Rashid Khalidi: 'The Audacity of Hope'

Andy McCarthy has some bizarre news regarding Obama and his buddy, Rashid Khalidi.

Do you recall Rashid Khalidi?

Remember the matter of the Los Angeles Times refusing to release the tape of Obama honoring Khalidi?

Why is the Los Angeles Times sitting on a videotape of the 2003 farewell bash in Chicago at which Barack Obama lavished praise on the guest of honor, Rashid Khalidi — former mouthpiece for master terrorist Yasser Arafat?

At the time Khalidi, a PLO adviser turned University of Chicago professor, was headed east to Columbia. There he would take over the University’s Middle East-studies program (which he has since maintained as a bubbling cauldron of anti-Semitism) and assume the professorship endowed in honor of Edward Sayyid, another notorious terror apologist.

The party featured encomiums by many of Khalidi’s allies, colleagues, and friends, including Barack Obama, then an Illinois state senator, and Bill Ayers, the terrorist turned education professor. It was sponsored by the Arab American Action Network (AAAN), which had been founded by Khalidi and his wife, Mona, formerly a top English translator for Arafat’s press agency.

Is there just a teeny-weenie chance that this was an evening of Israel-bashing Obama would find very difficult to explain? Could it be that the Times, a pillar of the Obamedia, is covering for its guy?

Read the rest of McCarthy's 2008 piece on the event. He excerpts the LA Times' coverage of the story:

A special tribute came from Khalidi's friend and frequent dinner companion, the young state Sen. Barack Obama. Speaking to the crowd, Obama reminisced about meals prepared by Khalidi's wife, Mona, and conversations that had challenged his thinking.

His many talks with the Khalidis, Obama said, had been "consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases. . . . 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."...

The LA Times has yet to release the tape.

In terms of being a friend and staunch ally of Israel, Obama hasn't walked the walk.

It shouldn't come as a surprise that Obama wouldn't talk the talk at a private affair honoring his friend, Khalidi.

Here's video from 2008.



No doubt a JournoList sort of cabal is keeping Rashid Khalidi under wraps to help Obama the way they did with Jeremiah Wright.

So what's the news about Khalidi?

McCarthy writes:

President Obama's good friend, former PLO mouthpiece Rashid Khalidi, is back in the news. He has signed an appeal for funds to outfit another ship that, like the "peace flotilla," would try to break Israel's blockade of Gaza, the territory controlled by Hamas — the foreign terrorist organization that is the Muslim Brotherhood's Palestinian arm.

The ship would be called — wait for it — The Audacity of Hope.

That is incredible.

Read more about Khalidi and the appeal posted at USTOGAZA.org.

We turn to you to help make the U.S. boat, The Audacity of Hope, a reality. We must raise at least $370,000 in the next month. These funds will be used to purchase a boat large enough for 40-60 people, secure a crew, and cover the licensing and registering of the boat. In addition, the funds will subsidize some other costs of sending a U.S. delegation.

It's sick that this group is naming its boat The Audacity of Hope.

Apparently, the group hopes to capitalize on Obama's pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel position to raise cash. Obviously, a blockade-busting boat wouldn't be named The Audacity of Hope if those apt to donate to the cause weren't aware that Obama is on board with the effort in spirit.

McCarthy goes on to note that in the LA Times' 2003 report some information was withheld from the public.

As the report does not relate, Obama and Khalidi's mutual friends, the former Weather Underground terrorists turned professors Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, were also reportedly in attendance. (When Obama and Ayers teamed up to dole out money at the Leftist Woods Fund, a $75,000 grant was given to the Arab American Action Network (AAAN) founded by Khalidi and his wife, Mona. Mona Khalidi has also signed the appeal for money to support The Audacity of Hope voyage. The AAAN regards Israel as illegitimate and has sought to justify Palestinian terrorism.) As I mentioned in the 2008 column, the Weathermen's 1974 manifesto, Prairie Fire, is rabidly anti-Israel and demands that the U.S. get out of the Middle East, etc.

Same old, same old. The lib media continue their blackout on Obama's radical buddies. The LA Times continues to sit on the videotape.

