Barack Obama is preparing to travel to Israel this week.

As he does so, guess who is highlighting the details of Obama's over-the-top speech to the American Israeli Political Action Committee, in which the likely Democratic nominee adopted a more hardline stance regarding the Middle East peace process than that of the majority of Israelis?

Here's a hint: It's not Obama, nor even Republican John McCain.

Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader has produced a devastating new analysis of Obama's AIPAC speech

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ij0OjMEJKes

Campaigners for Nader and his running-mate, former San Francisco Supervisor Matt Gonzalez, are arguing that Obama's acceptence of many of the same extreme positions embraced by McCain confirms the need for another choice.

Argues the Nader camp:

Why is it important to have Ralph Nader on the ballot in November?

Without him, the plight of the Palestinian people will not be an issue in this year's election.

How do we know?

Because Obama/McCain stand with the militaristic right wing AIPAC lobby in the United States.

Nader/Gonzalez stand with the Israeli/Palestinian peace movements.

You will be hearing a lot this weekend about Obama's upcoming trip to the Middle East.

To keep Obama's trip in perspective, check out our new video - Nader on Obama/Israel - here.

Pass it around to friends and family this weekend.

It is also important to keep in mind that Obama is to the right of some Mossad Israeli hawks. (See recent Mother Jones article here.)

Even these Mossad Israeli hawks - along with the majority of the Israeli people - would open talks with Hamas.

Obama/McCain would not.

Nader/Gonzalez would reverse U.S. policy in the Middle East.

Obama/McCain would not.

We stand with the courageous Israeli and Palestinian peace movements.

We stand against the AIPAC militarists.

At the very least, the Nader campaign's focus on the details of where the Democratic and Republican candidates actually stand with regard to the Israel/Palestine peace process argues for inclusion of independent and third-party candidates -- Nader, Green Cynthia McKinney and Libertarian Bob Barr -- in the fall debates.

Middle East peace is an issue. But it will only be honestly and fully debated if a variety of views -- including those of the majority of Israelis and the majority of Palestinians -- are represented by candidates who are willing to speak openly and bluntly about how to advance the process.

Comments (3)

1. well said! Google needs to stand up and show that it cares about real exchange of information and ideas rather than controlling and restricting the flow of information -- Let Nader Debate! Then we could finally see a substantive political discussion (what a concept!)

   Posted by betterthannader at 07/22/2008 @ 2:03pm

2. I think that Obama is sounding more far right on the Israel/Palestine issues than McCain day by day. Isn't he supposed to be to the left at least a little? Plus, you can never trust what he says, due to the millions of dollars in corporate and special interest ca$h he accepts. Just look at the fact that he voted for FISA--and, to think, he was a renowned Constitutional scholar?? Something is radically wrong with this picture, and not even a hefty dose of flowery "hope" rhetoric can do anything about it.

   I'll definitely be pushing for the inclusion of Nader into the New Orleans Google Debate in September. Only then will we have some accountability of Obama and McCain.

   Nader/Gonzalez '08 all the way.

   Best, Nigel Worcester, MA

   Posted by 32Gully at 07/22/2008 @ 4:05pm

3. Nader is the only candidate to even mention the Palestinians in a positive way.

   Nader is the only person who can bring peace to the entire world.

   I have voted for him 3 times now and plan on voting again in November.

   www.pafundi.com

   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Number of Operations Iraq Freedom and Enduring Freedom casualties as confirmed by U.S. Central Command: 4663

   Posted by pafundi at 07/25/2008 @ 9:45pm