LA Times Refuses to Release Tape of Obama Praising Controver

[Chicopee John]

Video of farewell party for alleged PLO worker shows Obama toasting 'friend and dinner companion' with questionable past.

 

FOXNews.com Tuesday, October 28, 2008

 

 

Rashid Khalidi, a professor and activist tied to the PLO, was feted by Barack Obama at a farewell dinner for the Palestinian activist.

 

The Los Angeles Times is refusing to release a videotape that it says shows Barack Obama praising a Chicago professor who was an alleged mouthpiece for the Palestine Liberation Organization while it was a designated terrorist group in the 1970s and '80s.

 

According an LA Times article written by Peter Wallsten in April, Obama was a "friend and frequent dinner companion" of Rashid Khalidi, who from 1976 to1982 was reportedly a director of the official Palestinian press agency, WAFA, which was operating in exile from Beirut with the PLO.

 

Click here to read the original LA Times story: 'Palestinians See a Friend in Barack Obama.'

 

In the article -- based on the videotape obtained by the Times -- Wallsten said Obama addressed an audience during a 2003 farewell dinner for Khalidi, who was Obama's colleague at the University of Chicago, before his departure for Columbia University in New York. Obama said his many talks with Khalidi and his wife Mona stood as "consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases."

 

Khalidi is currently the Edward Said professor of Arab Studies at Columbia. A pro-Palestinian activist, he has been a fierce critic of American foreign policy and of Israel, which he has accused of establishing an "apartheid system" of government. The PLO advocate helped facilitate negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians in the early '90s, but he has denied he was ever an employee of the group, contradicting accounts in the New York Times and Washington Times.

 

The LA Times told FOXNews.com that it won't reveal how it obtained the tape of Khalidi's farewell party, nor will the newspaper release it. Spokeswoman Nancy Sullivan said the paper is not interested in revisiting the story. "As far as we're concerned, the story speaks for itself," she said.

 

In recent months Obama has distanced himself from the man the Times says he once called a friend. "He is not one of my advisers. He's not one of my foreign policy people," Obama said at a campaign event in May. "He is a respected scholar, although he vehemently disagrees with a lot of Israel's policy."

 

But on the tape, according to the Times, Obama said in his toast that he hoped his relationship with Khalidi would continue even after the professor left Chicago. "It's for that reason that I'm hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation -- a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid's dinner table ... [but around] this entire world."

 

A number of Web sites have accused the Times of purposely suppressing the tape of the event -- which former Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn reportedly attended.

 

Sullivan said she would not give details of what else may be on the tape, adding that anyone interested in the video should read the newspaper's report, which was its final account.

 

"This is a story that we reported on six months ago, so any suggestion that we're suppressing the tape is absurd -- we're the ones that brought the existence of the tape to light," Sullivan said.

 

The Los Angeles Times endorsed Obama for president on October 19.

[damajuki]

Um, John? What are you doing?

 

I thought you were going to be the voice of reason on this board? What happened to that guy?

 

And why are you attacking newspapers today for reporting the things you actually want them to be reporting on?

 

I honest to God do not understand the attack on established journalism and newspapers by people who should know better.

 

Have you ever considered that FoxNews was created SOLELY to push a one-sided point of view and that inherently is NOT journalism?

 

Every time I have this conversation about the coordinated attack on the very institution of journalism, I get angry and depressed. Don't people understand that those who are constantly attacking "main stream media" (another term coined by the right to scare people with) are those who stand to benefit most from the destruction of any source of information that attempts to present information in an ACTUALLY fair and balanced way?

 

Consider the fact that without journalism and a truly free press that attempts to tell the truth -- and not just push an agenda -- , you are left with nothing but propagandists, from all sides.

 

Finally, when you post stuff like this, John, could you please tell me what you think the story is here? The Times broke the story and published on it. They actually REPORTED on this event.

 

Yet you insinuate they are hiding something? Why?

[Mr. T]

great Post John! thats the way to bring out the Hypocritical Press!

