LA Times Revives Obama Smear

Does being friends with Palestinians make one anti-Israel? Peter Wallsten of the LA Times apparently thinks so. His latest piece about Barack Obama's past ties to pro-Palestinian activists in Chicago is certainly meant to give the reader that impression. [See my recent Nation article, "Smearing Obama," for background on this topic. One of Wallsten's sources happens to be a key purveyor of the "Obama is a Muslim" lie. Updates below.]

The evidence Wallsten presents is scant and hardly alarming: Obama said nice things about Rashid Khalidi at a going away party for the respected Palestinian scholar, who moved from the University of Chicago to the Columbia University; he attended a speech by the late Palestinian expert Edward Said in 1998; he occasionally made statements supportive of Palestinians to Palestinian activists he knew in Chicago. [Also on The Nation's website, my colleague Jon Wiener puts the views of Khalidi and Said in context.]

Yet the implicit tone of Wallsten's article suggests that Obama is not to be trusted on matters relating to Israel. Left aside is the fact that one can be pro-Palestinian and pro-Israel (at least in Chicago). Or the fact that the majority of Israelis support a two-state solution to the conflict, the same position held by Obama. MJ Rosenberg brilliantly parodied the gist of the Times' article in a blog post at Talking Points Memo today: "LA Times Today: Obama Not To Be Trusted, Doesn't Hate Arabs!!"

Says MJ:

I used to work for Sen. Carl Levin, a Jew and a strong supporter of Israel, who is a close friend of the Arab community (in part, because he represents more Arab Americans than any other senator). I've seen Carl at Palestinian dinners (last year I saw him at one with Condi Rice). In fact, Joe Lieberman, not exactly an enemy of the State of Israel, has always gone out of his way to keep an open door to Arab-Americans, Palestinians and others.

In other words, this article is utterly bogus. Yes, Obama has empathy for Palestinians, just as he has empathy for Israelis. The man is naturally empathetic which will help repair some of the damage inflicted to our country's image by the current xenophobic administration.

If Arab-Americans and Palestinians trust Obama and think he plays fair, he will have considerably more leverage with them than either of the other two candidates who are not perceived that way. As Congressmen Bob Wexler and Steve Rothman, both Obama supporters, like to say, an American President who can speak to and be heard by Arabs can do a much better job in helping Israel and the Palestinians achieve peace and security than a President who is considered utterly unsympathetic to their concerns.

The accusation that Obama is "anti-Israel" isn't really about Obama or Israel. It's about racism, Islamophobia, and an attempt by Obama's political opponents to score a few cheap political points.

UPDATE: Debbie Schlussel, an inflammatory right-wing blogger and originator of the "Obama is a Muslim" lie, has identified herself as one of Wallsten's sources.

Here's some background on Schlussel, from my recent article:

"Barack Hussein Obama: Once a Muslim, Always a Muslim," blogger Debbie Schlussel wrote on December 18, 2006. Schlussel had a history of inflammatory rhetoric and baseless accusations. She said journalist Jill Carroll, who was kidnapped by Iraqi insurgents in 2006, "hates America" and "hates Israel"; labeled George Soros a "fake Holocaust survivor"; and speculated that Pakistani terrorists were somehow to blame for last year's shootings at Virginia Tech.

UPDATE II, 4:35 PM, Friday. Peter Wallsten responds to The Nation: "I welcome any and all criticism, of course. But like any reporter, I interview dozens, sometimes hundreds, of people for stories, and part of that process is to decide what's credible and what's not. In this case, the story was based solely on original reporting. I hope you and every reader would judge it based on what appeared in the Los Angeles Times."

Comments (42)

1. Not a cheap shot. A well-financed shot. Thank you, AIPAC. And Billary. (Check that list of 21 Billary billionaire backers who tried to bully Pelosi ... compare to AIPAC major backers ... present & accounted for.)

   This, however, isn't so much about votes (AIPAC doesn't control crucial numbers at the polls), as it is about placating certain advertisers. And donors. The heart of the matter, as it sends a message to Obama.