McCarthy writes:

The United States has neutrality laws against things like fitting, furnishing or arming vessels with the intent of committing hostile acts against a country with which the U.S. is at peace. (Challenging a blockade is a hostile act.) We also have laws against providing material support to terrorist organizations like Hamas. Will the Obama Justice Department pursue an investigation of Khalidi?

If Eric Holder and the Obama Justice Department won't even pursue an investigation of the New Black Panther Party and its intimidation of voters at a Philadelphia polling place on Election Day 2008, I'd say the chances of the DOJ investigating Khalidi are very slim.

A boat to aid Hamas and break the blockade named The Audacity of Hope is just another slap in the face to Israel.

Show us the tape, LA Times. A public viewing is long overdue. Why doesn't Obama himself encourage its release? Something to hide?

Quotes from the Obama-Khalidi Tape

I came across this on Little Green Footballs.


Doug Ross writes:

I received a tip from a person who has provided useful, accurate and unique data from LA before (e.g., "All six of CNN's 'undecided voters' were Democratic operatives"). Take it for what it's worth, but I believe this person is on target.

Saw a clip from the tape. Reason we can't release it is because statements Obama said to rile audience up during toast. He congratulates Khalidi for his work saying "Israel has no God-given right to occupy Palestine" plus there's been "genocide against the Palestinian people by Israelis."

It would be really controversial if it got out. Tha's why they will not even let a transcript get out.

If accurate, that would be damaging to Obama.

Ross provides some answers to questions about his post:

Update/FAQ on this post

Is there really a tape? Yes. The Times has acknowledged that the tape exists.

Why won't the Times release the tape? They've now come up with four reasons over the past few days for suppressing the video. None of the answers make sense.

Do you know who sent the tip? No.

Why believe the tip? While I receive a lot of tips and links, I seldom publish them. This particular email address has provided accurate and unique information in the past, as I noted above. No one else reported the information and I found it to be accurate in the past. As I said, take it for what it's worth.

Why doesn't the Times just publish a transcript? Why indeed.

Barack Obama should personally request that the Times release the video.

That would end all this speculation.

If Obama has nothing to hide, why not let the truth out?

The sooner the better.

L.A. Times Suppresses Obama Video

Show me the video.

It's newsworthy, but the Los Angeles Times won't release it.

In less than a week, Barack Obama could be the president-elect. The American people have a right to see the video.

The L.A. Times is engaged in a cover-up, withholding information.

"A major news organization is intentionally suppressing information that could provide a clearer link between Barack Obama and Rashid Khalidi," said McCain campaign spokesman Michael Goldfarb. " . . . The election is one week away, and it's unfortunate that the press so obviously favors Barack Obama that this campaign must publicly request that the Los Angeles Times do its job -- make information public."

The Times on Tuesday 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."

Jamie Gold, the newspaper's readers' representative, said in a statement: "More than six months ago the Los Angeles Times published a detailed account of the events shown on the videotape. The Times is not suppressing anything. Just the opposite -- the L.A. Times brought the matter to light."

Good grief.

The lib media splash the details of classified government reports and programs all over the place and the Times insists that it must keep its promise to the confidential source of the video?

That source would be wise to give the Times permission to release the tape. Right now, it seems that there's something to hide, something in it that's damaging to Obama.

This could turn into one of those cases of the cover-up being worse than the crime.

If there's nothing to suppress, don't.

It's the unknown that gives people reason to doubt and cause for concern.

That's bad for Obama.

Here's the original story:

It was a celebration of Palestinian culture -- a night of music, dancing and a dash of politics. Local Arab Americans were bidding farewell to Rashid Khalidi, an internationally known scholar, critic of Israel and advocate for Palestinian rights, who was leaving town for a job in New York.

A special tribute came from Khalidi's friend and frequent dinner companion, the young state Sen. Barack Obama. Speaking to the crowd, Obama reminisced about meals prepared by Khalidi's wife, Mona, and conversations that had challenged his thinking.

His many talks with the Khalidis, Obama said, had been "consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases. . . . 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."

Today, five years later, Obama is a U.S. senator from Illinois who expresses a firmly pro-Israel view of Middle East politics, pleasing many of the Jewish leaders and advocates for Israel whom he is courting in his presidential campaign. The dinner conversations he had envisioned with his Palestinian American friend have ended. He and Khalidi have seen each other only fleetingly in recent years.