[Guest Aloysius]

The Times today issued a statement about its decision not to post the tape.

 

"The Los Angeles Times did not publish the videotape because it was provided to us by a confidential source who did so on the condition that we not release it," said the newspaper's editor, Russ Stanton. "The Times keeps its promises to sources."

As Juki mentioned, the Times published an article about this way back in April.

 

I highly doubt that the McCain campaign actually thinks the Times is hiding something. They just wanted to get this story back in the news because it puts the words "Obama" and "Arab" in the same sentence.

 

It's cynical & crass. Hopefully, the American people won't be fooled by it.

[heckofajobbrownie]

It really is amazing how this works, isn't it?

 

When the campaign (even Hillary's campaign) wanted to push the Jeremiah Wright issue, these guys dutifully posted dozens of threads about Jeremiah Wright.

 

More recently, when the campaign wanted to push the Ayers issue, these guys dutifully posted dozens of threads about Ayers.

 

And in the last ten days, when the campaign decided it wanted to push the idea that Obama is a socialist, these guys dutifully posted dozens of threads about how Obama's a socialist.

 

Now, when the campaign has decided it wants to use an old story to continue pushing the idea of Obama and his radical ties, with a side order of "mainstream media bias", these guys dutifully post that, too.

 

It's like Ian Holm says in The Sweet Hereafter: "Let me direct your rage."

 

You guys are fucking sheep, you know that? There is nothing three strategists and a press release couldn't get you all worked up about.

 

Start by trying to have one original thought a day, then work your way up from there.

[Chicopee John]

Um, John? What are you doing?

 

I thought you were going to be the voice of reason on this board? What happened to that guy?

 

And why are you attacking newspapers today for reporting the things you actually want them to be reporting on?

 

I honest to God do not understand the attack on established journalism and newspapers by people who should know better.

 

Have you ever considered that FoxNews was created SOLELY to push a one-sided point of view and that inherently is NOT journalism?

 

Every time I have this conversation about the coordinated attack on the very institution of journalism, I get angry and depressed. Don't people understand that those who are constantly attacking "main stream media" (another term coined by the right to scare people with) are those who stand to benefit most from the destruction of any source of information that attempts to present information in an ACTUALLY fair and balanced way?

 

Consider the fact that without journalism and a truly free press that attempts to tell the truth -- and not just push an agenda -- , you are left with nothing but propagandists, from all sides.

 

Finally, when you post stuff like this, John, could you please tell me what you think the story is here? The Times broke the story and published on it. They actually REPORTED on this event.

 

Yet you insinuate they are hiding something? Why?

 

 

I posted an article. It was filled with quotes by the LA Times.

 

I didn't editoralize.

 

Actually, it was a positive post RE: the Times reporting something like this in the first place - see my thread "A Crack in the Dike".

 

Call off the dogs.

[Chicopee John]

The second you take something seriously enough from Fox News, you have to ask yourself what role you're playing for them... because it's an agenda based organization, not a news channel. Basically, John isn't sharing information... he's just doing his part to pass out pamphlets for the party.

 

A huge part of Fox News' talking points agenda recently has been to repeatedly hammer the news media, of which they no longer even pretend to be a part of. Coincidentally, hammering the legit media has been a desperate strategy of the GOP and the McCain campaign. Fancy that. Coincidence, I'm sure.

 

The McCain camp tells you not to believe the news... or the polls... or your eyes... or your ears. Just believe what we tell you to believe. Because you'll be happier that way. We'll tell you that we're right and you're right... and we're all alright. Watch Fox News for updates. And only Fox News.

 

A pretty exhaustive study was done on the media's so called liberal bent... and this was before Murdoch owned it all. And guess what? There is no significant leaning one way or the other. During the Bush administration, much of the news was negative... because much of the news was negative.

 

Why don't they report all the wonderful things happening in Iraq? Uh, because it's the Iraq war. It's stupid and it sucks.

 

Anyway, this shit bores me. I can't believe there are real people who can make their own coffee who actually let this bullshit into their brains. But whatever.

