Why the Rashidi tape matters.

UPDATE: Here’s another update by Andy McCarthy, basically saying what everyone else is — the L.A. Times did not adequately cover what Obama said at the Rashidi party even though he spoke for several minutes. McCarthy, by the way, successfully prosecuted Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman (the Blind Shiek) and several more of the 1993 WTC bombers, so I have to believe his instincts on Islamic fundamentalists is pretty good. I think people have a right to know what both Obama and Rashidi said.

Jeff Goldberg asks: “What is the L.A. Times Hiding?”

Already posted two posts below, Andy McCarthy notes: “The L.A. Times Suppresses Obama’s Khalidi Bash Tape.“

In summary, a protected source sent the L.A. Times a tape of Barack Obama attending a 2003 going away party for a long-time fundraiser and activist for Palestinians. His name is Rashid Khalidi. Some say he’s a former member of Yasser Arafat’s Palestinian Liberation Organization (i.e., a former terrorist for the PLO). Maybe he was, maybe he wasn’t.

But even so, there’s several important points to be made here:

• Despite some of the more questionable polls, this is a close race (Bush was down 8 points to Gore at this time in 2000, by the way). Independents, particularly Jewish-American voters in a swing state like Florida, might care greatly about (1) why Barack Obama was at an event held for an activist for the Palestinian cause, perhaps a PLO member, (2) what Obama or Khalidi might have said at the event, and (3) why the L.A. Times is refusing to broadcast the tape if indeed it is much ado about nothing.
• The L.A. Times would never withhold such a tape from the public were Obama a Republican or had it been McCain at the event.
• The L.A. Times has a lot of nerve claiming that they’re trying to protect their source — funny considering the L.A. Times has no problem whatsoever blasting classified national security information on its front page, CIA assets in harm’s way be damned.
• The retort by the L.A. Times Jamie Gold, that, “The Times is not suppressing anything. Just the opposite — the L.A. Times brought the matter to light,” is also a joke considering the original story doesn’t seem to quote Obama saying much of anything.
• While all this probably says much more about how supportive the mainstream media is of Barack Obama than it does about Obama himself, there’s one little gem in the original article that really sheds light on Obama’s foreign policy inexperience and arrogance:

“Barack’s belief is that it’s important to understand other points of view, even if you can’t agree with them,” said his longtime political strategist, David Axelrod.

Israelis and Palestinians have been living side by side for thousands of years, their land lawfully partitioned since 1947 — they understand one another perfectly well. Their communication with one another is perfectly clear. That’s why it is so violent — they DO understand each other. So, for the Obama camp to think it can just waltz in Kumbayah style, ask these two peoples to share a Coca Cola and “understand the other’s point of view” is new heights of arrogance and naivety. Every president since Eisenhower has tried and failed. So will Obama.