And yet the warm embrace Obama gave to Khalidi, and words like those at the professor's going-away party, have left some Palestinian American leaders believing that Obama is more receptive to their viewpoint than he is willing to say.

Their belief is not drawn from Obama's speeches or campaign literature, but from comments that some say Obama made in private and from his association with the Palestinian American community in his hometown of Chicago, including his presence at events where anger at Israeli and U.S. Middle East policy was freely expressed.

At Khalidi's 2003 farewell party, for example, a young Palestinian American recited 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."

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

Obama adopted a different tone in his comments and called for finding common ground. But his presence at such events, as he worked to build a political base in Chicago, has led some Palestinian leaders to believe that he might deal differently with the Middle East than either of his opponents for the White House.

"I am confident that Barack Obama is more sympathetic to the position of ending the occupation than either of the other candidates," said Hussein Ibish, a senior fellow for the American Task Force on Palestine, referring to the Israeli presence in the West Bank and Gaza Strip that began after the 1967 war. More than his rivals for the White House, Ibish said, Obama sees a "moral imperative" in resolving the conflict and is most likely to apply pressure to both sides to make concessions.

...Ali Abunimah, a Palestinian rights activist in Chicago who helps run Electronic Intifada, said that he met Obama several times at Palestinian and Arab American community events. At one, a 2000 fundraiser at a private home, Obama called for the U.S. to take an "even-handed" approach toward Israel, Abunimah wrote in an article on the website last year. He did not cite Obama's specific criticisms.

Abunimah, in a Times interview and on his website, said Obama seemed sympathetic to the Palestinian cause but more circumspect as he ran for the U.S. Senate in 2004. At a dinner gathering that year, Abunimah said, Obama greeted him warmly and said privately that he needed to speak cautiously about the Middle East.

Abunimah quoted Obama as saying that he was sorry he wasn't talking more about the Palestinian cause, but that his primary campaign had constrained what he could say.

Obama, through his aide Axelrod, denied he ever said those words, and Abunimah's account could not be independently verified.

Perhaps the video could shed some light on Obama's real positions on Israel and the Palestinian cause.

That may not be the issue at all. Obama and Khalidi may not be the real problem.

Perhaps the video clearly shows Obama palling around with Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn.

From FOX News:

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.

The newspaper reported Tuesday evening in a story on its Web site that the tape was from a confidential source.

"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," the Times' editor, Russ Stanton, said. "The Times keeps its promises to sources."

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.

The report from FOX News ends with this:

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

One has to wonder how that plays into the Times' decision to sit on the tape.

The L.A. Times is pro-Obama.

What, if any, information is being kept from the public?

Again, there's a simple way to end the speculation: Release the videotape.

Barack Obama and Rashid Khalidi

UPDATE, October 27, 2008: "The L.A. Times Suppresses Obama’s Khalidi Bash Tape," by Andrew McCarthy.
________________

Gateway Pundit reports that the Los Angeles Times is refusing to release a video of Barack Obama celebrating with a group of Palestinians who are openly hostile towards Israel.

Barack Obama toasts former PLO operative, Rashid Khalidi, at that event.



Gateway Pundit notes, "By the way, Khalidi was also best friends with Bill Ayers."

What a coinkydink!

Obama's Judgment

On this day of primaries that may decide the Democrat nominee for president, the Washington Post delves into the Obama "movement."

Another rally, another rapturous crowd.

At around 1 p.m. Wednesday, less than a week before today's crucial primary vote, a few hundred supporters lined up outside Duncanville High School, about 15 miles south of Dallas. Buttons were sold, three for $12. Shirts too, $10 each. Three hours later, the packed gymnasium of more than 2,500 -- with at least 500 more stuck outside -- spontaneously erupted into chants. The right side yelled, " B ARACK!" The left side screamed, " OBAMA!"

The candidate had yet to take the stage.

And down on the floor stood Rhonda Friedberg, a roll of duct tape encircling her right arm like a loose bracelet. A slender, striking woman with more than a passing resemblance to Diane Keaton, Friedberg calls herself "the tape lady." She's taped signs in restrooms, posters on walls and electrical wires to the floor so people don't trip.