   Posted by sloper at 04/10/2008 @ 3:52pm

2. Pennsylvania poll numbers dropping and Her Nibs isn't going to win it "big"...which means the numbers are still Obama's.

   Of COURSE, you're going to see more stuff like this. Trying to peel away a few Jewish Democrats, with "hints" that Obama is "pro-Palestinian" is an obvious play (watch how many time FRANKGRITS, HELENDAO, or...ahem...others bring it up now).

   And of course it helps McCain and don't think at this point there aren't a few Hillary'ites out there (in powerful positions) who aren't willing to sabotage Obama and let McCain win....if for the fact, that it still leaves 2012 open for She-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed and if her fingerprints aren't on it (like this LA Times piece)...she can't overtly be blamed for it.

   BTW, go back and find the Obama speech that he made in Tel Aviv last year after the rocket attacks....nothing "pro-Palestinian" there!)

   Posted by Mask at 04/10/2008 @ 4:14pm

3. to treat Hamas as a partner in negotiations.

   Posted by LVLIBERTY1 04/10/2008 @ 4:18pm

   you mean the democratically elected government?

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/10/2008 @ 4:20pm

4. free advice for the GOP!

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/10/2008 @ 4:27pm

5. Polls show that Canadians prefer Obama as President does that mean they are Anti American? Its unbelieveable to me that Obama comes from a mother who instill in him respect and appreciation for other cultures. His diversity is one of the reason that he is appealing as the President. He does not demonize people yet they continue to demonize him with innuendoes about fearing him hating him not trusting him. He is a muslim because he has a muslim name he is a radical because he goes to a Progressive church. He is naieve because he wants to talk with Iran. He is a concern because he wants to bomb Pakistan if he had actionable intelligence about Al Quaeda bases there and the Prime minister wont act. The guy said that he is PRO Israel but he thinks that Obama will be sympathetic to Palestians. How sit that diferent from a republican who said a while back Obama is as liberal as can be but he LISTENS to you he doesnt demonize you, you can talk to him. Its the SAME thing this guy is saying but somehow that means Obama is Anti semetic. Its who he is. Read his book he can be around people that he doesnt share all their views with. He even talk about a Prolifer who sent him an email saying he thought that he was fair even though he supports a woman's right to choose

   They've got this guy ALL wrong and its sad to me because he embodies a lot of qualities I think worthwhile in a leader. I think that we are so cynical and mistrustful that we cant appreciate someone who can see all sides to an argument.

   Carol

   Posted by harriscrl3 at 04/10/2008 @ 4:42pm

6. Posted by LVLIBERTY1 04/10/2008 @ 4:45pm

   Just curious, would you negotiate with somebody who called for your cities to be "Dresdenized" with only slight regard for collateral damage as long as it destroyed his enemies? Or for the use of "3-5 nukes" to gain a victory, instead of negotiate a settlement?

   Just curious.

   Posted by Mask at 04/10/2008 @ 4:52pm

7. When will people realize that to want a two state solution does not make you anti-Israel. It means you just want peace for Palestinians and Israelis alike without the destruction of one country or another.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/10/2008 @ 4:57pm

8. Posted by MARKCANYON 04/10/2008 @ 4:53p

   Shouldn't you want the death and destruction of all the Jews in Israel anyway? Such double speak Mark.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/10/2008 @ 4:59pm

9. Posted by MARKCANYON 04/10/2008 @ 4:53pm

   MARKCANYON,

   You obviously missed the whole point of the Khalidi article, which was that Israel has been pursuing a "one-state" solution with illegal settlements on Palestinian land. If it were up to the right-wing Likud that has been running Israel, there would be no Palestine, and this is what is meant by "one-state"

   Posted by Metteyya at 04/10/2008 @ 5:14pm

10. Posted by MARKCANYON 04/10/2008 @ 5:04pm

    Should really try something other than name calling. I quoted you earlier as thinking Jews are lesser than you and their destruction should be invited. So I guess if Israel was nuked tomorrow you wouldn't be opposed to it.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/10/2008 @ 5:25pm

11. Chicago Tribune 24 September, 2004 -- David Mendell, Tribune staff reporter

    'U.S. Senate candidate Barack Obama suggested Friday that the United States one day might have to launch surgical missile strikes into Iran and Pakistan to keep extremists from getting control of nuclear bombs.