 

 

Did I doctor something, Shep?

 

It came from Fox News but they reported it from and about the LA Times. The Times responded and their quotes were available for all to read.

 

Now you complain that I post actual articles RE: newspapers you respect?

[Chicopee John]

You guys are fucking sheep, you know that? There is nothing three strategists and a press release couldn't get you all worked up about.

 

Start by trying to have one original thought a day, then work your way up from there.

 

First of all, your language is unbecoming of you, Heck.

 

Second of all, I will just post poll after poll.............talk about getting all worked up..............Sheesh.

 

PS For everyone: Words like the one above aren't eloquent nor do they show anything but Middle School anger. This forum can use descriptions, etc. that do not include such rubbish.

[damajuki]

I posted an article. It was filled with quotes by the LA Times.

 

I didn't editoralize.

 

Actually, it was a positive post RE: the Times reporting something like this in the first place - see my thread "A Crack in the Dike".

 

Call off the dogs.

John, you can see how titling the thread "LA Times Refuses to Release Tape of Obama..." does seem like you were trying to make a point about the story itself, right?

 

It didn't appear you were praising the LA Times for their journalistic integrity, since that's NOT what the story you posted is doing.

 

Anyway, I believe you if that's what you say you were intending. I just hope you can see why it doesn't appear that way on its face.

[Westside Steve]

It really is amazing how this works' date=' isn't it?

 

[b']No Heck.

It's not "amazing or shocking or unexpected."

Hell it's only funny in a sickening way.

 

You guys bitch endlessly about Fox not being legit while praising the other side of the coin, CNN.

But even more ridiculous is your blind defense of the LA Times as political gospel.

 

Cripes they're at least supposed to feign an air or creedibility but they don't even do that anymore.

 

If it were McCain you'd tattoo it on your chest MEMENTO style.

 

WSS[/b]

[damajuki]

Steve, do you really believe the things you type? Sometimes I have to wonder...

 

No one here that I've seen has ever defended CNN. In fact, I'm not sure anyone here even watches CNN regularly. I don't because I tend to think all 24-news stations are entertainment-centric by their very design and so I don't trust their reporting.

 

I defend print journalism because I believe it's a vital piece of our system of government and way of life. The VAST majority of print news is actually quite good, regardless of the source.

 

Yet this incredibly important piece of our democratic system is being ceaselessly attacked.

 

Do you ever stop to wonder WHY and to pay attention to who is doing it?

 

Is it REALLY TRUE that ALL newspapers are "liberal"? That idea really makes sense to you?

 

Or could it be that these attacks are coordinated to create a specific effect, i.e., sowing doubt in traditional news outlets to create a need for the "truth" from an alternate "fair and balanced" source?

 

Shouldn't THAT be what worries reasonable people?

[Westside Steve]

Steve, do you really believe the things you type? Sometimes I have to wonder...

 

No one here that I've seen has ever defended CNN. In fact, I'm not sure anyone here even watches CNN regularly.

Oh come on.

Yet this incredibly important piece of our democratic system is being ceaselessly attacked.

 

Do you ever stop to wonder WHY and to pay attention to who is doing it?

 

Is it REALLY TRUE that ALL newspapers are "liberal"? That idea really makes sense to you?

 

Or could it be that these attacks are coordinated to create a specific effect, i.e., sowing doubt in traditional news outlets to create a need for the "truth" from an alternate "fair and balanced" source?

 

Shouldn't THAT be what worries reasonable people?

 

Print journalism is unfortunately on it's deathbed.

When John S Knights flagshiop paper is owned by some Canadian jagoff that has a bunch of papers on par with the Tradin Times....TV and Internet are the future love it or not.

And the big boys are playing catch up with slanted journalism just like Fox and CNN.

 

And don't pretend that any news story can't be slanted without telling one single lie.

 

BTW I think most reporters want a scoop first and a political agenda second, but those goals do intersect at times.

