that racist, I am lost.

I thought there was difference between a race and a nation.

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
Can someone tells me what makes that racist, I am lost.

I thought there was difference between a race and a nation.[/quote]

This is actually a decent question. It’s difficult to answer. For example, are the Japanese a “race.” They would argue so, but genetically they seem quite similar to other east Asians (Chinese/Koreans).

wiki actually has a decent article on it:

Some argue that although race is a valid taxonomic concept in other species, it cannot be applied to humans.[3] Many scientists have argued that race definitions are imprecise, arbitrary, derived from custom, have many exceptions, have many gradations, and that the numbers of races delineated vary according to the culture making the racial distinctions; thus they reject the notion that any definition of race pertaining to humans can have taxonomic rigour and validity.[4] Today most scientists study human genotypic and phenotypic variation using concepts such as “population” and “clinal gradation”. Many contend that while racial categorizations may be marked by phenotypic or genotypic traits, the idea of race itself, and actual divisions of persons into races or racial groups, are social constructs.

You are transparent.

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

The idea of race itself, and actual divisions of persons into races or racial groups, are social constructs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(classification_of_human_beings) [/quote]

I don’t normally agree with Wikipedia, or with the idea that things are “socially constructed”; I do very much, however, agree with this ^^.

Race - looked at from any point of view - is a meaningless concept really.

I think I’ve figured out your brand of conservatism. I wondered awhile why you never respond to any of the points made about Islamic terrorism and why you so vociferously oppose the modern Republican party.

There’s plenty of reason to dislike Khalidi and Obama because of his associations with Khalidi:
http://www.google.com/search?q=khalidi+site%3AJihadwatch.org&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Suffice it to say, for your particular brand of “conservatism,” Islam isn’t even on the radar. Everything is the fault of the Zionists. This is Buchanan’s blind spot as well.

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
Can someone tells me what makes that racist, I am lost.

I thought there was difference between a race and a nation.[/quote]

The race is Arab. Pretty clear.

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
apbt55 wrote:
Can someone tells me what makes that racist, I am lost.

I thought there was difference between a race and a nation.

The race is Arab. Pretty clear.[/quote]

His religion is Islam. He is a Jew-hating terrorist sympathizer. Funny how those people keep turning up in Obama’s network.

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
Race - looked at from any point of view - is a meaningless concept really. [/quote]

Unless you are on the receiving end of discrimination based on your visual appearance…

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Much of the assault on Khalidi comes from the American loony Zionist Right, which quietly supports illegal Zionist colonies in the West Bank and the ethnic cleansing of the remaining Palestinians.

I think I’ve figured out your brand of conservatism. I wondered awhile why you never respond to any of the points made about Islamic terrorism and why you so vociferously oppose the modern Republican party.

There’s plenty of reason to dislike Khalidi and Obama because of his associations with Khalidi:
http://www.google.com/search?q=khalidi+site%3AJihadwatch.org&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Suffice it to say, for your particular brand of “conservatism,” Islam isn’t even on the radar. Everything is the fault of the Zionists. This is Buchanan’s blind spot as well. [/quote]

Ah, the reliable anti-Semitism smear. I had the over-under at five posts, pleasantly surprised.

I’m going to take the word of conservative who knows something about the region over that of “Jihadwatch”, whoever the hell they are.

As to Islam not even being on my radar…not really worth a reply, but here goes. I take the fanaticism of jihadis as a given, I’m not sure why it even needs discussing. That doesn’t excuse the fact that the tail wags the dog when it comes to the U.S. and Israel. No, I don’t really buy the “Clash of Civilizations” narrative. You clearly do.

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Much of the assault on Khalidi comes from the American loony Zionist Right, which quietly supports illegal Zionist colonies in the West Bank and the ethnic cleansing of the remaining Palestinians.

I think I’ve figured out your brand of conservatism. I wondered awhile why you never respond to any of the points made about Islamic terrorism and why you so vociferously oppose the modern Republican party.

There’s plenty of reason to dislike Khalidi and Obama because of his associations with Khalidi:
http://www.google.com/search?q=khalidi+site%3AJihadwatch.org&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Suffice it to say, for your particular brand of “conservatism,” Islam isn’t even on the radar. Everything is the fault of the Zionists. This is Buchanan’s blind spot as well.