    Obama, a Democratic state senator from the Hyde Park neighborhood, made the remarks during a meeting Friday with the Tribune editorial board. ...

    Iran announced on Tuesday that it has begun converting tons of uranium into gas, a crucial step in making fuel for a nuclear reactor or a nuclear bomb. The International Atomic Energy Agency has called for Iran to suspend all such activities. ...

    "On the other hand, having a radical Muslim theocracy in possession of nuclear weapons is worse. So I guess my instinct would be to err on not having those weapons in the possession of the ruling clerics of Iran. … And I hope it doesn't get to that point. But realistically, as I watch how this thing has evolved, I'd be surprised if Iran blinked at this point."

    As for Pakistan, Obama said that if President Pervez Musharraf were to lose power in a coup, the United States similarly might have to consider military action in that country to destroy nuclear weapons it already possesses. ...'

    Posted by HonestLiberal at 04/10/2008 @ 5:28pm

12. osted by MARKCANYON 04/10/2008 @ 5:04pm

    On top of that I am not easily insulted by scum of the earth style nazi-sympathizers. Try harder it may work.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/10/2008 @ 5:33pm

13. CCCOMFO, discussing Israel with MARKHIMMLER is a wasted effort to say the very least.

    This is a guy who called the Holocaust "one bright moment in history".

    His attitude to the Jews and Israel, makes LVLIBERTY's attitude towards the Palestinians seem like Jimmy Carter's!

    Posted by Mask at 04/10/2008 @ 7:31pm

14. Posted by LVLIBERTY1 04/10/2008 @ 6:01pm

    Speaking of which, just so we're clear, LVLIB....

    what ARE the SPECIFIC "legitimate" borders of Israel that you consider "legal"? What the UN mandated in 1947 or what they won in '67 or is there some 2000 year old map/description from a religious tome or what?

    Posted by Mask at 04/10/2008 @ 7:33pm

15. Posted by LVLIBERTY1 04/10/2008 @ 7:52pm

    Okay....why?

    Why are THOSE the "legitimate" borders of Israel?

    Posted by Mask at 04/10/2008 @ 8:14pm

16. Limbaugh Goosesteppers: he's racist and anti-semitic!

    AIPAC president Howard Friedman stated in a letter to Newsweek that "Senators Clinton, Obama, McCain and Governor Huckabee have demonstrated their support for a strong U.S.-Israel relationship."

    Haaretz: Obama supports Israel. Period.

    Jerusalem Post: Obama is not 'bad for Israel'

    Ralph Nader: Obama's "supporting the Israeli destruction of the tiny section called Gaza, the million-and-a-half people. He doesn't have any sympathy for a civilian death ratio of about 300-to-1, 300 Palestinians to one Israeli."

    Obama: "My view is that the United States' special relationship with Israel obligates us to be helpful to them in the search for credible partners with whom they can make peace, while also supporting Israel in defending itself against enemies sworn to its destruction"

    Limbaugh Goosesteppers: uh huh... he's probably Muslim too.

    Posted by winyahn at 04/10/2008 @ 8:46pm

17. Dash o' logic: The very same country that chose George WMD Bush over and over (and you know who you are)

    The very same country that chomped on freedom fries, boycotted a chick band, called a shot up congressman anti-American, and sang along teary eyed "And I'm proud to be and American, where at least I know I'm free... God Bless the USA!