 

But in this case I have no doubt that if it were McCain at say, OJs aquittal party, the LA and NYT would have run with it.

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

John, that wasn't really directed at you, but the 5-7 others on here who take up every line of attack on cue. 20 minutes after it's on Drudge/Fox/Rush they've absorbed it and allowed it to get them angry at whatever they were told to get angry at, and believe whatever they were told to believe. Even after living through dozens of elections, they have no clue how this game works.

 

Yes, they're sheep.

[Westside Steve]

John, that wasn't really directed at you, but the 5-7 others on here who take up every line of attack on cue. 20 minutes after it's on Drudge/Fox/Rush they've absorbed it and allowed it to get them angry at whatever they were told to get angry at, and believe whatever they were told to believe. Even after living through dozens of elections, they have no clue how this game works.

 

Yes, they're sheep.

 

LOL

And right on cue you're here to blindly defend whatever it may be.

 

WSS

[Mr. T]

GET US THE TAPE THE L.A. TIMES REFUSES TO RELEASE, AND WE'LL GIVE YOU CASH!

 

JewishWorldReview.com | For the last week, this site has been receiving mail -- lots of mail -- asking that we somehow shame the Los Angeles Times into releasing a videotape they admit to having that shows then Illinois state Sen. Barak Obama praising Rashid Khalidi, the one-time PLO spokesman/adviser during a 2003 farewell party in Chicago. Shortly thereafter, he became the head of the Middle East Studies Department at Columbia University.

 

At what turned out to be a "Jew-bash", Obama, who the polls say will likely be the next leader of the Free World, chose to remain silent. Even after the presentations, the politician who now says he's in favor of a secure Israel refused to denounce what he had just heard. Including, according to the Times:

 

A " young Palestinian American recit[ing] a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, "then you will never see a day of peace."

 

And another speaker likened "Zionist settlers on the West Bank" to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been "blinded by ideology."

 

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1008/v ... r_friendly

[heckofajobbrownie]

Oh, and you guys also bought the idea that Obama wants to kill newborn babies. Forgot that one.

[Westside Steve]

Oh, and you guys also bought the idea that Obama wants to kill newborn babies. Forgot that one.

 

 

But even if there was footage of him yanking one right out of the womb and biting it's head off you'd defend it with every fiber of your being.

That is IF a news outlet other than the LA or NY Times had the balls to air it.

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

I've never had anyone pay so much attention to me in my entire life! Do you really sit around all day waiting for me to post something so you can accuse me of defending Obama from the nutjobs in here?

 

And do you ever notice how you have to invent scenarios that have never happened to accuse me of something? That you can never beat me on the facts?

 

If you want me to disagree with something Obama said or did or proposes, then find something I disagree with. Tupa and I discuss these things all the time.

 

But you could probably save a lot of time expecting me to agree with the mindless and paranoid political attacks posted in here, or that Fox News is on the same level as the New York or LA Times as far as journalism goes.

 

Really, you need to get a new hobby.

[Guest mz.]

But even if there was footage of him yanking one right out of the womb and biting it's head off you'd defend it with every fiber of your being.

 

Though obviously (?) tongue-in-cheek, Steve, attempt to name one "lib" on this board who would defend rampant PBA, let alone biting the heads off.

 

You love to make ridiculous blanket statements like this that a) deflect attention from your lack of a real argument and apply to absolutely nobody.

[Westside Steve]

I've never had anyone pay so much attention to me in my entire life! Do you really sit around all day waiting for me to post something so you can accuse me of defending Obama from the nutjobs in here?

 

It ain't much of a wait Heck. You make Old Faithful seem erratic.

 

And do you ever notice how you have to invent scenarios that have never happened to accuse me of something? That you can never beat me on the facts?

 

"Facts" being Obama spin.

 

If you want me to disagree with something Obama said or did or proposes, then find something I disagree with. Tupa and I discuss these things all the time.

 

Quit hiding behind Toop.