This has been a season of many "firsts" for the 46-year-old molecular biologist: the first time she's volunteered for a campaign, the first time she's served as a precinct captain in an election, the first time she's given money to a candidate.

Every time Friedberg drives her 1991 red Toyota pickup truck out of the driveway of her Dallas home to attend another meeting of Obama's precinct captains, she surprises even herself. Before, she was "a homebody," as her husband of seven years describes her. Now, she feels she's part of a movement.

"Whether or not he wins the nomination, whether or not he makes it all the way to the White House, this is a movement," Friedberg shouts above the roar of the crowd. "A movement is when you're emotionally involved, and that's where I am."

She pauses, then says "And, you know, it's not about Barack Obama. It's about us. He's expressing what we need expressed and what we've been needing expressed for years."

...Never mind the gladioluses and calla lilies that need planting in her small front yard. Forget the novel she picked up about two months ago.

Over the past month, Friedberg's priority has been to make sure Obama's supporters in her precinct know about the Texas two-step: First they have to vote in the primary, then show up at 7 p.m. for the caucus.

By Monday morning, she'd made more than 700 phone calls on Obama's behalf. Being inside the arena, enveloped in the roar of the crowd, listening to Obama and his promises of hope and change, she feels part of something.

I think Friedberg nails it when she says that "it's not about Barack Obama. It's about us."

It seems to me that there are a lot of people wanting a purpose, something to believe in. What's weird is that the purpose seems to be Obama, not a cause or a goal or a philosophy.

"He's expressing what we need expressed."

OK. That's just sad. What's he expressing?

Barack Obama is supposed to be about changing politics as usual. Is that what we need expressed?

Unfortunately, his words ring hollow.

The movement is fraudulent.

From FactCheck.org:

Barack Obama's campaign is distributing a mailer in Ohio that plays upon anti-NAFTA feelings in the Buckeye State. But the flyer is misleading:

---Obama is quoted as saying that "one million jobs have been lost because of NAFTA, including nearly 50,000 jobs here in Ohio." But those figures are highly questionable and from an anti-NAFTA source. Other economic studies have concluded the trade deal resulted in much smaller job losses or even a small net gain.

---The mailer quotes Hillary Clinton as saying "NAFTA has been good for New York and America." That quote, however, is taken out of context. She also said in that same news conference that NAFTA was flawed and old trade deals needed to be revisited.

That's definitely politics as usual.

Obama is not the man he claims to be. And if Obama is not the man he claims to be, then the movement falls apart.

On Monday's Nightline, Obama was interviewed by Terry Moran.

On the question of experience, Obama welcomes the contrast between him and Clinton, who has repeatedly described herself as someone who is "tested" and "ready."

"I think the question is, how do you know any president is ready?" Obama said. "[Until] you're president, you haven't made these decisions."

"What people can take a look at is how I exercised judgment on key foreign policy questions over the last several years," he said. "And I think they can have confidence. ... More often than not, I have shown judgment that was superior to some of these people who are claiming much lengthier experience."

As part of her proven experience, Clinton has highlighted her visits to more than 80 countries, her time spent in the White House and her service on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

"Look, I've lived overseas," said Obama. "I have family overseas. I have served on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee."

I can't believe that Obama has the nerve to consider living overseas and having family overseas to be foreign policy experience. That's idiotic.

He claims that he has superior judgment compared to "people who are claiming much lengthier experience."

Yeah, he opposed the Iraq war from the beginning. How many times have we heard that? Obama's always yapping about Hillary voting for the war and he didn't.

He didn't have to cast a vote on the war because he wasn't a U.S. Senator at the time!

How long does he think he can use his statement on Iraq as an indication of his superiority?

If Obama has such superior judgment, then why does he make "boneheaded" mistakes and surround himself with a weird band of buddies and associates?

Obama's spiritual mentor, Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., shares the views held by terrorists.

On the Sunday after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, Mr. Wright said the attacks were a consequence of violent American policies.