    The same country will very likely go for McCain

    Posted by winyahn at 04/10/2008 @ 9:02pm

18. Posted by ZERO 04/10/2008 @ 8:54pm

    It's funny that LV supports a decision made by the UN to give Israel the land in the first place but if you ask him about the want of UN now he would say we shouldn't pay attention to it.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/10/2008 @ 9:09pm

19. Posted by ZERO 04/10/2008 @ 9:16pm

    I don't something about insanity makes me have to comment. I guess there is no point because I will never change his mind.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/10/2008 @ 9:30pm

20. For Frosty who seems to like people who do not believe other people should exist.

    Posted by LVLIBERTY1 04/10/2008 @ 4:45pm

    what the fuck?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/10/2008 @ 10:17pm

21. I've learned that Carl Levin (also one of my Senators) et al is not decisively opposed to Arabs. What does that have to do with Obama, perhaps I'm having trouble deciphering Avi Berman's badly organized piece.

    Let me attempt to explain this in as simple terms as possible so as to clear up your confusion. Carl Levin is a Jew. He apparently has cordial relations with Arabs in his state. No one suspects him of being anti-Israel or anti-semitic. Hence, cordial relations with Arabs cannot be taken as evidence of anti-Israel or anti-semitic leanings. That logic should apply to Barack Obama just as it does to Carl Levin.

    The point of Ari's post is that there is an on-going campaign to smear Barack Obama with a variety of sins, largely based on this sort of non-evidence. The people who promote these smears have dark agendas of their own and are not constrained by fidelity to the truth.

    I do hope this has been helpful.

    Posted by robgo2 at 04/11/2008 @ 02:11am

22. Posted by MARKCANYON 04/11/2008 @ 03:00am

    I like how brash you are because some of us want a two state peaceful solution that automatically means we hate Jews somehow. I have plenty of Jewish friends including my little sisters boyfriend. I think as a people Jews are amazing. They have found a way to survive some of the worst atrocities. I have an appreciation of their religion also. I seek a two state system and just because MarkCanyon and LVLiberty say so that all of a sudden makes me anti-semitic. Geniuses you two are. Maybe you should think about what your saying before you speak and jump to wild baseless conclusions with absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/11/2008 @ 03:31am

23. Why must we all Love the Isreali Gov't? I have nothing against the citizens of either country or Culture- But I despise their Leaders as Much as I do the Ones who've taken over our Country. I beleive the people of Isreal and the People of Palestine would be better off (as we would) if those who claim 'leadership' actually cared about them instead of the doctrine which seems to be guiding Most Political powers- Through Chaos (fear) comes Order (control). Teh majority of US want out of the ME, have for Decades. but the Inc's and their lap dogs have found this agenda to be Profittable. So the mantra "We must fight them there" continues. We are No Longer a Democracy, we have no control over what is Done using our Name, Resources and Blood- why do we think the People of these countries have any more Say then US? If We do Not demand the Criminals in Our gov't be brought to Justice- then all is Lost not just for US, but those who wish for the same Rights & Freedoms Our Country was Founded On, in theirs? Thsi Admin, the Inc's, the Congress and their Foreign sponsors must be dragged out from behind the Facade they have been hiding behind for decades, some for nearly a Century (Federal Reserve).There are so many who Must be Tried for their Crimes we will be entertained for Decades to come with this Reality (Court) TV!

    Posted by Purple girl at 04/11/2008 @ 06:53am

24. I mask my racism under indignation at what the fucking Jews have done to the unfortunate Arabs. The truth and justice of the matter is of no account to me. Shitting on the Jews is what it's about and in the process I am perfectly willing to claim moral superiority over you. I am gutless hypocrite.

    Posted by MARKCANYON 04/11/2008 @ 03:00am | ignore this person

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/11/2008 @ 09:12am

25. Apparently we have gone from throwing the kitchen sink at each other to throwing the bath room stool with its contents. If Sen. Obama is for walking away from some of the historical hate and hopefully moving us away from nuclear winter I'll vote for that. nuclear winter doesn't seem like the best solution to global warming. I must confess that I don't know any of the people mentioned, but according to the blogs they seem like intellectuals that are interested in peace. I saw the Paul Newman movie about the boat that no one wanted and I love all the Jewish people that I know. I'm seventy years old and an army buddy of mine had 8 mm film of; Dachau, Auschwiz, Birkenau, Belsen, and Buchenwald when those camps were liberated. it seems that we are well on our way to repeating history. I personally don't care, but that isn't what I want for my children. dying in war isn't the only way to become a hero there are much better and more productive ways.

