PDA

View Full Version : Obama’s Road to Damascus


Garcia Bronco
11-11-2008, 11:36 AM
Interesting Read. Thoughts?

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=376A8A3B-62DD-407F-8D48-F38B2A63B96E

Obama’s Road to Damascus
By John Perazzo
FrontPageMagazine.com | Tuesday, November 11, 2008

History will record that Barack Obama’s first act of diplomacy as America’s president-elect took place two days after his election victory, when he dispatched his senior foreign-policy adviser, Robert Malley, to meet with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad—to outline for them the forthcoming administration’s Mideast policy vis-à-vis those nations. An aide to Malley reports, “The tenor of the messages was that the Obama administration would take into greater account Egyptian and Syrian interests” than has President Bush. The Bush administration, it should be noted, has rightly recognized Syria to be not only a chief supporter of the al Qaeda insurgency in Iraq, but also the headquarters of the terrorist organization Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the longtime sponsor of Hamas—the terrorist army whose founding charter is irrevocably committed to the annihilation of Israel. Yet unlike President Bush, Obama and Malley have called for Israel to engage in peace negotiations with Syria.

A Harvard-trained lawyer and Rhodes Scholar, Robert Malley is no newcomer to the Obama team. In 2007, Obama selected him as a foreign policy adviser to his campaign. At the time, Malley was (and still is today) the Middle East and North Africa Program Director for the International Crisis Group (ICG), which receives funding from the Open Society Institute of George Soros (who, incidentally, serves on the ICG Executive Committee).

In his capacity with ICG, Malley directs a number of analysts who focus their attention most heavily on the Arab-Israeli conflict, the political and military developments in Iraq, and Islamist movements across the Middle East. Prior to joining ICG, Malley served as President Bill Clinton’s Special Assistant for Arab-Israeli Affairs (1998-2001), and as National Security Adviser Sandy Berger’s Executive Assistant (1996-1998).

Robert Malley was raised in France. His lineage is noteworthy. His father, Simon Malley (1923-2006), was a key figure in the Egyptian Communist Party. A passionate hater of Israel, the elder Malley was a close friend and confidante of the late PLO terrorist Yasser Arafat; an inveterate critic of “Western imperialism”; a supporter of various revolutionary “liberation movements,” particularly the Palestinian cause; a beneficiary of Soviet funding; and a supporter of the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. According to American Thinker news editor Ed Lasky, Simon Malley “participated in the wave of anti-imperialist and nationalist ideology that was sweeping the Third World [and] … wrote thousands of words in support of struggle against Western nations.”

In a July 2001 op-ed which Malley penned for the New York Times, he alleged that Israeli—not Palestinian—inflexibility had caused the previous year’s Camp David peace talks (brokered by Bill Clinton) to fall apart. This was one of several controversial articles Malley has written—some he co-authored with Hussein Agha, a former adviser to Arafat—blaming Israel and exonerating Arafat (the most prolific Jew-killer since Adolph Hitler) for the failure of the peace process.

Malley’s identification of Israel as the cause of the Camp David impasse has been widely embraced by Palestinian and Arab activists around the world, by Holocaust deniers like Norman Finkelstein, and by anti-Israel publications such as Counterpunch. It should be noted that Malley’s account of the Camp David negotiations is entirely inconsistent with the recollections of the key figures who participated in those talks—specifically, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, then-U.S. President Bill Clinton, and then-U.S. Ambassador Dennis Ross (Clinton’s Middle East envoy).

Malley also has written numerous op-eds urging the U.S. to disengage from Israel to some degree, and recommending that America reach out to negotiate with its traditional Arab enemies such as Syria, Hamas, Hezbollah (a creature of Iran dedicated to the extermination of the Jews and death to America), and Muqtada al-Sadr (the Shiite terrorist leader in Iraq).