 

But you could probably save a lot of time expecting me to agree with the mindless and paranoid political attacks posted in here, or that Fox News is on the same level as the New York or LA Times as far as journalism goes.

 

Sorry. I know MoveOn and Truthout mean more to you.

But you have your talking points to cover.

 

Really, you need to get a new hobby.

 

It isn't like I'm NOT responding to your crap now is it?

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

Me: Fox News isn't the same type of journalistic organization as the New York or La Times.

 

Steve: You love Move On and Truthout!

 

My point exactly. And mz the pussy's.

 

You see, Steve, you can either argue with me that Fox News' "journalism" is on the same level as the New York Times, or you can act like a child. You continually act like a child.

 

I mean, I've never posted anything from either of those sites you mentioned. I've never even been to their sites. And in case you haven't noticed, Obama has resisted any help from Move On and doesn't deal with them at all. And even if either of us had close ties to Move On, it still wouldn't win you the argument above. It's just childish.

 

You're arguing with nobody about nothing. You have nothing.

 

As for Tupa, I'm not hiding behind him. I'm just suggesting that maybe it should dawn on you that people have adult disagreements about issues every day and all the time. They just don't seem to be able to involve you.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Now take a look at the political headlines Fox News has up on their site right now:

 

Prime-Time Obama Blitz

Flush with cash after changing his position on accepting public campaign financing, Obama buys up prime-time TV tonight for half-hour infomercial selling — Obama

 

• Race Tightening: McCain Pollster Says 'Too Close to Call'

• Obama Accepting Untraceable Prepaid Credit Cards

• ELECTION NIGHT PRIMER: Guide to Congressional Races

• THE STRATEGY ROOM: Eric Bolling Hosts FOX News' Online Political Talk Show — STREAMING LIVE

 

Furor Over Palin Effigy

Despite cries for a hate-crime investigation, FBI and L.A. police say hanging Palin mannequin just 'bad taste'

 

• HASSELBECK: Media Incredibly Sexist Toward Palin

• Clerk Charged for Accessing Info on 'Joe the Plumber'

• Obama Campaign's 'Urgent' Battleground Appeal

• FOX FORUM: Obama's the Perfect Hollywood President

 

 

McCain calls out L.A. Times for refusing to release video of Obama toasting PLO activist Rashid Khalidi, saying, 'why that should not be made public is beyond me.'

• Tell the L.A. Times What You Think

• YOU DECIDE: Release the Tape?

 

 

Every single one of those headlines is designed to put Obama, or Obama supporters, or Obama's campaign in a negative light. And I'm not even posting the scary photo:

 

http://www.foxnews.com/

 

Check it out for yourself. Then go to the NYT and LAT sites and tell me what you find.

[Westside Steve]

Me: Fox News isn't the same type of journalistic organization as the New York or La Times.

 

Steve: You love Move On and Truthout!

 

My point exactly. And mz the pussy's.

 

You see, Steve, you can either argue with me that Fox News' "journalism" is on the same level as the New York Times, or you can act like a child. You continually act like a child.

 

Eat me.

The NYT is slanted to the left.

Which makes them more dangerous than Fox who lets you know which way they lean.

You only deny it since it's the party to shill for

 

 

I mean, I've never posted anything from either of those sites you mentioned. I've never even been to their sites. And in case you haven't noticed, Obama has resisted any help from Move On and doesn't deal with them at all.

 

Now that's funny. I doubt he lobbied Hamas for support either but still has it.

 

And even if either of us had close ties to Move On, it still wouldn't win you the argument above. It's just childish.

 

Eat me again.

I've never posted anything from Newsmax.

Fox on occasion but there are a lot more from CNN the flip side

So what?

 

You're arguing with nobody about nothing. You have nothing.

 

Well I have you.

Oh wait....

You're right there.

 

As for Tupa, I'm not hiding behind him. I'm just suggesting that maybe it should dawn on you that people have adult disagreements about issues every day and all the time. They just don't seem to be able to involve you.

 

Spmebody must be wrong and somebody must be right.