    Posted by julien38 at 04/11/2008 @ 1:57pm

26. I am not a Jew nor an Arab. My interest is in humans acting humane. After what the Jews have gone through they, of all people, should know better than to oppress others. I am an American Indian and what the Israelis are doing is nothing less than the cruelty and dominance of the strong over the weak perpetrated against the native peoples of our own land. Those here in the U.S. seem to forget the circumstances under which this country was conquered (stolen). To remember this is shameful so entitlement in the name of God seems to be the excuse for all who dominate others. I am disgusted and disappointed in the Jewish people who forget and ashamed of this country for ignoring their part in this atrocity. Although not surprising given our own history. Who truely are the bigots and hipocrites here. The middle east conflict will never end until the State of Israel remembers its past as they want everyone else to remember, not to use it as an excuse to gain but to ensure it never happens again to anyone.

    Posted by CherokeeMoon at 04/11/2008 @ 2:45pm

27. I recommend that people read the actual LA Times article, which says nothing more than that Palestinian supporters see a friend in Obama. No smears are revived, the contributions of the Schluessels and Abunimahs to the contrary notwithstanding. It seems to be a fairly balanced and informative article. Obama did hobnob with Said and Khalidi, did he not? If Palestinians support Obama it is certainly interesting news, and it is a tribute to his ability to get along with everyone, considering that he has pretty strong Jewish support.

    Posted by amiiss at 04/11/2008 @ 2:56pm

28. Does anyone have ideas regarding how to hold the media accountable for letting themselves and the people they interview equate anti-Semitism (a misnomer-- Palestinians are 100% "Semitic") with criticism of Israel's illegal occupation and brutal use of torture? Would an organization like Moveon.org be willing to organize writing campaigns with this very issue in mind? This is both the most critical and the most misunderstood issue when it comes to our efforts to create peace in the Middle East, if you actually believe that's the aim of all this. It is beyond irresponsible to label those of us who criticize human rights abuses "anti-Semites" simply because we're not as selective in our definition of "human" as their oppressors are. It is our kind of mentality – the kind that respects all humans – that has spoken out against genocide and torture world wide throughout history. It's just infuriating.

    Posted by lightner at 04/11/2008 @ 3:39pm

29. Does anyone have ideas regarding how to hold the media accountable for letting themselves and the people they interview equate anti-Semitism (a misnomer-- Palestinians are 100% "Semitic") with criticism of Israel's illegal occupation and brutal use of torture? Would an organization like Moveon.org be willing to organize writing campaigns with this problem in mind? This is both the most critical and the most misunderstood issue when it comes to our efforts to create peace in the Middle East, if you actually believe that peace is the aim of all this. It is beyond irresponsible to label those of us who criticize human rights abuses as "anti-Semites" simply because we're not as selective in our definition of "human being" as they are. It is our kind of mentality – the kind that respects all humans – that has spoken out against genocide and torture world wide throughout history. It's just infuriating.

    Posted by lightner at 04/11/2008 @ 3:48pm

30. all candidates face an opposition campaign. republicans, as the opposition, are masters at reaching down low to scrape the bottom of the barrel to instill fear and doubt into the minds of the voting public about the candidate they oppose. exaggerating or outright lying is part of their schtick and should come as no surprise to anyone. they play the same tired cards: obama is a muslim; he is anti-Israel; he supports every word uttered by Rev Wright; he's too inexperienced....blah blah blah. too many weak minded Americans believe this crap. after what we've seen the last 7 plus years, i'd vote for my alcoholic neighbor over a republican any day.

    Posted by sirhcus at 04/11/2008 @ 5:06pm

31. Why is this matter being framed as if anti-israeli is such an unthinkable position? Or even pro-palestinian? This isn't abortion! We're talking about understanding the realities of occupation and refugee life, the politics tied to the scarcity of humanistic rhetoric, much less behavior.