In addition, Malley has advised nations around the world to establish relationships with, and to send financial aid to, the Hamas-led Palestinian government in Gaza. In Malley’s calculus, the electoral victory that swept Hamas into power in January 2006 was a manifestation of legitimate Palestinian “anger at years of humiliation and loss of self-respect because of Israeli settlement expansion, Arafat’s imprisonment, Israel’s incursions, [and] Western lecturing …”

Moreover, Malley contends that it is both unreasonable and unrealistic for Israel or Western nations to demand that Syria sever its ties with Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, or Iran. Rather, he suggests that if Israel were to return the Golan Heights (which it captured in the 1967 Six Day War, and again in the 1973 Yom Kippur War—two conflicts sparked by Arab aggression which sought so permanently wipe the Jewish state off the face of the earth) to Syrian control, Damascus would be inclined to pursue peace with Israel.

Malley has criticized the U.S. for allegedly remaining “on the sidelines” and being a “no-show” in the overall effort to bring peace to the nations of the Middle East. Exhorting the Bush administration to change its policy of refusing to engage diplomatically with terrorists and their sponsoring states, Malley wrote in July 2006: “Today the U.S. does not talk to Iran, Syria, Hamas, the elected Palestinian government or Hezbollah…. The result has been a policy with all the appeal of a moral principle and all the effectiveness of a tired harangue.”

This inclination to negotiate with any and all enemies of the U.S. and Israel—an impulse which Malley has outlined clearly and consistently—has had a powerful influence on Barack Obama.

It is notable that six months ago the Obama campaign and Malley hastily severed ties with one another after the Times of London reported that Malley had been meeting privately with Hamas leaders on a regular basis—something Obama had publicly pledged never to do. At the time, Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt minimized the significance of this monumentally embarrassing revelation, saying: “Rob Malley has, like hundreds of other experts, provided informal advice to the campaign in the past. He has no formal role in the campaign and he will not play any role in the future.”

But indeed, within hours after Obama’s election victory, Malley was back as a key player in the president-elect’s team of advisors—on his way to Syria. Mr. Obama, meanwhile, received a most friendly communication from Hamas, congratulating him on his “historic victory.”


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Perazzo is the Managing Editor of DiscoverTheNetworks and is the author of The Myths That Divide Us: How Lies Have Poisoned American Race Relations. For more information on his book, click here. E-mail him at wsbooks25@hotmail.com

Rohirrim
11-11-2008, 12:44 PM
Let's take one example. There are all kinds of spooky rumors that a man named Robert Malley is one of Obama's advisers, specifically his Middle East adviser. His name comes up mysteriously and intrusively on the web, like the ads for Viagra. Malley, who has written several deceitful articles in The New York Review of Books, is a rabid hater of Israel. No question about it. But Malley is not and has never been a Middle East adviser to Barack Obama. Obama's Middle East adviser is Dan Shapiro. Malley did, though, work for Bill Clinton. He was deeply involved in the disastrous diplomacy of 2000. Obama at the time was in the Illinois State Senate. So, yes, this is a piece of experience that Obama lacks.

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=6bd11ed5-bf80-44a0-b683-a0563e11ab89&k=6923

(FrontPage Magazine (also known as FRONTPAGEMAG.COM) is an online conservative political magazine, edited by David Horowitz and is published by the David Horowitz Freedom Center (DHFC) (formerly the Center for the Study of Public Culture), a non-profit organization in Los Angeles, California. It is a publication presenting a conservative viewpoint on various subjects.)

Paladin
11-11-2008, 01:08 PM
Oh. You mean a "Conspiracy Theory" boiler room/shop.

Paladin
11-11-2008, 01:17 PM
I doubt htat Isarael would ever give up control of the Golan Heights. And I do not believe that all issues in the Mid-east are due to the Palistinians, and the issues will require the two sides to give a little. Whjy not talk to both and all sides and see what could happen? I remember reading somewhere that Assad attended college in the US.

I stand corrected:

Bashar al-Assad is the second son of the late President Hafez al-Assad. Dr. Bashar al-Assad was born in Damascus, Syria on September 11, 1965. He attended school at the Franco-Arab al-Hurriyet School in Damascus. He then attended the University of Damascus and studied Medicine and specialized in Ophthalmology. He continued his education and specialization in Ophthalmology in the United Kingdom.

Hotrod
11-11-2008, 01:22 PM
Barry will be tested early and his response will help shape the next 4 years.

Paladin
11-11-2008, 01:25 PM
He'll just nuke 'em.....

watermock
11-11-2008, 01:43 PM
This should come as little surprise. He did belch out some support of Israel in his acceptance speech, but as usual rhetoric is his strong suite.