Mr. Wright, who has long prided himself on criticizing the establishment, said he knew that he may not play well in Mr. Obama’s audition for the ultimate establishment job.

“If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me,” Mr. Wright said with a shrug. “I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen.”

Obama's campaign has said, “Senator Obama is proud of his pastor and his church.”

Really? I question Obama's judgment on that.

Wright isn't the only questionable person close to Obama.

He's friendly with Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi.

[Khalidi is] a harsh critic of Israel who reportedly worked on behalf of the Palestine Liberation Organization when it was labeled a terror group by the State Department.

Khalidi held a fundraiser in 2000 for Obama’s failed bid for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives.

And then there's William Ayers.

Jonah Goldberg writes:

"Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon."

This excerpt from William Ayers' memoir appeared in the New York Times on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001 -- a few hours before Al Qaeda terrorists crashed hijacked planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Ayers, once a leader in the Weather Underground -- the group that declared "war" on the U.S. government in 1970 -- told the Times, "I don't regret setting bombs" and "I feel we didn't do enough."

Ayers recently reappeared in the news because Politico.com reported Friday that Barack Obama has loose ties to him. Ayers, now a professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, is apparently a left-wing institution in Chicago's Hyde Park neighborhood, and Obama visited Ayers' home as a rite of passage when launching his political career in the mid-1990s. The two also served on the board of the charitable Woods Fund of Chicago, which gave money to Northwestern University Law School's Children and Family Justice Center, where Ayers' wife (and former Weather Underground compatriot) Bernardine Dohrn is the director.

Hanging out with former members of the Weather Underground isn't using the best judgment in my opinion, particularly since Ayers has no regrets about declaring war on the America. That's not good.

Now, we get to Tony Rezko.

Obama and Rezko have strong ties.

In 1995, Obama began campaigning for a seat in the Illinois Senate. Among his earliest supporters: Rezko. Two Rezko companies donated a total of $2,000. Obama was elected in 1996 -- representing a district that included 11 of Rezko's 30 low-income housing projects.

In 2003, Obama announced he was running for the U.S. Senate, and Rezko -- a member of his campaign finance committee -- held a lavish fund-raiser June 27, 2003, at his Wilmette mansion.

A few months after Obama became a U.S. senator, he and Rezko's wife, Rita, bought adjacent pieces of property from a doctor in Chicago's Kenwood neighborhood -- a deal that has dogged Obama the last two years. The doctor sold the mansion to Obama for $1.65 million -- $300,000 below the asking price. Rezko's wife paid full price -- $625,000 -- for the adjacent vacant lot. The deals closed in June 2005. Six months later, Obama paid Rezko's wife $104,500 for a strip of her land, so he could have a bigger yard. At the time, it had been widely reported that Tony Rezko was under federal investigation. Questioned later about the timing of the Rezko deal, Obama called it "boneheaded" because people might think the Rezkos had done him a favor.

I think Obama's relationship with Rezko speaks volumes about his judgment.

From Nightline:

Obama's critics point to Tony Rezko, a Chicago real estate developer, as a reason to question Obama's brand of politics.

Rezko, who has raised a lot of money for Obama over the years, goes on trial this week on corruption charges. Rezko has ties to many politicians, but it is a real estate deal Rezko participated in with Obama in 2005 that enabled the senator to purchase his current home, that has brought a lot of scrutiny to the candidate's campaign.

For Obama, who has called himself a reformer and touted his judgment, some voters might ask how could he enter into this transaction with a longtime contributor who, at that time, was known to be under investigation for corruption?

"I've already said that that was a mistake, even though it was completely above board," said Obama. "Because he had been a contributor, I shouldn't have entered into any real estate transaction with him."

What a lame response!

Obama doesn't personify honesty. He's not about change. He insists that he has superior judgment, but I don't see the evidence.

It's pathetic that so many people are spellbound by someone they really don't know. And at least some of what they think they know about Obama is not true.

Just the Facts

Don't expect to see this in the New York Times.

"Obama Served on Board that Funded Pro-Palestinian Group"

Aaron Klein writes:

JERUSALEM – Democratic presidential frontrunner Sen. Barack Obama served as a paid director on the board of a nonprofit organization that granted funding to a controversial Arab group that mourns the establishment of Israel as a "catastrophe." (Obama has also reportedly spoken at fundraisers for Palestinians living in what the United Nations terms refugee camps.)