    Most folks are in a hurry, now, (informed by one biased source or another)to learn of their position concerning the israeli occupation of palestine (the conflict, the war, the problem, the peace process; these phrases are not appropriate descriptors, considering there exists language that precisely describe the situation).

    I'd support anyone who advocates humanistic policy and takes critical, responsible action. Unfortunately, that is infrequently what is offered by american political candidates. More of the same (historically successful) propaganda and lying is almost guaranteed, regardless of who wins this presidential contest...

    But it is a perplexingly troubled state we are in, when we will not allow our potential representatives to approach domestic or foreign issues with integrity and true allegiance to us; to human welfare, even when they initiate a willingness/desire to do so.

    We have become quite a morally confused sort...

    Posted by israelibro at 04/11/2008 @ 7:54pm

32. Thought I recognized the name Debbie Schlussel in your post. Your backgrounder, however, omits one key point: the passage of the anti-affirmative action "Michigan Civil Rights Initiative"/Proposal TWO for which she's General Counsel. She is not just a right-wing talking head, but a dangerous activist on domestic issues as well as on Israel/Palestine.

    Posted by ypsibobbyg at 04/11/2008 @ 8:25pm

33. Someone above referred to Obama's church as "progressive". Well, I would beg to disagree. Perhaps it may even be called REGRESSIVE in that it instils hatred and racist sentiments onto the younger and more impressionable congregants, thus perpetuating the harm to next generations.

    Further, it astonishes me that children are allowed to witness Rev. Wright's lewd, pornographic gyrations on the pulpit while screaming: "Yah Bill Clinton loves us like he did monica...he's riding us dirty like he did Monica." Perhaps it is not too old-fashioned to be incredulous at the fact that this was coming from a person in a position of trust and that the two young girls of a presidential candidate had been sitting at the pews listening and viewing such paranoid, totally inappropriate commentary. It was not a bar loounge or a bowling alley. It was a "church" of sorts I believe. If that is Sen. Obama's parental judgment in allowing his kids to witness such vulgar acts and listen to extremist hateful words, then he is a hell of a "progressive" politician. But his anorexic resume and lack of judgment is obvious to everyone, including Obama, when he said back in 2004 when he was asked if he'd run as president in '04:

    "Well, no, I don't think that I can do that...my resume is not capable of supporing that and I don't have the judgment..." That was Obama then, wisely asserting his lack of experience in '08 would not make him a viable candidate.

    Right on Senator. Let's hope that Obamyopia sees the wisdom in what Sen. McCain had to say to Tim Russert in a Meet the Press interview when asked who'd make a good president.

    "I am sure. I have no doubt that Sen. Hillary Clinton will make a good President".

    Let's face it. BO is, at best, even though talented in speechmaking and ambition, naively arrogant. Stating that "Hillary can stay in the race as long as she wants to" was the icing on the cake. He is giving His "permission" to a woman who was in politics when he first started tying his shoe laces while at the same time belitting her! Well, in about 8 years, BO will have taken sufficient courses to graduate from Harvard's new "Gender Sensitivity 101" course. And he may stop making sexist statements referring to his female opponent's "claws coming out" and "likeable enough", etc. This man has not been tested in life, never mind the highest political office .

    His arrogant elitism, vacuousness and those 'typical old white women' (discerning his thinly-veiled condescension) will unfortunately demolish any chances he had of getting the nomination--teaching Him what no lecture had taught him in or out of the ivy tower in his Speechmaking career. Perhaps it's not too late for him, though, to apply for the Chief Whitehouse Speechwriter's position. He's truly gifted.

    Posted by sakel at 04/11/2008 @ 8:30pm

34. Posted by SAKEL 04/11/2008 @ 8:30pm

    Do you have a reference for the resume comment?

    Posted by winyahn at 04/11/2008 @ 9:50pm

35. The Israel/Palestine problem (in that order)is largely an American responsibility, and it has little to do with Judaism or Islam.