Golan heights is off the table after the '73 yon kippur war.

Garcia Bronco
11-11-2008, 01:58 PM
This should come as little surprise. He did belch out some support of Israel in his acceptance speech, but as usual rhetoric is his strong suite.

Golan heights is off the table after the '73 yon kippur war.

That was my opinion as well. These Arab countries started a fight and got their asses kicked literally.

BroncoBuff
11-11-2008, 02:55 PM
We can be supportive of Israel without laying down for all their wishes ... it's about time somebody here at least listen respectfully to Muslin nations' concerns. Last guy to do that was Jimmy Carter, and that was a long time ago....

You guys watch, before Obama leaves office, there will be both a Palestinian state and peace in the Middle East.

Hotrod
11-11-2008, 03:05 PM
We can be supportive of Israel without laying down for all their wishes ... it's about time somebody here at least listen respectfully to Muslin nations' concerns. Last guy to do that was Jimmy Carter, and that was a long time ago....

You guys watch, before Obama leaves office, there will be both a Palestinian state and peace in the Middle East.

Never going to happen

ak1971
11-11-2008, 03:07 PM
You guys watch, before Obama leaves office, there will be both a Palestinian state and peace in the Middle East.

One could only wish, but I would would bet everything I have that this will never happen

Rohirrim
11-11-2008, 03:54 PM
One could only wish, but I would would bet everything I have that this will never happen

You do realize that no one will listen to a guy with that avatar, right?


I guess we should be thankful it's not a frontal shot. :D

cutthemdown
11-11-2008, 04:29 PM
We can be supportive of Israel without laying down for all their wishes ... it's about time somebody here at least listen respectfully to Muslin nations' concerns. Last guy to do that was Jimmy Carter, and that was a long time ago....

You guys watch, before Obama leaves office, there will be both a Palestinian state and peace in the Middle East.

Oh man that is rich. Jimmy Carter did listen and what did it get him? Certainly not peace in the middle east.

Unless someone can figure out how to make like 3 times more land for them nothing will work. Packed in like sardines and they don't like each other. Religious hatred that goes back a long long time.

Not to mention the fact Obama already said Jerusalem will never be divided and will always be the Jewish capital.

I just don't see it. Obama could improve conditions but not solve them. He could maybe warm up to Syria and Iran but they would probably backstab him by continuing to support terrorist groups.

elsid13
11-11-2008, 04:35 PM
This should come as little surprise. He did belch out some support of Israel in his acceptance speech, but as usual rhetoric is his strong suite.

Golan heights is off the table after the '73 yon kippur war.

Israel has already stated that would be willing to give Syria back the Golan Heights if a number of conditions are meet. Including making it a demilitarized zone, diplmatic recognition of Israel and end of Syrian support of Hamas

cutthemdown
11-11-2008, 04:39 PM
Israel has already stated that would be willing to give Syria back the Golan Heights if a number of conditions are meet. Including making it a demilitarized zone, diplmatic recognition of Israel and end of Syrian support of Hamas

Israels position changes with each new leader. Seems like they change leadership about 2-3 times every 4-5 yrs. I'm ignorant to how they work it so I won't comment past that observation.

elsid13
11-11-2008, 04:45 PM
Israels position changes with each new leader. Seems like they change leadership about 2-3 times every 4-5 yrs. I'm ignorant to how they work it so I won't comment past that observation.

Israel follows the British Parliamentary systems, but with more parties then Labor and Conservatives, it very similar to the Germans . The change government because to win election and PM spot the major parties need to form coalition with number of small parties that have direct influence on the policy of the government. But once the coalition break down, they have to call for election to reform the government.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
11-11-2008, 04:50 PM
Oh. You mean a "Conspiracy Theory" boiler room/shop.

Ha!

First it was the "lipstick on a pig" flap, then it was the bogus story about the "attack" on the McSame campaign worker, and now this.

That's strike three for Garcia. :clown:

cutthemdown
11-11-2008, 05:04 PM
Israel follows the British Parliamentary systems, but with more parties then Labor and Conservatives, it very similar to the Germans . The change government because to win election and PM spot the major parties need to form coalition with number of small parties that have direct influence on the policy of the government. But once the coalition break down, they have to call for election to reform the government.