The co-founder of the Arab group, Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi, is a harsh critic of Israel who reportedly worked on behalf of the Palestine Liberation Organization when it was labeled a terror group by the State Department.

Khalidi held a fundraiser in 2000 for Obama’s failed bid for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives.

In 2001, the Woods Fund, a Chicago-based nonprofit that describes itself as a group helping the disadvantaged, provided a $40,000 grant to the Arab American Action Network, or AAAN, at which Khalidi’s wife, Mona, serves as president. The Fund provided a second grant to AAAN for $35,000 in 2002.

Obama was a director of the Woods Fund board from 1999 to Dec. 11, 2002, according to the Fund’s website. According to tax filings, Obama received compensation of $6,000 per year for his service in 1999 and 2000.

The $40,000 grant from the Woods Fund to AAAN constituted about a fifth of the group’s reported grants for 2001, also according to tax filings. The $35,000 Woods Fund grant in 2002 made up about one-fifth of AAAN’s reported grants for that year as well.

Headquartered in the heart of Chicago’s Palestinian immigrant community, AAAN describes itself as working to "empower Chicago-area Arab immigrants and Arab Americans through the combined strategies of community organizing, advocacy, education and social services, leadership development, and forging productive relationships with other communities."

Speakers at AAAN dinners and events routinely have taken an anti-Israel line. The group co-sponsored a Palestinian art exhibit, titled "The Subject of Palestine," that featured works related to what Palestinians call the "nakba" or "catastrophe" of Israel’s founding in 1948.

The theme of AAAN’s Nakba art exhibit, held at DePaul University in 2005, was "the compelling and continuing tragedy of Palestinian life ... under [Israeli] occupation ... home demolition ... statelessness ... bereavement ... martyrdom, and ... the heroic struggle for life, for safety, and for freedom."

Another AAAN initiative, "Al Nakba 1948 As Experienced by Chicago Palestinians," seeks documents related to the "catastrophe" of Israel’s founding.

Although AAAN co-founder Rashid Khalidi has at times denied working directly for the PLO, he reportedly served as director of the official PLO press agency WAFA in Beirut from 1976 to 1982, a period during which the PLO committed scores of anti-Western attacks and was labeled by the U.S. as a terror group. Khalidi’s wife, Mona Khalidi, reportedly was WAFA’s English translator during that period.

...According to a professor at the University of Chicago who said he has known Obama for 12 years, the senator first befriended Khalidi when the two worked together at the university. The professor spoke on condition of anonymity. Khalidi lectured at the University of Chicago until 2003; Obama taught law there from 1993 until his election to the Senate in 2004.

Asked during a radio interview with this reporter on WABC’s John Batchelor program about his 2000 fundraiser for Obama, Khalidi said he "was just doing my duties as a Chicago resident to help my local politician."

Khalidi said he supports Obama for president "because he is the only candidate who has expressed sympathy for the Palestinian cause."

Where does Barack Obama stand on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

From Obama's website:

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Obama will make progress on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a key diplomatic priority. He will make a sustained push – working with Israelis and Palestinians – to achieve the goal of two states, a Jewish state in Israel and a Palestinian state, living side by side in peace and security.

Obama always says that all his policy positions are clearly spelled out in detail on his website.

In my opinion, two sentences on the Israelis and Palestinians don't provide adequate detail.

I'd like to hear Obama explain his stint as a "paid director on the board of a nonprofit organization that granted funding to a controversial Arab group that mourns the establishment of Israel as a 'catastrophe.'"

Obama's friend Rashid Khalidi, "a harsh critic of Israel who reportedly worked on behalf of the Palestine Liberation Organization when it was labeled a terror group by the State Department," held a fundraiser for Obama.

What's this about? Is this insignificant? Does it matter?

Obama's incredibly vague speeches about hope and change, peppered with his tired jokes about his cousin Dick Cheney being the black sheep of his family and Republicans approaching him to whisper their support don't reveal a lot about the issues.

His website isn't helpful.

I think Obama needs to clarify his position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in detail.