Ah, the reliable anti-Semitism smear. I had the over-under at five posts, pleasantly surprised.

I’m going to take the word of conservative who knows something about the region over that of “Jihadwatch”, whoever the hell they are.

As to Islam not even being on my radar…not really worth a reply, but here goes. I take the fanaticism of jihadis as a given, I’m not sure why it even needs discussing. That doesn’t excuse the fact that the tail wags the dog when it comes to the U.S. and Israel. [/quote]

You’re telling me that the Copts (Spencer and Ibrahim) at JihadWatch know nothing about the “region?” Thank you for that laughably absurd assertion. Egypt is a stone’s throw away from Israel and “Palestine.”

Why don’t you take the balls of the Saudis a bit further down your throat while you’re supporting Khalidi?

Yeah, I’m up on my Islamic studies and their division of the world into Dar al-islam and Dar al-Harb (Reliance of the Traveler, point w43.2). You keep looking for evidence of meddling by your Jewish puppeteers.

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
Race - looked at from any point of view - is a meaningless concept really. [/quote]

ftw!

[quote]vroom wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
Race - looked at from any point of view - is a meaningless concept really.

Unless you are on the receiving end of discrimination based on your visual appearance…[/quote]

That’s especially when it becomes meaningless. By allowing others the ability to affect how you view yourself or even having to defend yourself based on some superficial quality gives the attack meaning. Ignoring it really is the best way to make it go away.

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Much of the assault on Khalidi comes from the American loony Zionist Right, which quietly supports illegal Zionist colonies in the West Bank and the ethnic cleansing of the remaining Palestinians.

I think I’ve figured out your brand of conservatism. I wondered awhile why you never respond to any of the points made about Islamic terrorism and why you so vociferously oppose the modern Republican party.

There’s plenty of reason to dislike Khalidi and Obama because of his associations with Khalidi:
http://www.google.com/search?q=khalidi+site%3AJihadwatch.org&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Suffice it to say, for your particular brand of “conservatism,” Islam isn’t even on the radar. Everything is the fault of the Zionists. This is Buchanan’s blind spot as well.

Ah, the reliable anti-Semitism smear. I had the over-under at five posts, pleasantly surprised.

I’m going to take the word of conservative who knows something about the region over that of “Jihadwatch”, whoever the hell they are.

As to Islam not even being on my radar…not really worth a reply, but here goes. I take the fanaticism of jihadis as a given, I’m not sure why it even needs discussing. That doesn’t excuse the fact that the tail wags the dog when it comes to the U.S. and Israel.

You’re telling me that the Copts (Spencer and Ibrahim) at JihadWatch know nothing about the “region?” Thank you for that laughably absurd assertion. Egypt is a stone’s throw away from Israel and “Palestine.”
[/quote]

That’s interesting that they’re Copts. Doesn’t change the fact that their website is by all outward appearances a Likud front. I just read every one of those links, and ran into the usual AIPAC-style propaganda. Khalidi said the killing of civilians is never justified, but that of Israeli soldiers is? If I were a Palestinian, I’d probably feel the same way. So would you. Khalidi said Israel is an “appartheid state”? It is, and pretty clearly. Some ISRAELIS say that. Ha-aretz had an editorial about the “new Herrenvolk” a few years ago. The tragedy of Israel is that a people that survived centuries of pogroms and then industrial genocide received a country and found themselves as oppressors (before your next slander, no, this does not equate the Holocaust to the Occupied Territories).

Way to stay classy, guy who started a thread about civility on this forum.

[quote]
No, I don’t really buy the “Clash of Civilizations” narrative. You clearly do.

Yeah, I’m up on my Islamic studies and their division of the world into Dar al-islam and Dar al-Harb (Reliance of the Traveler, point w43.2). You keep looking for evidence of meddling by your Jewish puppeteers. [/quote]

Where did I do that? Keep up the anti-Semite slurs though, it’s the mark of a non-existent argument.

“AIPAC,” “Zionists,” “Likud”. You’ve effectively made my point for me. The Jews that agree with you are cited, the Jews that don’t are Zionist propagandists. The Jews you like are the ones most inclined towards their own self-destruction through “talks” with organizations who warmly refer to Surah 2.65 in their charters.