Which makes it hard to get anything done considering in Syria is will be same family ruling with an iron fist each decade. Israel starts to deal, things fall apart, a new election is called for, a new person in power, wants to start over in negotiations etc.

elsid13
11-11-2008, 05:10 PM
Which makes it hard to get anything done considering in Syria is will be same family ruling with an iron fist each decade. Israel starts to deal, things fall apart, a new election is called for, a new person in power, wants to start over in negotiations etc.

I the word chaotic comes to mind when you talk Israeli politics

Spider
11-11-2008, 05:34 PM
I the word chaotic comes to mind when you talk Israeli politics

ahhh you mean like Dortoh postings .......... got it

elsid13
11-11-2008, 06:10 PM
ahhh you mean like Dortoh postings .......... got it

When I think of Dortoh postings the words pink riding lawn mower are one i think of.

cutthemdown
11-11-2008, 06:22 PM
I the word chaotic comes to mind when you talk Israeli politics

considering how long it would take to settle what I see as the 2 big deal breakers in any peace deal, right of return, half of Jerusalem as Palestinian capital, no way Obama even tries that hard first term.

Plus try and fail would make him look bad. He will of course try and do what he can to keep violence low. He could with hold certain weapons like cluster bombs etc, but I don't see Obama pushing the issue. If he tries first term and fails it weakens him. The smart thing to do is focus on Afghanistan, he can probably help some there with a bigger American effort. Focus on economy because thats what the people who voted for him care most about.

I agree peace for Israel and the Palestinians would be great but not at the expense of the Jewish people having to give right of return. Israel is a democracy and all those millions of refugees would tilt the power too much. You can't expect them to allow that to happen. Also how can you expect the Jewish people to now give up half of Jerusalem? Sure that was the original plan but they fought 2 wars now. It would be like Spain saying give back what we lost in the Spanish American war. To the victory goes the spoils.

kappys
11-11-2008, 07:47 PM
We can be supportive of Israel without laying down for all their wishes ... it's about time somebody here at least listen respectfully to Muslin nations' concerns. Last guy to do that was Jimmy Carter, and that was a long time ago....

You guys watch, before Obama leaves office, there will be both a Palestinian state and peace in the Middle East.

The Palestinian state will be there because Isreal has gladly built her a cage for her people to live in. The wall is mostly complete and the Palestinians can now enjoy their former territories minus any of the water supplies or places that anyone would actually want to live. Since they will have no resources they can also continue to enjoy 50%+ unemployment rates and to have a people completely dependant on foreign supplies for food, water, medicine and whatever else they might be given.

cutthemdown
11-11-2008, 11:24 PM
The Palestinian state will be there because Isreal has gladly built her a cage for her people to live in. The wall is mostly complete and the Palestinians can now enjoy their former territories minus any of the water supplies or places that anyone would actually want to live. Since they will have no resources they can also continue to enjoy 50%+ unemployment rates and to have a people completely dependant on foreign supplies for food, water, medicine and whatever else they might be given.

Yeah but will they get a Walmart and Mcdonalds? If not how can we expect them to survive? Of course the Palestinian Walmart would carry different things then the one we have.

Like for instance there Walmart would have really cheap prayer mats and the Koran printed on really cheap paper that probably contains some sort of toxic chemical (****ing Chinese).

cutthemdown
11-11-2008, 11:32 PM
The Palestinian state will be there because Isreal has gladly built her a cage for her people to live in. The wall is mostly complete and the Palestinians can now enjoy their former territories minus any of the water supplies or places that anyone would actually want to live. Since they will have no resources they can also continue to enjoy 50%+ unemployment rates and to have a people completely dependant on foreign supplies for food, water, medicine and whatever else they might be given.

I would like to see the Palestinians get to live a better life. IMO they got screwed by Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq. Those countries should have never attacked Israel in the first place. Iran actually stayed out of it and IMO doesn't deserve any blame. Those countries give them just enough to stay alive, but mostly they just give them some paltry weapons and explosives. Not enough to make a difference just enough to keep them poor and deadly.

