Obama and Israel - UPDATE#3

Received in email from the Republican Jewish Coalition:

Nader Calls Out Obama's "Pro-Palestinian" Past

Washington, D.C. (February 25, 2008) -- After remarks made by Ralph Nader yesterday on "Meet the Press," Republican Jewish Coalition Executive Director Matt Brooks said, "Ralph Nader added to the debate on Senator Obama's views on Israel and the Middle East and raised serious doubts and questions about the true leanings of Senator Obama on these important issues." During his interview on "Meet the Press," Nader said that Sen. Obama had reversed his positions on Israel. Nader said Sen. Obama's "better instincts and his knowledge have been censored by himself" and that Sen. Obama was "pro-Palestinian when he was in Illinois before he ran for the state Senate" and "during the state Senate."

Sen. Obama has caught criticism for pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel statements and sentiments before. In March 2007, Sen. Obama was criticized for saying that "Nobody is suffering more than the Palestinians." Obama has also been criticized for stocking his campaign with several controversial advisors including Zbigniew Brzezinski, Robert Malley, Samantha Power and Susan Rice.

"People should be very skeptical of Barack Obama's shaky Middle East policies. When a long-time political activist like Ralph Nader, with a well-documented, anti-Israel bias, claims that Senator Obama shares this anti-Israel bias, that is alarming," said RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks. "If Senator Obama supports Ralph Nader's policies, which consistently condemn Israel's right to defend itself against terrorism, and if Sen. Obama has only reversed his positions to run for president, it once again raises serious questions about his grasp of the geo-political realities of the Middle East and puts into doubt his commitment to the safety and security of Israel. These are important questions we in the Jewish community will be asking."

UPDATE:

Jennifer Rubin of Commentary addresses this issue as well, and notes that Obama has tried to distance himself from the likes of Brzezinski and state his support for Israel.

Rubin goes on to note that he's an unknown. 

As a friend of Israel who sees it as being all too vulnerable, I feel that I have to report all the potential negatives I see about Obama. I am not out to get him.  But he just seems to me to be too much of a question mark. The fact that he leans so far left, and that so many on the left are pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel, the fact of his advisors being who they are, his church pastor, the enthusiastic support of Louis Farrakhan...all the little things add up to concern on my part.

Update #2:

Some words that I found very appropriate with regard to blogging about the election from the National Jewish Democratic Council on being careful about what we say:

There is nothing wrong with rhetoric that holds public figures accountable. Indeed, accountability is a bedrock principle of our democracy. If someone takes issue with Senator Barack Obama’s stand on the Iraq War or Senator John McCain’s support of the troop surge, that’s acceptable— loud and spirited criticism is not only legitimate, it is the American way.

Yet loud and spirited criticism on the issues and facts must not be confused with smears and baseless hatred. Lies and slander have no place in Jewish public discourse and it is against classical Jewish values to knowingly lie or distort the truth about an individual, in order to publicly shame him or her.

I agree wholeheartedly.  I know that in the heat of the moment I have crossed the line of over zealously criticizing those with whom I disagree.  In the past when I've felt that I've crossed that line, I have apologized. Being far from perfect, I am as prone as anyone to subjectivity and emotion, but my overarching goal is to be honest.  It is sometimes very hard to determine the truth of what one reads, which is why I always provide links and sources so that people may investigate the truth for themselves. I encourage anyone who reads this blog to please be kind enough to let me know when my sources or reasoning are faulty. You do me a favor if and when you do.

There's an interesting article in the NY Sun that discusses the pros and cons of Obama's developing "brain trust" of advisors.  There are both negative and positives, and the following quote should not be taken as proof positive in any direction, but I found it to be an interesting comment on ALL the recent American presidents with regard to Israel policy:

Mr. Obama has not pledged to move the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem as soon as he takes office, a promise made by every major candidate for president since Ronald Reagan in 1980, and a promise broken by every president since the Reagan administration.

(hat tip: Soccerdad)

Update#3:

Ok, now this rings all my alarm bells:  An anti-war leftist site interprets Obama's Israel policy.

Yet another view: Could he really believe the most vicious people on the planet can be thwarted that easily?

Obama is a chameleon, everything to everyone, taking on a different form depending on the filter through which he is being viewed.

I don't know who he is.