Yes, and Khalidi defines “innocent” the same way Surah 5:32 does, meaning the “innocent” are the Muslims. Here’s the information you were looking for:

[quote]Thus Columbia?s new chair was given to Rashid Khalidi, a University of Chicago historian and Palestinian activist. Khalidi took over the ?Edward Said Chair Of Arab Studies.? Said, who died recently, and who was raised in Egypt, was a member of the Palestine National Council and an anti-Israel activist who thought the Oslo peace process was a “sellout.” [16] He was an English literature professor whose expertise was Jane Austen, yet his anti-American and anti-Israel writings dominate the perspectives of Middle East Studies departments across the nation.

Khalidi is on record defending the killing of Israeli soldiers: ?Killing civilians is a war crime, whoever does it, but resistance to occupation is legitimate in international law.? [17] Khalidi is an obsessive Israel basher and has stated Americans are ?brainwashed? by the Middle East?s only democracy. He also considered US popular support for overthrowing Saddam Hussein an ?idiots’ consensus?. [18]

Another Palestinian professor in Columbia?s Middle East Studies program is Joseph Massad, who also rails against the US and Israel. Massad likes to denigrate American democracy by alluding to early 19th century history when slavery was a worldwide institution, and accuses America of nuclear genocide for using the atomic bomb to end World War II. He has also characterized Israel as an ?imperialist? and ?colonial? concoction of the Europeans. [19]

With Khalidi?s appointment as chair and Massad as the main teacher of politics and history of the Middle East at Columbia, what students will be exposed to with no alternative views isn?t hard to imagine. Even Lisa Anderson, head of International Studies at Columbia has conceded publicly that Middle East Studies at Columbia are not balanced, nor are they at other Middle East Studies centers nationwide. [20] What is more telling is that Columbia tried to conceal where the money came from to fund Khalidi?s chair until pressure from outside academics and even the state of New York required it. [21] Daniel Pipes has remarked that choosing Khalidi for the Columbia chair is particularly egregious because he is one of a team of ?..Palestinian falsifiers who are all giving us this propagandist, non-scholarly interpretation of the Middle East,? and that Columbia?s cover-up of the donors ?..doesn?t smell right?. Steve Emerson, who reports to Congress frequently on terrorism issues, has stated publicly that ?Khalidi?s statements raise serious questions about his attitudes on violence.? [22] [/quote]

Of course, this is all Zionist propaganda, isn’t it?

[quote]Way to stay classy, guy who started a thread about civility on this forum.
[/quote]

No problem. What do you say to a guy who defends a professor at the Saudi-funded Columbia center for Arab Studies?

My argument is a darn-sight better than the your slur of “racism” for anyone who dares point out Khalidi’s connections to terrorism. Why don’t you just recite the shahada right now and start banging your head towards Mecca 5x/day? You’ve got plenty of criticism for “Zionists” and “Neo-conservatives” (many of whom happen to be Jews), but never an ounce of condemnation for those who’ve openly pledged their lives to our destruction. In fact, you identify with them!

What’s even more laughable was that both McCAin and Obama were falling all over themselves to demonstrate their support for Israel during their last debate. It appears the “zionists” have gotten to Obama also.

“McCArthyism”. Wow. I heard a CAIR official make this same statement in a recent public denunciation of an Irvine city councilman who dared criticize the organizations ties to terrorism.

I was getting at the point that it isn’t race issue, It is a ideology, a belief structure that he and the group he leads all hold. That seeks the destruction of Israel.

I know lot of people don’t take stock in the bible but I believe Palestine is the nation of men, descendents of ishmeal. the illegitimate son of Abram the father of Israel. pretty sure most of their belief, at least the radicals like Khalidi is a movement to irradicate, some might call this genocide, the Isreal nation.

There in lies the problem with those of us that still believe in a free nation where we support our allies that fight for the same freedom’s in their own nation. We tend to look unfavorably on groups that would like destroy them.

Pathetic - the first sentence disqualifies the entire piece. The attacks on Khalidi have focused on everything but race.

The predictable shriek of “racism!” is nothing more than someone wanting to change the subject.

Oh, and GDollars, to your defense against comments that you are anti-Semitic: if the standard is so low that merely being a critic of a Palestinian makes you “racist”, then by that very same standard merely being a critic of Israel is “anti-Semitic”.

You can’t have it both ways. Figure out which way you want to have it and get back to us - in the meantime, spare us this low-grade Buchanan impression.