If Obama can get the Palestinians to give up having Jerusalem as their capital, and the right of return for refugees, then maybe something can work out. But it's impossible to get Israel to give in on those issues. They won the war and they won't give Jerusalem up peacefully. No person or President has ever been able to solve these 2 deal breakers. Golan heights maybe but that does nothing for the Palestinians unless Syria is planning on giving it to them.

IMO Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt should pony up more money to help them, but guess what they are stingy selfish countries that just never come through for the Palestinians.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
11-12-2008, 12:58 AM
A new Gallup poll (http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2008-11-10-poll-obama_N.htm) shows that 68% of the people have a favorable opinion of President-elect Barack Obama. Also, 65% think the country will be better off in 4 years. Just after George W. Bush was elected the first time and also after Bill Clinton's first election about 50% were expecting things to be better in 4 years. Thus Obama enters the White House surfing on a wave of good will. That has real consequences. Even if the Democrats end up with 57 or 58 seats in the Senate, the Republicans will be very loathe to filibuster his initial legislation since they will clearly be blamed for the consequences of not letting a popular President carry out his program.

cutthemdown
11-12-2008, 01:54 AM
A new Gallup poll (http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2008-11-10-poll-obama_N.htm) shows that 68% of the people have a favorable opinion of President-elect Barack Obama. Also, 65% think the country will be better off in 4 years. Just after George W. Bush was elected the first time and also after Bill Clinton's first election about 50% were expecting things to be better in 4 years. Thus Obama enters the White House surfing on a wave of good will. That has real consequences. Even if the Democrats end up with 57 or 58 seats in the Senate, the Republicans will be very loathe to filibuster his initial legislation since they will clearly be blamed for the consequences of not letting a popular President carry out his program.

No doubt Republicans won't filibuster unless they have some democrats who go along with them. Obama is popular and the people want to see his ideas get a fair shake. At the same time I think Obama won't be presenting things in a way as to make it impossible for the Republicans to agree.

I think Obama has already said he won't go for a quick withdraw in Iraq. That will make Republicans happy because they knew that wasn't a good idea.

I don't think the tax plan is really that crazy. I mean if it really has tax cuts for 95% of the people, Republicans wil be able to swallow the 3-4% increase to the 250 grand club. It's not like its a huge tax increase.

I think the other thing would be a bigger stimulus package that Republicans would prob fight in certain areas but in the end go ahead and pass.

I guess the first big fight would be over maybe a Supreme Court nominee, or maybe the Healthcare reform.

LABF what do you see being the first issue Republicans just scoff at and feel the must filibuster?

cutthemdown
11-12-2008, 01:56 AM
in your opinion LABF how much of that 18% more that are optimistic this time around is due to Black people being so happy? Maybe 12-15%

rastaman
11-12-2008, 03:39 AM
Barry will be tested early and his response will help shape the next 4 years.

Obama will be tested just like every President is tested with in their first year in office. No big deal and nothing new......it comes with the office.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
11-12-2008, 04:08 AM
in your opinion LABF how much of that 18% more that are optimistic this time around is due to Black people being so happy? Maybe 12-15%

The subtext of what you're saying here seems to be that if blacks account for "12-15%" then those 12-15 percentage points don't really count.

How does it matter what color the extra 15% are?

cutthemdown
11-12-2008, 04:34 AM
The subtext of what you're saying here seems to be that if blacks account for "12-15%" then those 12-15 percentage points don't really count.

How does it matter what color the extra 15% are?

Of course they count. Black people count as much as anyone. I was more pointing out how much of a difference Obama can make. IMO blacks never felt anyone was going to be different. I'm not the hood wearing white rider of Long Beach you think I am.

The reason it matters is because I think it will be good for the country for black people to be excited and hopefully.

Bronco Bob
11-12-2008, 03:53 PM
Oh man that is rich. Jimmy Carter did listen and what did it get him? Certainly not peace in the middle east.



When was the last time their was a war between Egypt and Israel?

orinjkrush
11-12-2008, 05:45 PM
would you rather live in Egypt, Syria or Israel?

Oy veh.

kappys
11-12-2008, 06:42 PM
would you rather live in Egypt, Syria or Israel?

Oy veh.

Depends am I Palestinian in this game?

cutthemdown
11-12-2008, 06:50 PM
When was the last time their was a war between Egypt and Israel?

1973