    Posted by donpolly at 04/12/2008 @ 07:43am

36. Most major newspapers are backing Hillary, and therefore, doing whatever they can to crack at Barack. I think Obama's openness to the two-state solution makes him one of the most progressive politicians out there. I trust he will work for it. There will be no peace in the Middle East if Palestine doesn't have their own state, and if Israel doesn't stop abusing its imperialistic opportunities.

    Thank you, Nation, for keeping the integrity in journalism.

    Posted by ShamanBlues at 04/12/2008 @ 6:03pm

37. Is it worse to be "Dresdenized", or to be "West Banked"? Of course, the former is theoretical, while the latter is the hard fist of reality.

    "Just curious, would you negotiate with somebody who called for your cities to be "Dresdenized" with only slight regard for collateral damage as long as it destroyed his enemies? Or for the use of "3-5 nukes" to gain a victory, instead of negotiate a settlement?"

    Just curious.

    Posted by MASK

    Posted by Durutti at 04/12/2008 @ 6:25pm

38. What's wrong with going to a Said lecture? Has anyone at the LA Times read any of his books? He's not a raving fanatic. Quite the contrary. He was a thinking man who genuinely wanted peace. I'm actually impressed that Obama went to one of his lectures and ashamed that the LA Times is trying to drum up anti-Muslim hatred. The most disturbing aspect of the article was Foxman's quote. He sounds like a maniac.

    Posted by TripLBee at 04/12/2008 @ 10:19pm

39. Is it worse to be "Dresdenized", or to be "West Banked"?

    this is a knucklehead question. it's not even in the same universe.

    Dresden:up to 100,000 civilians, many of them homeless refugees, were incinerated in ONE NIGHT. at least 40% were women and children.

    the arabs of the West Bank lead a pityful existence. they are in camps, residential camps, not extermination camps. they are supported by the UN and many western countries. perhaps a comparison with American Indians on reservations could be made. they are poor and without jobs. many used to have jobs in Israel but the intifada spoiled that.they need our help, as does Israel.

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/12/2008 @ 11:09pm

40. Isnt this the same newspaper that just got scammed about a story involving Tupac and Biggie?

    Posted by qjh48901 at 04/13/2008 @ 12:55am

41. It's about time we told israel to go to hell. We need someone that will do just that and stop pumping OUR money to them to slaughter innocent men, women and children.

    Posted by karlo at 04/14/2008 @ 09:08am

42. When is everyone going to realize the problems facing the Middle East are based on who has ownership of the site the Temple Mount is on. Jews believe that the 1st coming of the Savior will be when the Holy of Holies is built for the 3rd time(the Temple Mount is currently on the same site). Christians believe the rebuilding will bring the 2nd coming of Christ. This will fulfill their prophesies. Jews, Muslims and Christians all trace their lineage to Abraham so therefore they all worship the same God in their own way. Personally, my God(the same God) does not want any taking of human life over a piece of land. Paradise will never be gained by what we "own" in this life. It will be gained by how we live our lives. There are truly good and wonderful people throughout the world, no matter what religious affiliation, or lack thereof. Likewise, there are too many people who use "their" God and their "rightousness" to force their beliefs on other peoples, thereby enhancing their personal wealth and power. God does not suffer these people lightly. By blindly following these leaders, by not questioning their actual intent, makes the followers as guilty as the leaders. Jesus was crucified because he questioned the power of the Church and it's leadership. He was not questioning the power of God. I believe God wants peace, happiness and long life for us and not war and death. Politicians are destroying the world by using religious philosophy as their smoke screen. Religions are being undermined by allowing themselves to be used just so. Why don't we all try to take politics out of religion and religion out of politics and see what happens? I believe we would all be much better off. Herman Hesse wrote in "Sidhartha": "Words are nothing but the opinions of mankind." I have never read a more profound statement. Just because we believe something to be true, does that necessarily mean that it is the "truth".

    Posted by UTByrd at 04/14/2008 @ 1:11pm