Toops his own man and can discuss things with you any way he sees fit.

If he chooses to show deference that's up to him.

 

OTOH I have no problem calling you out for the pompous asswipe you are.

 

But that's just me. Mr. Vegas.

Don[t take it personally.

WSS

[Guest mz.]

I've never even been to their sites.

 

Nor have I. EVER. Just because one slants left doesn't mean one wants to partake in Left propaganda/bullshit.

 

The difference between between NY Times and MoveOn is the same as the difference between William Safire and FoxNews/Newsmax/cal's garbage. Unfortunately, Steve, you read the garbage.

[Guest mz.]

I see you're employing Steve's "I have no argument so I'm gonna just blah blah blah" tactics now, DH.

 

Say something germane for once.. Anything. Pick up a real newspaper. Read the New York Times, or any major city's newspaper for that matter. I'd recommend Harper's or the New Yorker, but they're way over your head. And that's OK.

 

There's life beyond Los Pequenos de Cristo de New Mexico and FoxNews, man. There really is. There are smart people on both sides of the aisle writing. Read one of them, ANY of them.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Let's take a look at the New York Times headlines today. We'll see if even someone as irrationally angry as Steve can tell the difference:

 

Aggressive Fed Cuts Key Rate by a Half-Point

 

Governors Call for Federal Rescue Package for States

 

Chaos in Congo as Rebels Draw Near

 

Early Voting and Exit Polls

 

Colombia Killings Cast Doubt on War Against Insurgents

 

Pakistan Protests U.S. Attacks Within Its Borders

 

5 Suicide Bomb Attacks Hit Somalia

 

College Costs Up Slightly, Report Says

[heckofajobbrownie]

Let's do the LA Times:

 

Fed trims key rate by half point

 

13 months later, Spector back on trial

 

McCain, Obama collide over 'socialist' charge

 

Stocks erase 300-point gain in late retreat

 

Sewage spill forces Laguna Beach closures

'America's sheriff' goes on trial for corruption

Pakistan quake kills at least 170 | Video | Photos

Suicide bombs kill 22 in northern Somalia

College tuition bills may spike, officials warn

Sylmar fire kills poultry, damages stables

[heckofajobbrownie]

Also, can anyone tell me what is wrong with Barack Obama going to a farewell dinner for a fellow colleague at the University of Chicago, even if that colleague's opinions on Israeli/Palestinian issues differs from his?

 

This is supposed to scare me? Scare you?

 

Or have you guys all fallen for bullshit again? Given your track record, I'm guessing you've fallen for bullshit again.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Check out how scary this man is. I mean, Yale and Oxford?? Talk about elitist.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashid_Khalidi

[heckofajobbrownie]

I've seen this guy on TV dozens of times. He's an expert on the Arab world. He's taught at Georgetown and U-Chicago and Columbia. He's an American.

 

What's shady about him?

 

You're all falling for this again. This is simply something they're drudging up to suggest he's got ties to scary Arabs and to scare Jews in Florida about Obama's commitment to Israel. That's all it is. Trust me, no one within the McCain campaign gives a shit that Obama knows Rashid Khalidi, or went to his goodbye dinner. Anyone in government who works on Middle East issues knows who he is, and many have worked with him, including John McCain.

 

So if this guy is really so scary, will this scare you even more than going to his goodbye dinner?

 

"During the 1990s, while he served as chairman of the International Republican Institute (IRI), McCain distributed several grants to the Palestinian research center co-founded by Khalidi, including one worth half a million dollars.

 

A 1998 tax filing for the McCain-led group shows a $448,873 grant to Khalidi's Center for Palestine Research and Studies for work in the West Bank. (See grant number 5180, "West Bank: CPRS" on page 14 of this PDF.)

 

The relationship extends back as far as 1993, when John McCain joined IRI as chairman in January. Foreign Affairs noted in September of that year that IRI had helped fund several extensive studies in Palestine run by Khalidi's group, including over 30 public opinion polls and a study of "sociopolitical attitudes."